The Bible contradicts it self?

Which interpretations concerning the seeming contradictions do you not agree with? We can always discuss it further if you'd like.

Because, basically you're saying that we aren't allowing ourselves to see a contradiction, but what we have been trying to express is that the Bible seems to interpret itself because two different people are arriving at the same conclusion completely on their own. But sometimes there needs to be some explanation due to the context, and some people are more familiar with the Bible than others. Especially in comparison to those that are not reading the Bible, or those that have only read parts of the Bible. So, what do you see us trying to force to work? Can you give an example?

 

Hey, we actually have an opportunity to settle this controversy by empircal evidence--something rare in religious discussions. I don't particularly care whether we identify contradictions or not. HushBull has given us two extensive laundry lists of alleged contradicitions. So far I've looked at the first two on his second list, and wasn't impressed that there were contradicitons. I discussed the passages as I understand them. If somebody thinks there is a contradiction, they have an opportunity to explain what it is. By the way, this is will be slow going, and I won't be doing any posting for awhile, because I'm going into the desert for a couple of weeks, cut off from it all. If somebody wants to take over this task while I'm gone, feel free.

 

I'm not saying that you specifically aren't allowing yourself not to see a contradiction. I'm more so referring to olderwaterbrother who seems to be implying that a) the bible contains differing viewpoints belonging to differing authors and b) the bible is not contradictory. His "different sides of the house" analogy seems to confim this. If one is openly admitting that they realise that the Bible does contain passages that might slightly oppose one another and choosing to call them alternative perspectives rather than contradictions, then demanding that people offer up contradictions for discussion is absurd.

I have my suspicions that trying to keep the argument limited to trivial, petty discussion of bible passages is an attempt to draw attention away from the bigger picture, and that is that interpretation of the bible is always purely subjective and therefore nobody has any real claim to whether it is "truly right" or "truly wrong".

 

Why not go for the full 40 days and 40 nights? Good luck.

 

I feel kind of silly that I am still posting in this thread so I will finish with this: We can all agree that interpretation of the Bible is invariably going to differ among every individual so why can't we just leave it at that?

 

I get what you mean. OWB did create a forum that tries to show that the Bible never contradicts itself and at some parts it does, or perhaps only appears to at this time for whatever unseen reason. But then this thread becomes, "How many contradictions does the Bible have? A lot or a little?" Then I guess this thread tries to prove that the Bible isn't as contradictory as once thought it to be. Actually, a whole lot less contradictory then once thought and like OWB has said, "Far and few between". Many would paint the picture that something like 80% of the Bible is contradictory, when in actually, it could be 10%, 2%.

And again, you keep saying that it is subjective, but you aren't showing to me how it is merely subjective and not objective and whether or not it being subjective negates the value of the messages of the bible and whether or not those subjective understandings are somehow universal. It can be both subjective and universal.

 

Well, you don't have to post or feel silly. It's just a debate. Just a discussion. Don't understand why it would make you feel so silly. But I digress...

Again, man, we're saying that it may not actually differ if we take context and the whole Bible into consideration. And you still haven't shown to us how you disagree with the interpretations of the seeming contradictions.

You still haven't disproven that two completely different people can not get the same message from the Bible, and if so, why is this true?

 

I have read ALL your posts!

The problem is that you have not read the OP, please do and then YOU read your own posts and please show me where you have introduced a contradiction like the OP requested.

That is what this thread is about.

If you don’t want to introduce a contradiction then please start your own thread that talks about what you want but this thread is for the introduction of contradictions and the discussion of those contradictions

Why is that so hard to understand?

 

You are correct this thread is about what you are calling a "trivial, petty discussion of bible passages" and if you wish to discuss "the bigger picture, and that is that interpretation of the bible is always purely subjective and therefore nobody has any real claim to whether it is "truly right" or "truly wrong"" please feel free to do so, just do it in a thread where that is the subject and stop hijacking this one.

 

Do we have to pick through the 50 seeming contradictions that Hushbull posted? Is that really our responsibility to sort that all out? We have asked to post specific contradictions that you would like to discuss so that we can go into why it might not be a contradiction by giving our interpretations of it.

Really though, why IS that so hard to get? I don't get it.

 

No, mainly because what you are saying is untrue but even at that it is still not the subject of this thread.

 

Anyone have any seeming contradictions that they would like to discuss in detail? If you want to discuss anything not pertaining to the OP topic question, please feel free to start another thread about it.

We'll start again below this post:

 

I suppose the most important contradiction, for me, is the section where Jesus talks about those who instruct others not to follow the Law, which was in what we now call the Old Testament. He says that whoever teaches this will be called "least in the kingdom of heaven". This seems to be a clear and straightforward call for christians to live the life of an orthodox Jew. Then Paul spends multiple chapters in multiple letters explaining in great detail why Jewish Law no longer applies.

This is a conceptual contradiction, rather than a literal contradiction. I have heard pastors spend hours explaining that the comment by Jesus has to be read and interpreted in light of Paul's writings, but this comes across to me as a total rationalization. Why would Paul have the authority or the right to clarify the words of Christ?

 

I just wanted to thank you for this contribution to the thread and also to let you know I wasn't "ignoring it" but just wanting to take some time to thinking about it rather than just shoot from the hip.

 

Thou shalt not murder

God murders many in the Great Flood and Sodom and Gomorrah

 

If you define murder as anytime some one dies, I guess what you say is true but most people don't define murder that way.

 

I think he meant people who were supposedly slain by your vengeful god, and his storm troopers.

Or was it Tuscan raiders?

It all kinda blends together after awhile.

 

Why would you define that as murder?

 

Being turned into a pillar of salt for looking over your shoulder.

 

hahaha