VVB, and any other christian, HarryW you can help them to..

[kovan]

i claim bible is corrupt (here i am not going to use my belief system)
and i am WILLING to listen to any of you to try and explain those contridictions to me
step one - first thing i think bible is corrupted is based on these so called contridictions

if you guyz can clean these up for me then we can go to the next level

so if you are going to explain them
state the so called contridiction, and the explaination

i will post them in 10's
========================

Contradiction #1
Who incited David to count the fighting men of Israel?

(a) God did (2 Samuel 24:1)

(b) Satan did (1 Chronicles 21:1).

Contradiction #2

In that count how many fighting men were found in Israel?

(a) Eight hundred thousand (2 Samuel 24:9).

(b) One million, one hundred thousand (1 Chronicles 21:5).



Contradiction #3

How many fighting men were found in Judah?

(a) Five hundred thousand (2 Samuel 24:9).

(b) Four hundred and seventy thousand (1 Chronicles 21:5).



Contradiction #4

God sent his prophet to threaten David with how many years of famine?

(a) Seven (2 Samuel 24:13).

(b) Three (1 Chronicles 21:12).



Contradiction #5

How old was Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem?

(a) Twenty-two (2 Kings 8:26).

(b) Forty-two (2 Chronicles 22:2).



Contradiction #6

How old was Jehoiachin when he became king of Jerusalem?

(a) Eighteen (2 Kings 24:8).

(b) Eight (2 Chronicles 36:9).



Contradiction #7

How long did he rule over Jerusalem?

(a) Three months (2 Kings 24:8).

(b) Three months and ten days (2 Chronicles 36:9).



Contradiction #8

The chief of the mighty men of David lifted up his spear

and killed how many men at one time?

(a) Eight hundred (2 Samuel 23:8).

(b) Three hundred (1 Chronicles 11:11).



Contradiction #9

When did David bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem?

Before defeating the Philistines or after?

(a) After (2 Samuel 5 and 6).

(b) Before (1 Chronicles 13 and 14).



Contradiction #10

How many pairs of clean animals did God tell Noah to take into

the Ark?

(a) Two (Genesis 6:19, 20).

(b) Seven (Genesis 7:2). But despite this last instruction

only two pairs went into the ark (Genesis 7:8, 9).

[Iain17]

Mate, a couple of things.

Get out more.
Get over it.
Grow up.

Its getting tiresome.

The various biblical "chapters" were written by different authors, some writing three hundred years after the incident was meant to have taken place. Therefore you will get differences in accounts, try reading a Police witness scene report, to see how different people can see different things in the same incident.

I would have deep problems with an historic account, written by various authors, which contained the exact duplicate account of what happened.

This is not too support the "christians" on this site, who claim the bible is the work of god, which clearly it is not. God is all knowing and infalliable, therefore there would not be these inconsistencies.

Thank you kovan, you have just supported my arguement that the bible is a creation of man, not god.

[kovan]

i have been grown up
i brought up a VERY valid arguement


jethro
grow up
hehe
no wait

what ever

but on a serious note
what the hell, those are DIRECT from bible
its not like i am making them up

[paulw]

Err, guys,

To claim that the Bible is divinely inspired does not necessarily mean that a great bearded figure came down from on high and took up a quill...

Don't forget that much of the Old Testament is a religious history of the Jewish People. Attempting a synthesis between biblical accounts and Egyptian history leads to all sorts of anomalies which can only be explained in terms of our understanding of tiemlines and when various writings were first put together as being fundamentally flawed.

Remember also that the various books of the OT were not necessarily written by one person (there were at least four Isaiahs!)

Inconsistency in an (largely) historical account does not necessarily make that work 'corrupt'. Facts in the bible should not be taken too literally (whatever fundamentalists say - the earth was NOT created in seven days). That said, doesn't mean that there might not be some universal truths in there and whatever, there is some great poetry.

Anyways, that's my two bob's worth. Anyone else got a view or am I going to get a flaming as usual?

P.

P.S. Jethro, kovan, you're both pretty balanced, (even if you are both going straight to hell on gas mark 7) does this all sound a bit arrogant/pompous? My wife says I usually am when I get on my soapbox. I just think I'm being lucid, oh well...

[jdavison]

If I remember right it wasn't actually God who incited them so I do believe that scripture is taken out of context but I'll double check. Its been a while since I have been through the Old Test. Also I have to remind you that you are most likely getting these from 1 of multiple translations. As with most translations, they use multiple translators which can come up with varying differences. I am hunting down a copy of the actual writing from the manuscripts to chase down these contradictions and find what it actually say. I would also like to note that God DID NOT create the earth in those 7 days. This is crearly stated in the first two verses of Genesis. This is a common misconception from the church.

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was (or possibly became) empty, a formless mass cloaked in darkness. And the Spirit of God was hovering over its surface.

[kovan]

paulW
hehehe
me go to hell? hehe well you know what they say
make friends with the devil(jethro) you become the devil
so you got some what a valid point

then again you dont


but on a serious note

Inconsistency in an (largely) historical account does not necessarily make that work 'corrupt'

now lets look at what that word means

in·con·sis·tent (nkn-sstnt)
adj.

Displaying or marked by a lack of consistency, especially:
Not regular or predictable; erratic: inconsistent behavior.
Lacking in correct logical relation; contradictory: inconsistent statements.
Not in agreement or harmony; incompatible: an intersection inconsistent with the road map.
Mathematics. Not solvable for the unknowns by the same set of values. Used of two or more equations or inequalities.


now lets look at what corrupt means


cor·rupt (k-rpt)
adj.

Marked by immorality and perversion; depraved.
Venal; dishonest: a corrupt mayor.
Containing errors or alterations, as a text: a corrupt translation.
Archaic. Tainted; putrid.


source: http://www.dictionary.com

so if something is inconsistent, it means it contains errors
anyone disagree?
if something contains errors that means its NOT correct
agree?
if something not correct then its Corrupt because its true


PLEASE do not write in this thread (everyone) if its not related to the explaining the contridictions


jdavidson, have fun searching


i still am waiting for them to be explained...

[paulw]

kovan,

The differences don't need explaining. Inconsistencies do occur in the Bible. That fact alone does not mean it cannot be considered as an inspired religious document.

The inconsistencies are part of the 'bragging' inherent in the writing down of oral tradition.

Inconsistency does not necessarily imply that the facts were altered or are 'wrong'. Wrong is meaningless when you are being allegorical, and a lot of the bible is allegorical.

Corrupt and Inconsistent do not mean the same thing (that is why they are different words. Still, 'cos you're not English I'll forgive you for your inexactitude!)

the Bible is like Chinese Whispers, only not Chinese and nobody's whispering!

Cheers,

P.



[Edited by paulw on 11-20-2000 at 08:25 AM]

[kovan]

paulw
i dont know about you
but i surely would NOT devote my life or run my life according to something "inconsistent"

if its gods word it should be 100% accurate
without any mistakes, errors,

so then my arguement or my point STILL stands
that bible is NOT the word of god
if it is, since god is perfect then his word should be perfect

at least you agree that bible contains mistakes
not all christians would even admit that

oh and what does your wife think of that? hehe
jk man

[kovan]

ha ha you edited your message
how cute


and about the english
ehehe

i just gave you the dictionary version of what they meant
i diddnt wanna guess it out of the air

so according to defination i presented of the 2 words
corrupt means there is somethign wrong with the issue
consistency means there is something wrong with the issue
which means they are both almost identical, but used in different situations

again
and its not just one or two or three "inconsistencies"
i presented 10 (regardless of the previous posts)
and i am planning to post 200 or so

now a divine inspired book should NOT contain so many inconsistencies..

[kovan]

one more thing..
what if that "inconsistency" changed
"thou shall not kill" to "thou shall kill"
you see they are almost identical
but we know the right one..
and just ONE inconsistency turned the meaning around

[paulw]

kovan,

Are you being purposefully obtuse?

I edited it to point out the difference between the two words. The definitions are not exactly the same. The difference may be samll, but it is there and in this case semantics are important.

The word of God may be perfect, but when transmitted via Human agency, it becomes imperfect. Imperfection does not mean that you cannot use something, it just means that you have to be careful how you use it. That is why I am not a fundamentalist. I have never claimed that the Bible is self-consistent. Nor do I believe in its literal truth. However, there are some truths in there. The knowledge of God is the realm of Theology and the Bible can be understood within its proper context.

I do not have enough knowledge of Islamic sacred texts to offer an opinion on them, but I'll bet some human somewhere wrote them down.

Basically, we are arguing over something unprovable - it all comes down to Faith I actually think a lot of Christian sects put too much faith in the Bible. You have to be careful with it! Doesn't mean I can't find things in there and that God can't speak to me through it, but if He wanted too he could 'phone me up. He hasn't yet.

P.

[kovan]

i will pass your number to him

paulw
that is EXACTLY what i am saying
that the bible is not accurate
and that most christians rely on it too much to be the ABSOLUTE truth

and i dont think i am obtuse
not at all
my WHOLE point is to prove the bible is NOT ALL
word of God
and i believe you and i agree on that
so my work is done with you

now to all those christians believing bible is 100% accurate
i still need those contridictions explained

either admit bible is not accurate or explain

i think thats a very fair judgement or way of tackling the issue

paulw
i got a Call from god saying bible is not accurate
didn't you get one?
i guess your not on his list

[paulw]

He mis-dialled, guess He's just not so infallible afetr all

Final thought - if all of the Bible is divinely inspired then, however imperfect, it is the word of God.

I don't rule out that there might be a few words of Man thrown in there though. I wouldn't rule that out for ANY religious text.

P.

P.S. I don't think you're obtuse, but you're not being too subtle...

P.

[kovan]

dude give a man a break will ya?
you use hard words hehe
i had to look up word obtuse
now the word subtle

i will look that up in a second
i have to do some thing for boss

just agree or disagree to the following please
SOME of bible is word of god and some is men's word?

[paulw]

All of it is Men's words, inspired by God.

That do ya.

I hope I haven't obfusticated the issue too much<grin>

P.

[kovan]

ya ya i know that already
what i meant is
throu the inspiration men messed up


did i mention that makes it corrupt? hehe
ok enough with you
i still like to hear your opinion on the contridictions i posted weather they are mens mistakes or there is a explaination for them

but dont have to since you believe there is mistakes in the bible

[jdavison]

Kovan,

Could you email me the list of all 100 contradictions. I'll check them out this weekend and try and give you some answers monday. I may come back a few months from now with some of them once I get my arabaic copy of the scriptures to see what may have possibly been a translation problem(if any). send them to [email protected]. My yahoo account likes to truncate long messages.

[kovan]

i will send them in html format or something if i put other stuff on a cd for ya
but i will give you links later to them as well

[jdavison]

cool, thanks

Kovan is also claiming that the Quran is written by God and kovan doesn't accept the fact that mankind literally wrote both.

The only thing that I am remotely aware that Christians say God wrote was the 10 commandments in stone (but it could simply be from a movie I watched and not from the bible), although Personally I think Moses had enough time to carve them himself.

This is what you should be wary of...Just because Moses had the time to carve the commandments in stone himself, does not mean that God didn't do it. But I am not sure of the real claim (the movie said that God wrote with His own finger --fire or some such).

Just like other claims that could have been from something other than God, but could also be from God. You'll have to struggle with believing those on your own.

With that said, the more I learn, the more I believe there is a God and that it is the God of the Bible and that Jesus is the Christ and the One God which is confusing to those relying on their own understanding and frailties.

[kovan]

what is in the Qur'an is what god SAID
not what God inspired
there is a BIG difference
in the bible, which is interpertation of the word of god

i say "i saw earth fall out from its orbit"
thats DIRECTLY my word
now for argument sake
Harry comes along and says
"i heard kovan say earth fell from its orbit"
or
"kovan said earth fell from its orbit"

thats harry's interpertation of what i SAID

so there is a big difference
i dont wanna hear bout anything other than those contridictions explained

if you want to discuss Qur'an
please start a NEW thread
and stop hiding throu talking about something that totally not related to the TOPIC
the topic is
for you to explain THOSE 10 contridictions
if you cant do that please stay quite until someone does

thank you
and again i confirm that Gen X was 100% right regarding that you totally ignore the present issue and talk about something else

Why don't you post my replies to your apparent contradictions that I already addressed? They were less than 20, so you should still have 180+ "unresolved" in your mind.

I totally agree with you, the bible is a historic document, therefore inconsistencies between the various Authors tend to lend authority to the text, rather than if the facts were completely exact.

Go to your local bookshop and hunt throught the Classics section, you should find a book by a Jewish historian called Juventius, (a bit hazy on the spelling there). In this the book the guy mentions a person who can only Jesus. This is only mentioned in a couple of paragraphs and relates to the leader of a radical sect of Jews. This has been used by a number of open minded historians to point out the likely existence of a person called Jesus.

As l have stated before, any research into the origins of the christian faith would bring up many amazing facts, which don't support the fundamentalist christian arguements.

[paulw]

Hey Jethro,

I'm certainly not fundamentalist but I do think the Bible is more than just an historical document. Quite where the line lies is a matter of debate - and I am quite willing to enter into that without thinking that anyone who disagrees must, necessarily, be damned (it's likely, but not certain<grin>).

Cheers,

P.

[jdavison]

Jethro,
you are many things but open minded isn't one of them. There are also tons more books written by non believer who went out to prove the bible invalid or a lie that couldn't and wrote more books on why they believe it. I don't suppose you read any of those. What I want to know is what happened in your life to make you so anti-christian? I haven't tried to convert anybody. I have held open discussion and I have been open to others faith and beliefs. What I will not stand for is the putting down of a persons beliefs and the outright and blatant hatred of those just because of what they believe.

I agree that the bible is a historical document in parts. Books like Exodus,samuel, Joshua, Kings, Chronicles, acts, and some others. Others are inspirational, like psalms, job. Some are instructional. They all have a different purpose.

[kovan]

VVB what you talking about?
i posted 10 contridictions
you havent even addressed ONE yet
there is 10 in this thread
answer them please

[jdavison]

Actually I think he addressed them when you posted them the first time.

[kovan]

no he didn't
he addressed another set.. and he didn't explain all of the other set as well
i wanna start with these 10
if anyones gonna answer them go ahead,
so i can go on posting more

[jdavison]

the seven pair was of animals approved for eating. In other words that was his food supply and was unrealated to the pairs of animals.

Gen 7:2
2 Take along seven pairs of each animal that I have approved for eating and for sacrifice, and take one pair of each of the others.

[kovan]

MUCH BETTER
when i get home i will have a look at Gen again
but thats what i am talking about
i provide the so called contridiction
you provide me with an explaination

[jdavison]

Im trying, were is that list at anyway. I want to send the whole thing to my pastor to see what he has to say on them too. I'll have more time over the holiday to take a look through a couple of the translations to. That one just caught my attention. If you want you can go to
http://www.crosswalk.com
They have an online bible.

[Guv]

As an atheist, I am confused by this and certain other threads.

I thought that religion was based on faith, not truth, not logic, not science.

I actually addressed all of these when you first posted them in another thread.

How about doing some work and retrieve the answers I already gave. Most of these 10 I had put in your favor (or wouldn't put them in the bible's favor with my present understanding of them).

I think the one I really liked was commanding an odd number to walk in pairs. Like 7 to walk two-by-two.

I don't think you really are interested in replies.

Take an odd number of people and tell them to walk two-by-two. Do they or not? The technicality may damn you.

Cheers.

Guv
I wonder sometimes if there is a physics that if we were advanced enough, we too could do God's "miracles". It may be that rather than explaining everything in this finite time, it will be covered in Eternity 101.

Take one of my elementary thoughts on the Virgin Birth.

This woman conceived without "the assistance of a man" you ask? We call this a miracle.

If someday we can manifest a localized field within the seemingly closed womb of a virgin, which causes her to become impregnated, this won't be a "miracle" anymore; but could have been done by suchj a being.

As a reference to this God Technology, consider your "closed" house where you might watch TV without cable or satellite dish (or maybe I should include satellite dishes); a once "closed" room is no longer "closed" by varying definitions and a signal is received. This could be a sample to a higher technology that you would not describe to your child just learning how to speak and who doesn't posess the vocabulary for the conversation.

A remote controlled RF car would be controlled like a "miracle" decades ago. Maybe it would be considered demon-posessed.

Of course, these examples may insult God whose "technology" is far beyond my thoughts.

Believe it or not, my point is that many things may well be logical once we understand. As we are unlikely to understand all on this plane of existence, faith pleases God and demonstrates a reliance on Him.

"Him" being a gender reference in my language. But a reference for my finite mind none the less, to grasp the infinite.

Other languages capture the plurality of the name of God. There is enough for Eternity 101.

Originally posted by Guv
As an atheist, I am confused by this and certain other threads.

I thought that religion was based on faith, not truth, not logic, not science.

Guv flee like the wind, its too late for the rest of us. In total agreement with you, have tried to point out that the Bible is the work of man, not the work of god, and that a lot of it's content is based on the belief systems of previous religons or the political requirements of the early christian church...but its like hitting your head against the wall. Fundamental Christians believe in the Bible as the work of god, and no amount of arguement will sway them from this belief.

Generally when you get them down to basics they change the subject or go in for personnel attacks. Still am learning a bit from kovan in regards to Islam from these threads.

[jdavison]

You stated that but have failed to list any proof to back up your statements. First of the bible was compiled later but the beginings of it started before any other religions I know. Genesis itself was simply a compilation of jewish history and finally compiled by moses to make the torah. Moses is not only listed in jewish history but in egyptian history along with the plagues. That is historical fact! Go look it up yourself. Was it just amazing timing that they all happened in that small period of time or was it God. I have never claimed that the bible was written by God and not men. It was inspired by God through men. Man wrote it. This was never denied.

[kovan]

jdavison
question is will you agree to the fact that during that inspiration that men have recorded gods word inaccurately?

[jdavison]

I would only agree that some minor historical detail was recorded inacurately. I think that the main intent such as the teachings in the gospols, the torah, psalms, and most of the epicaples are the teching and instructions of god. and revelations too. I'm not talking about the translated versions but the manuscripts. People in several different locations writing the story can't be that wrong in unison. I think in chronicles and kings and a few others that there may be some technical problems but for the most part the history should be fairly acurate.

[jdavison]

Just a side not. I don't think the bible has all of gods inspired scriptures in it either.