|
Three articles appear below: 1 Brian De Kretser lists alleged "Bible Contradictions". 2 Kevin Rogers gives a brief response. 3 "Anonymous" responds to each and every "contradiction". Bible Contradictions
(Investigator 149, 2013 January) The Christian
Bible is
the world's best example of self-contradictions, misinformation and
plagiarism. Biblical scholars have known this for centuries. "God's
Word" the Bible has been edited, re-interpreted, mistranslated,
revised, censored, re-written, interpolated a countless number of times
down the centuries.
The first council
325
a.d. voted out "Acts of the Apostles" and "Revelation" from the Bible,
the second council 363 a.d. voted them in again. Another council 406
a.d. voted these two and others out of the Bible once more.
Thus
various books were voted in and out of "The Infallible Word of God"
over the centuries by 24 different councils. These were altered and
amended by 50 or more translations and more than 150,000 alterations.
Here are
a few more
examples-
The Roman Church
claims
that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome or Pope. But many scholars are
of the opinion that such a person as Peter never existed.
The
Church created its
own history using forged documents, but in the earliest writings
listing the Bishops of Rome, Peter's name never appears. According to
Irenaeus an early church father, the first Bishop of Rome was Linus,
followed by Clement. Peter never had that title; he was invested
centuries after he died.
More Examples-
It is estimated
that over
9,000 scientific errors have been found in the Bible (e.g. cud-chewing
Hares, straw eating Lions, a flood covering every mountain on earth,
etc)
Yet the Catholic Church's "Dogmatic Constitution" declares in 1965 that God is the true author of the Bible and all the biblical stories are "accurate and true and without error." In 1972 Evangelical Divinity Schools were requiring that all affirm that the "Bible is free from error." The notion of a god or gods is rejected by the intelligent or by any person with common sense and power to reason. But embraced by the fundamentalist no-brains who have lost the power of reason. They still believe in "fairies at the bottom of the garden." Those who choose to live without this mythical God's convoluted plan for some mythical salvation, are quite well off without it, free of guilt or need to believe in a mythology handed down from the Dark Ages, that cannot stand up to reason or investigation. Brian de Kretser Institute for Research into Religions Darwin N.T. Australia. Bible Contradictions? (Investigator 150, 2013 May) Kevin Rogers I refer to Brian De Kretser's article in Investigator #149 on Bible Contradictions. In this article Brian provided a list of supposed contradictions in the Bible to demonstrate its unreliability. Now for some of them I actually agree that it appears that way. One example that Brian cites is when Jesus sent out the 12 disciples. In Mark 6:8 Jesus says "take nothing for your journey except a staff". (Brian incorrectly attributes this to Matthew 6:8). However, in Matthew 10:10 and Luke 9:3 Jesus is recorded as saying "Take nothing for your journey, not even a staff". Now I am sure that some clever person has provided a reconciliation of this contradiction. However, explanations of this type appear lame to me. I don't seek to prove Biblical inerrancy, and inconsistencies at this level do not concern me. Who cares if the disciples carried a staff or not? (Actually both Matthew and Luke had a copy of both Mark and Quelle when they authored their gospels. They may have simply preferred Quelle to Mark on this occasion.) What I do contend is that the gospels reflect records based on highly reliable historical testimony. The more serious inconsistencies that Brian claims reflect more on Brian than on the Bible. He just fails to read the Bible intelligently. I will just demonstrate this with a few examples:
If you fail to
take
context into account and do not read the text sympathetically then you
can discover all kinds of contradictions that aren't really there, but
that is your problem, not a problem with the text.
Brian concludes, "The notion of a god or gods is rejected by the intelligent or by any person with common sense and power to reason..." By this he compliments himself and maligns those who disagree with him. However, I don't think that Brian has demonstrated his case. "CONTRADICTIONS" CLEARED UP
Anonymous (Investigator 151, 2013 July) EVIDENCE
SUMMARIZED
In the
1980s the world of
science began to accept that global destruction by asteroid impact
could one day come from Space. This, however, is something I learned
from the Bible years earlier. (Investigator #62) To appreciate the
power of such evidence Mr De Kretser — who accuses the Bible of
"contradictions, misinformation, plagiarism and mistranslation" (#149)
— should try returning science to its previous position of denial.
Then
there is racism
which is opposed in the Bible. Racism killed tens of millions in the
1940s and was defended by numerous scientists but is now refuted by the
science of genetics. To appreciate the power of such evidence De
Kretser should try getting racist beliefs re-accepted as science.
And there are a thousand other examples showing the Bible regularly correct and its critics mistaken. This includes
hundreds of
geographical locations archaeologically confirmed, about 100 Bible
people confirmed, and scores of statements in ethics, medicine,
psychology, astronomy, history, theology and zoology, plus numerous
alleged contradictions cleared up (in the Encyclopedia of Bible
Difficulties and other publications).
CONTRADICTIONS
De
Kretser seems to
consider it a contradiction if something is done on one occasion but
something different next time. By this viewpoint someone who breathes
in and then out, or starts his car and later stops it, is contradicting
himself.
Are the
two statements
"Tony opened the door" and "Tony did not open the door" contradictory?
Only if both statements refer to the same door, the same Tony, and the
same point in time. Change one of these — the person, the door or the
time — and there's no contradiction.
"CONTRADICTIONS"
CLEARED UP
Let us go through De Kretser's list: Q. Is the sequence of creation in Genesis 1 different to Genesis 2? A.
Genesis 2 is not an
alternative "creation story" to Chapter 1 but focuses on the Garden of
Eden. Compare this to a book in which Chapter 1 gives a broad summary
(e.g. a broad summary of World War I) and subsequent chapters discuss
specifics (e.g. specific battles). To do this is not "contradictory".
Q. Was Adam told he "would die at once" if he ate of the fruit? A. Adam's dying began the same day but took many years to finish. (Genesis 5:4) Q. Did God decide to destroy everything on earth (Genesis 6:7-17) but changed his mind and saved some? A.
Genesis 6:13 says: "I
will destroy them from the earth [i.e. the land]". Subsequent verses
(6:14 to 7:4) state that representatives of all "kinds" would survive
on the Ark.
Q.
"Everyone that asketh,
receiveth, and he that seeketh, findeth, and to him that knocketh, it
shall be opened." (Matthew 7:7-8) OR "Only a few will be saved, and
many will seek to enter but will not be admitted." (Luke 13:23-24)
A. Everyone is invited into the Kingdom of God but many refuse or delay until too late. Q. Did Jesus tell his followers to preach without shoes and staves (Matthew 10:10) OR to take shoes and staves (Mark 6:8-9)? A.
Matthew 6:9-10 says:
"Take no gold, or silver, or copper in your belts, no bag for your
journey, or two tunics, or sandals, or a staff…" The point (which is
clearer in Mark 6) is, don't take a second pair of sandals or second
staff.
Jesus doubtless often repeated his teachings on the same day to changing audiences. In Matthew's version some disciples who already had a staff may have asked about a second staff, so that "Take no staff" meant no additional staff. Q. Will the earth abide forever (Ecclesiastes 1:4) OR "Heaven and earth shall pass away..." (Matthew 24:35; Luke 21:33) A.
Ecclesiastes describes
what people could find out about the world by observation and
experience. One observation is: "A generation goes and a generation
comes, but the earth remains forever." The Hebrew "olam" refers to
unknown/indefinite lengths of time which can be forever but not
necessarily. And that's what was observable — people die but the land
stays. The New Testament goes beyond what ancient people could observe
and foretells of "new heavens and a new earth." (II Peter 3:13)
Q. J.C. was "Prince of Peace" OR not to send peace but a sword. (Matthew 10:34) A. Jesus
will bring
universal peace (Isaiah 9:6-7), and preached "Blessed are the
peacemakers…" (Matthew 6:9) But until universal peace occurs many
people oppose Jesus. The "sword" refers to conflict within families.
(Matthew 10:34-36)
Q. What were Jesus' last words on the cross? A. The
Gospels are based
on "eyewitnesses". Different witnesses would have observed from
different distances, were present at different but overlapping times,
experienced different distractions, and therefore heard and noticed
different details.
In
Matthew and Mark Jesus
says: "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (27:46; 15:34) These
were not the final words since Jesus was then offered sour wine
(Matthew 27:48) and "gave a loud cry and breathed his last." (Matthew
27:50; Mark 15:37)
John 19:30 states: "When Jesus had received the wine, he said, 'It is finished.' Then he bowed his head and gave up his spirit." These words occurred after "My God, My God…" but they are not the "loud cry". Jesus' "loud cry" occurred between saying "It is finished" and bowing his head. Luke gives the words of this loud cry: "Then Jesus, crying with a loud voice, said, 'Father, into your hands I commend my spirit.' Having said this, he breathed his last." (Luke 23:46) Q. The Roman Church claims that Peter was the first Bishop of Rome or Pope. But many scholars are of the opinion Peter never existed. Peter never had that title; he was invested centuries after he died. A.
Hundreds of New
Testament claims are already confirmed by archaeology, which suggests
that confirmation of Peter will eventually occur. Human bones excavated
under the altar of St Peter's Basilica in Rome in 1968 have been
forensically identified as a 1st century man in his 60s. Peter's bones?
Perhaps. http://religion.wikia.com.wiki/Saint_Peter
Q. Do the dead "know nothing" (Ecclesiastes 9:5-6), "they shall not rise" (Isaiah 26:14), or are they conscious? A. The
theme of
Ecclesiastes is what someone who believes in God could discover about
life's purpose by observing the world. Observation tells him that the
dead "know nothing" (9:5-6) and people die like animals. (3:18-21)
Observation therefore finds no final meaning — "everything is vanity".
The last chapter of Ecclesiastes goes beyond observation and states: "the spirit shall return to God who gave it." (12:7) Other Bible passages foretell a future "resurrection". (Daniel 12:2; John 5:28-29; 11:24-26; Acts 23:6; Revelation 20:13) "They shall not rise" (Isaiah 26:14) is true of that time in history and assured the Jews that the nations (Isaiah 14-25) that had oppressed them and their rulers (26:13), won't oppress them again. Q. "Ye are saved through faith...not works." (Ephesians 2:8-9) OR "By works is man justified, and not by faith." (James 2:24) A. Faith
that "Jesus died
for sinners" (Romans 5:6-8) comes first, but faith also produces "good
works" which demonstrate one's faith.
Q. "Drink wine not water" (1 Timothy 5:23) OR "Don't drink wine (Proverbs 20:1 & Romans 14:21) A. In I
Timothy wine is
prescribed for Timothy's stomach ailments. Aside from illness, it's OK
to drink wine in moderation for enjoyment without getting drunk. (Psalm
104:15) However, avoid wine or anything else if it "stumbles" those
"weak in faith" — Romans 14:1-23.
Q. "God has been tempted 10 times." (Numbers 14:22) OR "God can't be tempted." (James 1:13) A. In
the Old Testament
the Hebrew for "tempt" ("Nahsah") can mean "test" as in testing
someone's loyalty, patience or truthfulness. God's patience is "tested"
when evil-doers ignore Him and persist in their evil. God too can
"tempt" by testing people's worthiness for a task or assignment. In
modern English "tempt" often implies trying to entice someone to act
unethically. In this sense God cannot be tempted nor tempts. (James
1:13)
Q. "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation." (Micah 4:3) OR "Nation shall rise against nation." (Matthew 24:7) A.
Matthew refers to wars
between the 1st century and Christ's second coming; Micah refers to the
peace afterwards when God rules humankind.
Q. "Love your enemies." (Luke 6:27) OR "Kill your enemies." (Luke 19:27) A.
There's a time for
both. Luke 19:27 refers to Christ at his return when he judges — read
from verse 11 onwards.
Q. "With God all things are possible." (Matthew 19:26) OR "God can't prevail against chariots of iron." (Judges 1:19) A. "The
LORD was with
Judah, and he [Judah] took possession of the hill country, but could
not drive out the inhabitants of the plain because they had chariots of
iron." (Judges 1:19)
That "the LORD was with Judah" is seen in verses 4-19, but having God's favor does not guarantee getting everything immediately when one wants it. Jesus himself said "Not what I want but what you want…" (Matthew 26:39) Q. God punishes children for their parent's sins unto the 3rd and 4th generations. (Exodus 20:5) OR The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father. (Ezekiel 18:20) A.
"Punishing the
children" refers to them suffering consequences of their parents'
behavior. That this commonly happens is obvious. New Scientist
magazine reports: "The sins of the fathers are, indeed, visited on
subsequent generations. Nutrition and smoking in early life may
influence the health of men's sons and grandsons, a new study has
revealed." (7 January, 2006, p. 10) Ezekiel 18 refers to judicial
punishment for crime, sin, unrighteousness and negligence. Punishment
for any of these is on the perpetrator, not his relatives.
Q. Was Jesus given vinegar and gall to drink on the cross (Matthew 27:34) or wine and myrrh? (Mark 15:23) A. Not
"on" the cross but
before. Two soldiers may each have offered a different drink and Jesus
refused both. Alternatively the vinegar contained both "gall" (a bitter
additive, possibly pain-killer) and myrrh.
Q. "The Lord is very pitiful and tender of mercy." (James 5:11) OR "I will not pity nor spare, nor have mercy." (Jeremiah 13:14) A.
Compare today's
judicial system which can protect or punish depending on innocence or
guilt. God is "tender in mercy" but ultimately judges unrepentant,
merciless evil-doers without mercy.
Q. "Blessed are the peace makers" (Matthew 5:9) or "The Lord is a man of war." (Exodus 15:3) A. The
Bible teaches
peace, and followers of God promote peace. (Romans 12:18) Many people,
however, see peace as weakness and start conflicts and wars. This makes
God their enemy and ultimately brings out his "man of war" or warrior
side.
SCIENTIFIC ERRORS
De Kretser claims thousands of errors such as cud-chewing hares, straw-eating lions, and a flood covering all mountains. Hares
and rabbits eat
their own partly-digested fecal pellets and the food therefore goes
through the digestive system twice — a fact discovered in 1940. (#145)
Ruminants such as cattle and deer regurgitate their food for re-chewing
and it goes through part of the digestive system twice. This similarity
explains why Moses refers to hares as "chewers of cud". (#149)
What about "straw-eating" lions? Isaiah 11:7 pictures straw-eating lions to describe future world peace. Lions, however, also literally eat grass. Carr (1965) says: "I am sure it is also the desire to make up a dietary deficiency which sometimes makes lions eat quantities of fresh grass… This habit is also quite common with wild lions…" (Return to the Wild, p. 108) And regarding Noah's Flood: This was a large local flood since there was "earth" i.e. land not covered by the water — Genesis 8:1. REASON
De Kretser claims that all who can reason reject the notion of God. Actually
modern science
developed out of Christianity, millions of science graduates believed
in prayer, and the Human Genome Project was headed by a Christian.
Professor Paul Davies, physicist and cosmologist, writes: "Through my scientific work I have come to believe more and more strongly that the physical universe is put together with an ingenuity so astonishing that I cannot accept it merely as a brute fact." (The Mind of God, 1992) |