Bible Contractions Graphic

How do you define "universal truth"?

Joseph Campbell pointed out that all mythology reflects the same "plot" so to speak, i.e., the commonality of the human unconscious or perhaps the "Jungian thing" -- but at the end of the day myth is still myth aka fairy tales.

 

The Angel refers to "HIS FATHER DAVID" which CONTRADICTS the FALSEHOOD that Mary's conception was NOT biological.

NOT my problem that YOUR Stone Age fables and superstitions are NONSENSICAL.

YOU need to make "sense" out of that gobblygook.

Then WHY did you FAIL to do that?

 

NOW you are FALSIFYING the "prophecy" in your INFALLIBLE word of "god" in order to get around the Cognitive Dissonance CAUSED by the CONTRADITION?

At least my "prophecy" that you would have to FALSIFY one or the other came TRUE!

Hilarious!

 

Now I think you are just letting your imagination run wild.

Why don't you cite the specific prophecy and we can analyze it together?

 

"The Lord declares to you that the Lord himself will establish a house for you: When your days are over and you rest with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, your own flesh and blood, and I will establish his kingdom. He is the one who will build a house for my Name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever."


"I will raise up your offspring to succeed you, your own flesh and blood, and I will establish his kingdom."
That would be Solomon.

"and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever."
Doesn't actually say they will all be biological ancestors.

Seems like adoption into a family could fit into this. Especially if they are the first-born son to your first (and only) wife, since the inheritance and kingship would traditionally pass to that son.

 

I already did and it is YOU that is FAILING to substantiate your OPINIONS.

Sad!

 

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!

The above falls under the definition of FLAILING!

Sad!

Joseph was MARRIED with SONS prior to being widowed and marrying Mary which means his FIRST-BORN son was NOT Jesus!

Have YOU never STUDIED your OWN religious texts with your mind OPEN to these CONTRADICTIONS?

Because that is the impression the CONTENT of your posts is REVEALING.

 

Buri:
It strikes me as odd that you're using the avatar of a fictional devil, while arguing that the Judeo-Christian is "fantasy and mythology."

Your avatar is as fictional as your argument that, to quote you, Bible believers "pretend" there are no Bible contradictions when in fact "everyone else can see them as plain as day." You are hardly in a position to speak for "everyone," unless you are referring to every atheist. In any event, suppose you post your first three supposed Bible contradictions right here, in this thread, and then explain to the rest of us why you consider it to be a contradiction. Do that, and we can discuss it further.

I will wait.

Alter2Ego

 

the avatar is for laughs. Buri was one of Odin's sons, I’m enjoying and laughing at mythology all in the same basket. That said, let’s look at some contradictions!
GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time.
GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later.

well, which one was it? Don’t get to have it both ways. There’s SO many, I’m picking just a few fun ones.
GE 6:4 There were Nephilim (giants) before the Flood.
GE 7:21 All creatures other than Noah and his clan were annihilated by the Flood.
NU 13:33 There were Nephilim after the Flood.

I have a membership to our amazing museum, sadly the nephilim are never there when I go. Which is sad, since this story was borrowed from the epic of Gilgamesh but I’m dying to see the nephilim exhibit!

GE 12:7, 17:1, 18:1, 26:2, 32:30, EX 3:16, 6:2-3, 24:9-11, 33:11, NU 12:7-8, 14:14, JB 42:5, AM 7:7-8, 9:1 God is seen.
EX 33:20, JN 1:18, 1JN 4:12 God is not seen. No one can see God's face and live. No one has ever seen him.

ok, are we seeing him or not? I’m guessing that since anyone could make up any wild stuff they wanted and mental illness was probably pretty rampant, and psychedelics were not uncommon that there is no reasonable expectation to take any of this literally. A few good stories, a bunch of awful ones, but not entirely unexpected.

 

Do you have any evidence for this?

There is no scriptural support for your assertion here. To what "religious texts" exactly are you referring?

 

That's just a manner of speaking. That can just mean they happened within the same period of time, not literally at the same time.
There is no contradiction there.

There are multiple possible explanations for that.
"all creatures" could just be a manner of speaking and might not mean literally all, could just mean "all different types of creatures", a wholesale disaster that almost wiped all of them out, maybe only in that part of the world.
Nephilim could have arisen afterwards, either from Noah's descendants, population from far away outside the disaster zone, or even from some other realm of existence (if Nephilim did not just refer to ordinary giants, the same place where they came from before).

The "giants" mentioned in Numbers are likely not even be the same "Nephilim" mentioned in Genesis.
Probably the simplest and most likely explanation.

 

Sad that you appear to have so little in the way of actual Subject Matter Knowledge on this topic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Joseph_the_Carpenter

The CONTRADICTIONS are IN your own SCRIPTURES so what else do YOU need?

 

The FLAILING never ends!

 

Here is one they missed, which is unanswerable.

Adam was not separated from God by sin until AFTER Eve was created, so how could he be "so alone" it was "not good" BEFORE Eve was created while he was without sin and one with God?????

 

How about this:
Ps 104:5 the LORD hath founded the earth upon its own bases; it shall not be removed for ever.

1 Ch 16: 30 Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.
contradicted by:
Isa 24:19 The earth is utterly broken down, the earth is clean dissolved, the earth is moved exceedingly.
20 The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed

 

That's a little bit of a manner of speech, rather than literal. I think you ignore the wider context of this verse.

If you go to chapter 65 (later in Isaiah), he expresses a theology of a "new earth", meaning the earth will one day be renewed.

"the earth broken down" could partially be referring to then-existing political boundaries of empires and the established order breaking down. Somewhat of a hyperbolic metaphor.

It is talking about a different type of movement, which you can glean from the context of the chapter ("violently shaken", "reels like a drunkard", "sways like a hut in the wind", this is a little bit different from it changing course on a larger scale).

Many of these supposed contradictions that are being identified only appear to be contradictions in the literal very narrow-minded sense, not so much their actual meaning when looking at the wider context and familiarity with the overall story and theology.


In addition to that, all of the Psalms cannot necessarily be taken as factual truth because they are the philosophical speculations of man in prayer. However, despite that, the Psalms are sort of believed to be unintentionally prophetic, so that inconsistencies in them would not be entirely non-problematic.
(Meaning even if there was a blatant inconsistency that existed in Psalms, it would not be entirely devestating)

 

That is not considered scripture. It does not hold the same status as accepted parts of the Bible, and the majority of Christians do not accept it.

There is a general belief or theory it was just made up, to support a particular religious doctrine. By claiming Joseph was married before, they could explain how Jesus could have brothers while Mary remained a perpetual virgin. Obviously that is unlikely. (Joseph would have remained married to Mary and never had sex for the rest of their lives?)

 

That seems more like a philosophical or theological question than a contradiction.

You're basically asking why did Adam have to suffer being alone, something bad, before mankind had sin. Even though the situation did not last long and God quickly remedied the situation (with the creation of Eve).

 

"Strikingly". Good choice of words. There has always seemed to be a close resemblance between the two phenomena, LDS end Islam.

 

The entire subject of such a central character as religions address can, by definition, only be done in metaphor, even if it is not presented that way. 'God' exceeds human capacity for encompassing with mind, so could only be pointed at with symbols. The more a faith defines this One, the more it limits, demeans and defiles. It could be said that religion is blaspheme in that it limits a person's channels of experiencing the infinite.

 

Cherry picking from ancient scriptures is a sign of DESPERATION.

 

Why did your allegedly OMNISCIENT imaginary deity NEED to REMEDIATE his "perfect creation" within DAYS of having finished it?

And WHY didn't he KNOW that introducing Eve would result in their "sinning"?

Since your beliefs claim that your IMAGINARY deity is ALL KNOWING that means that he MUST have created Eve for the NEFARIOUS purpose of ENTRAPMENT.

Sad!

 

Uh, it IS a contradiction. You cannot be created at the same time and not and the same time. That's a blatant contradiction.

As far as taking things literally, that's a lot of the point. You cannot take any of it literally. There is no such thing as nephilim, we not only have a massive contradiction we have a complete fairy tale. That's the explanation.

 

John 20:
1 Early on the first day of the week, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance.
2 So she came running to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one Jesus loved, and said, “They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we don’t know where they have put him!”
3 So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb.

11 Now Mary stood outside the tomb crying. As she wept, she bent over to look into the tomb
12 and saw two angels in white, seated where Jesus’ body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot.
13 They asked her, “Woman, why are you crying?” “They have taken my Lord away,” she said, “and I don’t know where they have put him.”​

Now, added to these issues, neither account is written like an eyewitness account. Both are written in an omniscient third-person narrator voice. No authorship for either one is established, either, nor is even the existence of these characters outside of myth. It is apparent that the authors of these gospels were either unaware of each other or unconcerned with what the other was writing. Given the lack of telephones and other means of long-distance communication, it's natural that different stories would be written by different people at different places and different times. It doesn't help matters that they had to rely primarily on oral storytelling.

You can see that it's not easy to put together a plausible scenario from these two stories that doesn't also make at least one of them wrong on at least some points. On top of that, these are claims of a miracle occurring and something quite important to the whole Christ myth, namely his resurrection and first appearance. It is something that one would expect eyewitnesses / parties involved and the Almighty himself to get right on the record!

John creates a lot of these little issues relative to the synoptic gospels. He's kind of the outlier, for whatever reason.