[Dark Tofu]

Here's the best example of a contradiction.

Look up the different accounts of Jesus' resurrection in the four canonical Gospels. They all agree on pretty much two few things-Jesus was resurrected, and an angel was there when the women arrived.

They differ on what the angel looked like, which particular women were there, etc. I can make sense of those contradictions by knowing that the four Gospel accounts were written by fallible men collecting eyewitness accounts that got all the basic facts right but sometimes missed a detail (as anyone is prone to do) and not thinking that every single word in their accounts is the inspired Word of God.

Really, this ends contradiction in the Word of God. Some of the most glaring contradictions were in the letters-Paul spoke of salvation by faith alone, and James spoke of salvation by works. If we understand that those aren't inspired opinions, that quandary is resolved and the truth of the matter is revealed-which is salvation by a personal relationship with God, which is what the entire rest of the Bible preaches.

Also, Paul's stuff concerning womens' roles in the church (as well as his command for men not to have long hair, which contradicts the Nazarene vow not to cut hair) is understood to be his personal opinion under my view, making that contradiction irrelevant.

There are contradictions in the Bible, I've just spent several pages pointing them out to you. Unlike most people, who would abandon the faith when presented with such evidence, I've figured out how those contradictions can be while still maintaining my faith... and not some vague liberal New-Agey subjective morality claptrap, but an actual strong, evangelical, no-nonsense, Christ-centered faith.

[BillSPrestonEsq]

Originally Posted by Dark Tofu

Here's the best example of a contradiction.

Look up the different accounts of Jesus' resurrection in the four canonical Gospels. They all agree on pretty much two few things-Jesus was resurrected, and an angel was there when the women arrived.

They differ on what the angel looked like, which particular women were there, etc. I can make sense of those contradictions by knowing that the four Gospel accounts were written by fallible men collecting eyewitness accounts that got all the basic facts right but sometimes missed a detail (as anyone is prone to do) and not thinking that every single word in their accounts is the inspired Word of God.

Really, this ends contradiction in the Word of God. Some of the most glaring contradictions were in the letters-Paul spoke of salvation by faith alone, and James spoke of salvation by works. If we understand that those aren't inspired opinions, that quandary is resolved and the truth of the matter is revealed-which is salvation by a personal relationship with God, which is what the entire rest of the Bible preaches.

Also, Paul's stuff concerning womens' roles in the church (as well as his command for men not to have long hair, which contradicts the Nazarene vow not to cut hair) is understood to be his personal opinion under my view, making that contradiction irrelevant.

There are contradictions in the Bible, I've just spent several pages pointing them out to you. Unlike most people, who would abandon the faith when presented with such evidence, I've figured out how those contradictions can be while still maintaining my faith... and not some vague liberal New-Agey subjective morality claptrap, but an actual strong, evangelical, no-nonsense, Christ-centered faith.

James does not speak of salvation by works, but that faith produces works. Your confusion of Nazarite and Nazarene shows you don't understand the vows purpose. The vow was to be a sign and wonder, and yes, a shame. There is no contradiction in Paul's views of women in the church, your just making it up to add filler to a bogus argument.

All you are left with is your opinion, because that is your only judge of what is the word of God. So to put it another way, your word becomes the word of God to you, making you ultimately your own God. That is a dangerous position to put yourself in. You can't have an evangelical faith, for what would you believe except what you deem as true. He who picks and chooses is in control.

[Travis]

Originally Posted by Dark Tofu

There are contradictions in the Bible, I've just spent several pages pointing them out to you. Unlike most people, who would abandon the faith when presented with such evidence, I've figured out how those contradictions can be while still maintaining my faith...

Hahaha! You think most Christians abandon the faith when they hear about those alleged "contradictions"? Virtually every Christian alive in the Western world today has heard them and found them unconvincing. True Christians are a little less lazy than you in that they take the time to reconcile apparent problems rather than just throwing entire books out of the Bible. And since they actually have true faith in their Lord, they know that they have neither the right nor the competence to stand as a judge over Him and His word in the first place.

[Narcil]

Originally Posted by Dark Tofu

Here's the best example of a contradiction.

Look up the different accounts of Jesus' resurrection in the four canonical Gospels. They all agree on pretty much two few things-Jesus was resurrected, and an angel was there when the women arrived.

They differ on what the angel looked like, which particular women were there, etc.

Do I have to do this again?
Matthew 28:1-7:
After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.

There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men.

The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples: 'He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.' Now I have told you."

Mark 16:1-7:
When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus' body. Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they were on their way to the tomb and they asked each other, "Who will roll the stone away from the entrance of the tomb?"

But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed.

"Don't be alarmed," he said. "You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter, 'He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.'

Luke 24:1-8:
On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, "Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: 'The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.' Then they remembered his words.

***I have left out John on purpose, as there are some other issues regarding his acount as compared to the other three (Luke's in particular) that I will address soon.***

Who went to the tomb?:
Matthew: Mary Magdalene and the other Mary.
Mark: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome.
Luke: The women.
John***: Mary Magdalene

Are any of these statements contradictory? Can they all be true at the same time? (Bill went to the party. -- Bill and Joe went to the party. -- It was an office party, everyone was there. -- Can all of these statements be true? Of course!!! It's exactly the same.)

Status of the tomb when it was found on the first day of the week?
Matthew: Open and with an angel nearby.
Mark: Open with an angel nearby.
Luke: Open with two angels nearby.
John***: Open, with two angels nearby.

I don't understand how these statements are supposed to be contradictory. Where there are two angels, there is also certainly one. Again, extra information. Complimentary, not contradictory.

The appearance of the angel?
Matthew: His appearance was like lightning, his clothes were white as snow
Mark: a young man dressed in a white robe.
Luke: two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning
John***: two angels in white

Again, how are these descriptions contradictory? Lets put them all together to see how they harmonize:
The angles appeared as young men, dressed in clothes white as snow which gleamed like lightning.

If these were contradictory statements, I could not have constructed that sentence, incorporating all four descriptions, yet also remaining true to each of them.

The rest is the statement of the angel to the women is essentially the same, and I have never heard anyone try to make the claim of contradiction based on His statements.

[Dark Tofu]

Narcil, I moved that arguement to the contradictions section under apologetics

[mlqurgw]

Psa 138:2 I will worship toward Your holy temple, and praise Your name for Your loving-kindness and for Your truth's sake; for You have magnified Your Word above all Your name.

[Dark Tofu]

Your point with the above verse is...?

[mlqurgw]

Originally Posted by Dark Tofu

Your point with the above verse is...?

God is very jealous of His name as can be seen from even a perusal of the Bible. I posted that verse to show that He is even more jealous of His Word than even His name. We ought to be extremely careful when we seek to discard any part of it. As for myself, I would rather err on the side of taking all of it than to risk incurring the wrath of God. Add the fact that if He is so jealous of His Word He certainly has the power and the wisdom to preserve it and see to it that it is taken as a whole.

[BillSPrestonEsq]

Originally Posted by Dark Tofu

Narcil, I moved that arguement to the contradictions section under apologetics

that doesn't really matter, it needs to continue here.

[Dark Tofu]

Originally Posted by Narcil

Do I have to do this again?

Now I shall do it.

Matthew 28:1-7:
After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.

There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it. His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow. The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men.

The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. Then go quickly and tell his disciples: 'He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.' Now I have told you."

Mark 16:1-7:
When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus' body. Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they were on their way to the tomb and they asked each other, "Who will roll the stone away from the entrance of the tomb?"

But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed.

"Don't be alarmed," he said. "You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter, 'He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.'

Luke 24:1-8:
On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus. While they were wondering about this, suddenly two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning stood beside them. In their fright the women bowed down with their faces to the ground, but the men said to them, "Why do you look for the living among the dead? He is not here; he has risen! Remember how he told you, while he was still with you in Galilee: 'The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again.' Then they remembered his words.

***I have left out John on purpose, as there are some other issues regarding his acount as compared to the other three (Luke's in particular) that I will address soon.***

Well I shall put it in. Because it is the most contradictory.

John 20:1-20
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. 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!"

So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. Both were running, but the other disciple out ran Peter and reached the tomb first.He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in. Then Simon Peter, who was behind him, arrived and went into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, as well as the burial cloth that had been around Jesus' head. The cloth was folded up by itself, separate from the linen. Finally the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went inside. He saw and believed. (They still did not understand from Scripture that Jesus had to rise from the dead.)

Then the disciples went back to their homes, but Mary stood outside the tomb crying. As she wept, she bent over to look into the tomb and saw two angels in white, seated where Jesus' body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot.

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." At this she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not realize that it was Jesus.

"Woman," he said, "why are you crying? Who is it you are looking for?"

Thinking he was the gardener, she said, "Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have put him, and I will get him."

Jesus said to her, "Mary."

She turned toward him and cried out in Aramaic, "Rabboni!" (which means Teacher).

Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'"

Mary Madalene went to the disciples with the news: "I have seen the Lord!" And she told them that she had said these things to her.

On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fears of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" After he said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord.

Who went to the tomb?:
Matthew: Mary Magdalene and the other Mary.
Mark: Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome.
Luke: The women.
John***: Mary Magdalene

Matthew: I agree
Mark: I agree
Luke: I don't.
Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary, and others with them(look in verse nine)
John: I agree

Are any of these statements contradictory? Can they all be true at the same time? (Bill went to the party. -- Bill and Joe went to the party. -- It was an office party, everyone was there. -- Can all of these statements be true? Of course!!! It's exactly the same.)

Maybe they aren't 'contradictory' but this makes the Bible not inerrant. Let me explain.

If the Bible says only one person went naming them, it must mean just that person. Your statements above don't make sense. You would only say Bill if the subject was only on Bill or he was the only one who went. Which is not the case with these books. So you are telling me that John is correct in saying that only Mary Magdalene went and that when Luke says that at least 5 women went that he was right too?

Status of the tomb when it was found on the first day of the week?
Matthew: Open and with an angel nearby.
Mark: Open with an angel nearby.
Luke: Open with two angels nearby.
John***: Open, with two angels nearby.

Wrong.
Matthew:Violent earthquake, then one angel came and rolled back the stone and sat on it.
Mark:Stone already rolled away and one angel was inside tomb.
Luke:Stone was gone and they entered. Two angels appeared to them.
John:Stone gone. Two angels appeared to her.

I don't understand how these statements are supposed to be contradictory. Where there are two angels, there is also certainly one. Again, extra information. Complimentary, not contradictory.

It is contradictory. What happened? Was there a violent earthquake after they got there or was the stone already rolled away? Did an angel roll it away or was it already rolled away? Did angel come and sit on rock or was it already in the tomb or did 2 appear to them? Inside or outside tomb?

The appearance of the angel?
Matthew: His appearance was like lightning, his clothes were white as snow
Mark: a young man dressed in a white robe.
Luke: two men in clothes that gleamed like lightning
John***: two angels in white

Again, how are these descriptions contradictory? Lets put them all together to see how they harmonize:
The angles appeared as young men, dressed in clothes white as snow which gleamed like lightning.

If these were contradictory statements, I could not have constructed that sentence, incorporating all four descriptions, yet also remaining true to each of them.

Notice how Mark says a young man dressed in a white robe. Does that mean it was an angel? No. Does that mean there were two, no it means there was one. But I'll let you go on this one.

The rest is the statement of the angel to the women is essentially the same, and I have never heard anyone try to make the claim of contradiction based on His statements.

Well, what did the angel say then?

Also in just matthew mark and luke tell me exactly what happens here. (Paraphrases of the verses)

Matthew.
Women run toward where to disciples are to tell them the good news. Jesus appears to Jesus before Mary and Mary get there.

Mark
Then they fled from the tomb and told no one.

Luke
The women went and told the apostles, They didn't believe them, Peter went to tomb alone and saw strips of linen lying on their own wondering what had happened, Jesus appeared to them

And now explain to me how every bit of the book of John's summary of this event isn't a contradiction.

[BillSPrestonEsq]

Originally Posted by Dark Tofu

Now I shall do it.









Well I shall put it in. Because it is the most contradictory.

John 20:1-20
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. 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!"

So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. Both were running, but the other disciple out ran Peter and reached the tomb first.He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in. Then Simon Peter, who was behind him, arrived and went into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, as well as the burial cloth that had been around Jesus' head. The cloth was folded up by itself, separate from the linen. Finally the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went inside. He saw and believed. (They still did not understand from Scripture that Jesus had to rise from the dead.)

Then the disciples went back to their homes, but Mary stood outside the tomb crying. As she wept, she bent over to look into the tomb and saw two angels in white, seated where Jesus' body had been, one at the head and the other at the foot.

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." At this she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, but she did not realize that it was Jesus.

"Woman," he said, "why are you crying? Who is it you are looking for?"

Thinking he was the gardener, she said, "Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have put him, and I will get him."

Jesus said to her, "Mary."

She turned toward him and cried out in Aramaic, "Rabboni!" (which means Teacher).

Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'"

Mary Madalene went to the disciples with the news: "I have seen the Lord!" And she told them that she had said these things to her.

On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fears of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" After he said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord.



Matthew: I agree
Mark: I agree
Luke: I don't.
Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary, and others with them(look in verse nine)
John: I agree



Maybe they aren't 'contradictory' but this makes the Bible not inerrant. Let me explain.

If the Bible says only one person went naming them, it must mean just that person. Your statements above don't make sense. You would only say Bill if the subject was only on Bill or he was the only one who went. Which is not the case with these books. So you are telling me that John is correct in saying that only Mary Magdalene went and that when Luke says that at least 5 women went that he was right too?



Wrong.
Matthew:Violent earthquake, then one angel came and rolled back the stone and sat on it.
Mark:Stone already rolled away and one angel was inside tomb.
Luke:Stone was gone and they entered. Two angels appeared to them.
John:Stone gone. Two angels appeared to her.



It is contradictory. What happened? Was there a violent earthquake after they got there or was the stone already rolled away? Did an angel roll it away or was it already rolled away? Did angel come and sit on rock or was it already in the tomb or did 2 appear to them? Inside or outside tomb?



Notice how Mark says a young man dressed in a white robe. Does that mean it was an angel? No. Does that mean there were two, no it means there was one. But I'll let you go on this one.



Well, what did the angel say then?

Also in just matthew mark and luke tell me exactly what happens here. (Paraphrases of the verses)

Matthew.
Women run toward where to disciples are to tell them the good news. Jesus appears to Jesus before Mary and Mary get there.

Mark
Then they fled from the tomb and told no one.

Luke
The women went and told the apostles, They didn't believe them, Peter went to tomb alone and saw strips of linen lying on their own wondering what had happened, Jesus appeared to them

And now explain to me how every bit of the book of John's summary of this event isn't a contradiction.

You may be too dense to see this because you have chosen to disbelieve God's word, and replace it with your opinions. But what you see as contradictions are not contradictory. In fact they would only be contradictory in a static universe. We have consistent numbers of angels when the same people arrive. What you are requiring is that if one angel rolled away a stone, only one angel be present hours later. You are requiring identical circumstances at seperate times.

I say there are 30,000 people at Qualcomm stadium on a particular night for an event. 3 hrs later if you were to come by, there might be 10,000. And that does not necessitate a contradiction, it indicates that time has passed.

You assume angels can't walk.

[Godreignsoveral]

Originally Posted by BillSPrestonEsq

You may be too dense

This is inappropriate. Stiffnecked he may be, but dense? How about somebody calls you too stupid to understand it their way because you're not agreeing with them?

Mark

[BillSPrestonEsq]

Originally Posted by Godreignsoveral

This is inappropriate. Stiffnecked he may be, but dense? How about somebody calls you too stupid to understand it their way because you're not agreeing with them?

Mark

nice selective quoting. what I said was a non-17th century way of saying stiffnecked.

I made it clear it was a choice of his, not an inteligence issue, using modern terms. Dense does not mean stupid, it means impervious, an identical meaning to stiffnecked.

[Godreignsoveral]

Originally Posted by BillSPrestonEsq

nice selective quoting. what I said was a non-17th century way of saying stiffnecked.

I made it clear it was a choice of his, not an inteligence issue, using modern terms. Dense does not mean stupid, it means impervious, an identical meaning to stiffnecked.

Interesting... as that may be a dictionary truth, I've never heard anyone use dense as stiffnecked. Rather, dense over and over refers to stupidity... which is also an accurate definition. If you meant it merely as stiffnecked, I do apologize sincerely for fussing. I've really never heard dense in reference to a person in any other manner than demeaning, rather than matter-of-factual. Thanks for expounding and again, I apologize. Do you see though, how I read your sentence differently? I broke it down to "You must be too dense because (meaning, following is the proof of it) you do this and that."

Mark

[BillSPrestonEsq]

Originally Posted by Godreignsoveral

Interesting... as that may be a dictionary truth, I've never heard anyone use dense as stiffnecked. Rather, dense over and over refers to stupidity... which is also an accurate definition. If you meant it merely as stiffnecked, I do apologize sincerely for fussing. I've really never heard dense in reference to a person in any other manner than demeaning, rather than matter-of-factual. Thanks for expounding and again, I apologize. Do you see though, how I read your sentence differently? I broke it down to "You must be too dense because (meaning, following is the proof of it) you do this and that."

Mark

I hear it that way all the time as basically a state of becoming a way by choice. What I was meaning grammatically was just that he had chosen to become impervious to any harmonization of the scriptures because of his presupposal of their errancy.

More because you have chosen this, you will probably not be capable of seeing this.