Book of Contradictions: A Challenge

[reverendjeremiah]

I have never in my reading the Bible encountered something which to me seemed to contradict anything else...if that's the stupid answer you're looking for, I mean.

Translation: I have only read a few bits and pieces of the bible that my Pastor and study group told me about.

---

Min, I seriously wonder how people put up with a cranky old guy like yourself in real life.

The Hell you say.. I wish me and Min werent seperated by so many states. The idea of hooking up with Min on the weekend for beer and grilled animals appeal to me.

..and it has nothing with the fact that Im hitting 40 this year either.

---

Fail. That second verse doesn't say that He does not rest, it merely says that He does not tire. The first verse says that He rested, not that He tired.

LMAO ... what was I thinking ... "I'm not tired - I'm going to go rest". Yeah, that makes sense.

you tool! Go play in the kiddies pool - it's adult swim time ok little man.

What? You've never laid down and taken a nap just because you felt like you had no work to do? Man, you're really missing out.

Watson says, all the time hoping that nobody asks "why would an all powerful deity need to rest after doing so much work?

---

You are a rediculous little ding dong aren't you. Go find a sandbox to play in. If you're going to offer me arguments like that you're not going to leave Frodo with anything to use and two....

LMFAO.."ding dong". I love that word..its so childish and still funny as hell.

---

The Hebrew word used for "kill" is ratsach, which refers more to the act of murder.

There's a significant difference in the meaning of these two words/passages. One passage refers to the act of killing in battle, while the other prohibits the shedding of innocent blood. This is no different than asking a Marine not to murder anyone, yet asking him to kill in battle, there is no contradiction.

Skeptics consistently refer to the KJV in demonstrating some of these points. The KJV doesn't always select the most appropriate word for conveying the meaning of a passage. I don't think I've ever seen an example were the KJV wasn't the primary source of reference, though I'm sure there are some.

Another reason for these apparent contradictions is the limited number of words/letters used in the Hebrew language. A significant part of translating Hebrew words is based on context, like the two passages used above. It's clear on context alone what is being stated and this again is easily demonstrated in are own modern day vernacular.

"I'm going to kill my daughters boyfriend if he doesn't bring her home before midnight!"

They tell us that "the bible is the perfect word of god", then when we start pointing out contradictions we are told "That is a translation error..the original language..blah blah blah.."

I stop it right then and there. If someone needs to understand the original languages, then 99.999% of the believers are believing their religion off of a faulty manuscript. I rest my case. thanks for agreeing with me that this book is faulty.

Any other faults...er..."mistranslations" that I need to be aware of?

an all powerful gods word can be mistranslated for hundreds of years?

---

Oh FFS you are making excuses already! You're so deluded you can't even take advice from fellow atheists. I've told you already how mindblowingly easy it is to defeat you. And you make the excuse that you found me the easiest ones? Please mate... do me a favour and grow a spine.

Wait..you have "theist" and "agnostic" in your signature and you act like this? You call someone deluded, yet your signature suggest that you worship and believe something you admit cannot be known?



I dont know wether to verbally abuse you or pass you another beer and wait for the next hilarious thing to come out of your mouth.

[Nimzo]

Exegesis being a Greek word which means "trying to make bullshit smell better."

Dead flies have been known to give perfume a bad smell...

[downbeatplumb]

it might be more difficult to find consistancy in the bible.

So how about letting us see the consistancy.

[Doubting Thomas]

If someone wants to claim there are no contradictions in the bible, then please explain what Judas really did with the 30 pieces of silver for turning over Jesus, and then explain how he died.

Matthew 27:5
And he [Judas] cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.

Acts 1:18
Now this man [Judas] purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.

So in Matthew, he cast the money into the temple, then went & hanged himself.

But apparently in Acts we're told that Judas bought a field with the very same 30 pieces of silver and, while walking through it one day, fell down and burst open.

Now it appears to most readers of the bible that this would be a contradiction. I mean, after he tossed the money into the temple, did he think better about it and then go retrieve it, buy a field, start to hang himself but then change his mind, then fall from the tree he was trying to hang himself in and somehow burst open with his guts spilling out?

---

They tell us that "the bible is the perfect word of god", then when we start pointing out contradictions we are told "That is a translation error..the original language..blah blah blah.."

I stop it right then and there. If someone needs to understand the original languages, then 99.999% of the believers are believing their religion off of a faulty manuscript. I rest my case. thanks for agreeing with me that this book is faulty.

I, too, noticed the "lost in translation" defense of the bible is used a lot by Christians in order to explain why a passage doesn't say what it says. Thanks for giving me the perfect comeback. If you can't trust the translation, then how can you trust any of it to be correct?

I had a fundie friend once, while explaining why drinking alcohol is evil, try to tell me that Jesus turned water into grape juice because the original word for "wine" had two translations, one being "strong drink" and the other "grape juice." Of course he never did explain why the "grape juice" translation had to be the correct one.

[Minimalist]

Yeah, D-T. As this pile of shit from CARM shows, they simply define the obvious contradiction away.

http://carm.org/bible-difficulties/matth...lling-down

There is no contradiction here at all because both are true.

So you pretty much nailed the scenario they think happened.

Shitheads are inventive...must give them that!

[Cinjin]

If someone wants to claim there are no contradictions in the bible, then please explain what Judas really did with the 30 pieces of silver for turning over Jesus, and then explain how he died.

Matthew 27:5
And he [Judas] cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.

Acts 1:18
Now this man [Judas] purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.

So in Matthew, he cast the money into the temple, then went & hanged himself.

But apparently in Acts we're told that Judas bought a field with the very same 30 pieces of silver and, while walking through it one day, fell down and burst open.

Now it appears to most readers of the bible that this would be a contradiction. I mean, after he tossed the money into the temple, did he think better about it and then go retrieve it, buy a field, start to hang himself but then change his mind, then fall from the tree he was trying to hang himself in and somehow burst open with his guts spilling out?

---

They tell us that "the bible is the perfect word of god", then when we start pointing out contradictions we are told "That is a translation error..the original language..blah blah blah.."

I stop it right then and there. If someone needs to understand the original languages, then 99.999% of the believers are believing their religion off of a faulty manuscript. I rest my case. thanks for agreeing with me that this book is faulty.

I, too, noticed the "lost in translation" defense of the bible is used a lot by Christians in order to explain why a passage doesn't say what it says. Thanks for giving me the perfect comeback. If you can't trust the translation, then how can you trust any of it to be correct?

I had a fundie friend once, while explaining why drinking alcohol is evil, try to tell me that Jesus turned water into grape juice because the original word for "wine" had two translations, one being "strong drink" and the other "grape juice." Of course he never did explain why the "grape juice" translation had to be the correct one.

Add to that - that grapes are harvested once a year - how do you keep the grape juice from spoiling year round in the middle of the hot-as-fuck middle east???? Magical refridgerators?

Also, the old testament says "be not DRUNK with wine" ... isn't that tant amount to saying the "grape juice" is actually alcohol.

[Napoléon]

5 pages, and i still haven't seen frodo disprove a contradiction? YOU THERE FRODO?

[reverendjeremiah]

And lets all be dead honest, this whole "wrong translation" excuse is poorly conceived. They say that the hebrew word really meant "murder"

Ok, fine.

Then explain to me why the same concept is carried over into the new testament that is very much NOT HEBREW but in other languages.
---
Example:

Hebrew
-Exodus 20:13: Thou shalt not kill.

-Deuteronomy 5:17: Thou shalt not kill.

Matthew collected the "oracles" in Hebrew and translated them into Greek
-Matthew 5:21: Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment.

Romans is a letter written in the traditional Greek letter writing style of the first century A.D.
-Romans 13:9: For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

---
So here we have 3 different language situations (Hebrew, Hebrew to Greek, and Greek) from the original manuscripts translated the EXACT SAME WAY into English. It is also noticeable that the Book of Matthew was supposedly translated from Hebrew to Greek...

The Gospel of Matthew does not name its author. Papias of Hierapolis, about 100-140 AD, in a passage with several ambiguous phrases, wrote: "Matthew collected the oracles (logia - sayings of or about Jesus) in the Hebrew language (Hebraïdi dialektōi - perhaps alternatively "Hebrew style") and each one interpreted (hērmēneusen - or "translated") them as best he could."[1] On the surface this implies that Matthew was written in Hebrew and translated into Greek, but Matthew's Greek "reveals none of the telltale marks of a translation."[2] Scholars have put forward several theories to explain Papias: perhaps Matthew wrote two gospels, one, now lost, in Hebrew, the other our Greek version; or perhaps the logia was a collection of sayings rather than the gospel; or by dialektōi Papias may have meant that Matthew wrote in the Jewish style rather than in the Hebrew language.[3]

So why do they all say "Thou shalt not kill" if it really means something else.. like "thou shalt not murder"?

Honestly, the entire "lost in translation" excuse is so tiring, and so drawn out...



I pretty much assume that anyone who uses the excuse either is a dipshit who has no idea what they are talking about, or that they are aware of the problems, but choose to ignore them and "lie for Jesus" to make up for their faulty religious text.

[Cinjin]

And lets all be dead honest, this whole "wrong translation" excuse is poorly conceived. They say that the hebrew word really meant "murder"

Ok, fine.

Then explain to me why the same concept is carried over into the new testament that is very much NOT HEBREW but in other languages.
---
Example:

Hebrew
-Exodus 20:13: Thou shalt not kill.

-Deuteronomy 5:17: Thou shalt not kill.

Matthew collected the "oracles" in Hebrew and translated them into Greek
-Matthew 5:21: Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment.

Romans is a letter written in the traditional Greek letter writing style of the first century A.D.
-Romans 13:9: For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

---
So here we have 3 different language situations (Hebrew, Hebrew to Greek, and Greek) from the original manuscripts translated the EXACT SAME WAY into English. It is also noticeable that the Book of Matthew was supposedly translated from Hebrew to Greek...

The Gospel of Matthew does not name its author. Papias of Hierapolis, about 100-140 AD, in a passage with several ambiguous phrases, wrote: "Matthew collected the oracles (logia - sayings of or about Jesus) in the Hebrew language (Hebraïdi dialektōi - perhaps alternatively "Hebrew style") and each one interpreted (hērmēneusen - or "translated") them as best he could."[1] On the surface this implies that Matthew was written in Hebrew and translated into Greek, but Matthew's Greek "reveals none of the telltale marks of a translation."[2] Scholars have put forward several theories to explain Papias: perhaps Matthew wrote two gospels, one, now lost, in Hebrew, the other our Greek version; or perhaps the logia was a collection of sayings rather than the gospel; or by dialektōi Papias may have meant that Matthew wrote in the Jewish style rather than in the Hebrew language.[3]

So why do they all say "Thou shalt not kill" if it really means something else.. like "thou shalt not murder"?

Honestly, the entire "lost in translation" excuse is so tiring, and so drawn out...

you bastard you stole the argument I was going to use if Frodo threw it in my face.
oh well ... least its out there. Right on man!

[reverendjeremiah]

you bastard you stole the argument I was going to use if Frodo threw it in my face.
oh well ... least its out there. Right on man!

LOL..sorry man. I've been around the block several times now, and I know what they are going to say before they say it.

Here lately I just absolutely ignore any reference to Jebus, unless I think I can make a good joke that will make the guy stop talking serious and start laughing.

...some people refuse to have a sense of humor. If they fail to laugh, and I think the joke was good, then I avoid the shady character. People who take everything too serious tend to be trouble in my opinion.