Conflicting statements in the bible

[A_Nony_Mouse]

What you miss is that the two passages are given at different points in the chronology, with the 800 at a later point than the 300. So, both could be accurate.

Personally I tend to think that the numerical differences are more likely due to copying errors which have no effect on doctrine. But in this case, you don't even have a solid numerical difference due to the time factor.

Are you really claiming the lower number was a news report from the front lines not a final number?

[Statler Waldorf]

2 Samuel 23:8: “These are the names of the mighty men whom David had: Josheb- basshebeth a Tahchemonite, chief of the captains; the same was Adino the Eznite, against eight hundred slain at one time.”

1 Chronicles 11:11: “And this is the number of the mighty men whom David had: Jashobeam, the son of a Hachmonite, the chief of the thirty; he lifted up his spear against three hundred and slew them at one time.”

I am not seeing the contradiction here…

1. The verse in Samuel mentions two men killing 800 men at one time. The verse in Chronicles mentions only the first of these two men killing 300 men at one time. That’s not a contradiction.
2. Even if the first man, Josheb- basshebeth is credited with all 800 men in Samuel and the 300 men in Chronicles it does not mean this is a contradiction, nowhere does it say that the two verses are even describing the same event. A contradiction must occur in the same relationship and at the same time, so if Josheb- basshebeth killed 800 men in one battle and 300 in another battle that’s not a contradiction. This is also supported by the fact that the word “spear” doesn’t appear anywhere in the original text of the Samuel verse but does in the Chronicles verse.

[swordwords]

Most of the "contradictions" I've seen are so obviously out of context it isn't even funny. I'd like to see what constitutes a contradiction before I believe some graph.

I am an atheist, but I would agree with you, however, not for the same reason I assume you have. The Bible is allegory and these apparent contraditions are a sort of puzzle to be solved. (You, as well as most Atheists, in effect, see the entire Bible in the wrong context.) In some cases the "error" will complete an allusion and may also communicate part of the hidden meaning at the same time. In other cases, there really are two different events being discussed, but our literal reading of the Bible prevents us from seeing the distinction. At other times one metaphor might be replaced with another metaphor to send a slightly different message. (Jews and Greeks both understood this allegory, but often they might not recognize a particular allusion if they were not familiar with the writing to which it referred. So, if the writer of the Gospel of Matthew suspected that a Jew might not recognize an allusion to a Greek idea employed by the author of the Gospel of Mark, he might switch to an allusion that was more Jewish.) These types of errors and contradictions are also found in the works of the Jewish historian Josephus and they serve the same purpose.

[popeyespappy]

Tell it to our resident fundies.

[Statler Waldorf]

I am an atheist, but I would agree with you, however, not for the same reason I assume you have. The Bible is allegory and these apparent contraditions are a sort of puzzle to be solved. (You, as well as most Atheists, in effect, see the entire Bible in the wrong context.) In some cases the "error" will complete an allusion and may also communicate part of the hidden meaning at the same time. In other cases, there really are two different events being discussed, but our literal reading of the Bible prevents us from seeing the distinction. At other times one metaphor might be replaced with another metaphor to send a slightly different message. (Jews and Greeks both understood this allegory, but often they might not recognize a particular allusion if they were not familiar with the writing to which it referred. So, if the writer of the Gospel of Matthew suspected that a Jew might not recognize an allusion to a Greek idea employed by the author of the Gospel of Mark, he might switch to an allusion that was more Jewish.) These types of errors and contradictions are also found in the works of the Jewish historian Josephus and they serve the same purpose.

Sure, there’s figurative language used in various books of the Bible (i.e. Job), but the entire Bible Is allegory? Where do you get that idea from?

[A_Nony_Mouse]

Sure, there’s figurative language used in various books of the Bible (i.e. Job), but the entire Bible Is allegory? Where do you get that idea from?

How about the entire OT is propaganda as backstory for the totalitarian dictatorship of the Hasmonean priest kings?

[Tex]

Yes. The Day of Preparation begins on the evening of the day before and ends the following evening when passover begins. "John" (or whoever) understood this much better than you.

Then I see no problem. He was crucified on day of Preparation and then died when the day changed. The terms are correct. I'm really confused at to what your argument is.

What? It is not consistent with Matty. And the other two didn't give a shit about the nativity story.

Luke himself contradicts based on the math I gave. Jesus cannot be both 23 and 30 at the same time. Therefore, since it also doesn't match the other accounts, I'm thinking he wasn't born while Quinirus was governor in Galilee and Luke messed up. There was a census in 6 A.D., but it wasn't the one Jesus was born on.

A silly argument. One book says one thing and the other books say something else. That is what "contradiction" means. I am not interested in determining which account is right or wrong. I think they are all horseshit. I am merely pointing out to you that your allegedly inerrrant holy books tell different stories. This then becomes your problem and I see you have chosen to put your holy blinders on and pretend that reality does not exist. Again, your problem.

A silly argument? I guess all books ever written are wrong because they don't include all the possible data. My latin book only contains actual latin sentences from famous historians/philosophers/politicians/theologians, etc.. I guess all latin is wrong. My science book in 12th grade included physics that my sister's didn't have. I guess those are both wrong too. Your argument is a silly argument. "I don't like the way they look" is not a silly argument.

This ignored it and "said nothing to anyone." Period. The story ended at that point until later scribes found that unsatisfying and made some rather silly additions to it.

So what? The additions aren't wrong. They are written later into mark, but are in the other gospels. Who cares if they added the ending of the story.

And they obviously told people since, you know, people know now. Duh.

On top of that, as already explained, they were told, "...tell Peter and the disciples". I think they ONLY told Peter and the disciples.

Now, you're getting warmer.

You're a troll, not a scholar.

By George....now you are getting it.

Different stories for different audiences at different times.

YES, YOU GOT IT!!!

And all of them a load of crap.

Oh, nevermind.

---

@ Statler Wardolf
The guy thinks there's aliens controlling it all. Probably believes the Assassins Creed theology. Pay him no mind.

Tex, do you agree that the Bible is not literal and should be considered fiction?

No.

If not, how can you believe in the Bible's literal statements and take it seriously with so many controdictions?

1) It is a piece of literature. There are historical statements, yes, and then there are other literary devices used.

2) I have yet to see a literal statement be wrong to the extent that it actually affects the bible's worth. No, King Saul did not reign at 1 year old and die at 2 years old. There is an error. However, Saul's age doesn't matter. It doesn't affect anything.

3) If you can find a contradiction that actually affects Christian teachings or some big doctrine, I'll give you more credit, but right now the large majorities of "contradictions" are so insignificant it truly looks as if people want the bible to look as bad as possible rather than investigating it objectively.

[Cinjin]

Why bother Min? Between Tex, John V, GChild, and Stat, it's a giant cluster-fuck of pathetic excuses and/or outright avoidance. It doesn't matter what the Babbly book says, the gymnasty responses are always the same: Context, metaphor, and translation. They refuse to see that their dumbfuck god doesn't even have the power to keep his translations straight or his authors mathematically competent, let alone keep his own followers from splitting into hundreds of different sects - all disputing the interpretations of a "perfect book."

How anyone could possibly take that stupid book seriously is just .... well ....







oh and by the way. Which one of you is right? Is it you Tex? Is your church the right interpreters or should I go with those True Christians down in Westboro? How bout the Ku Klux Klan? Do they have it right? What a pathetic joke of god you all serve.

[John V]

Are you really claiming the lower number was a news report from the front lines not a final number?

First, I'm not claiming anything. I'm noting that a simple explanation exists.

Second, you spin it as if the difference in time is short. It isn't. It's years.

A person can have an old resume which shows their highest education as a high school degree, and another which shows their highest education as a college degree. If the latter was dated four or more years later than the former, no one would yell Contradiction! This isn't rocket science.

To those saying that Christians are doing gymnastics to avoid contradictions: look in the mirror. You're doing gymnastics to try to uphold the contradictions. You'd be better off admitting that there's some crap in that chart and trying to make a chart with fewer but better charges.

[Statler Waldorf]

It doesn't matter what the Babbly book says,

Yes, we all know that you do not care what scripture actually says; your assertion that it has contradictions without possessing even a basic working knowledge of Biblical theology or hermeneutics makes that quite apparent.

For someone who whines so much about other people being big meanie faces you sure are impolite aren’t you?

oh and by the way. Which one of you is right? Is it you Tex? Is your church the right interpreters or should I go with those True Christians down in Westboro? How bout the Ku Klux Klan? Do they have it right? What a pathetic joke of god you all serve.

People disagreeing about what the correct interpretation of scripture is only proves what we already knew (and what scripture teaches), namely that people are fallible. However, that is utterly irrelevant with regard to the merit of the truth claims made by scripture. You’d be a funny kindergarten teacher, “Well class, three of you thought that “2+2=4”, two of you thought that “2+2=5”, and three of you thought that “2+2=3”, so therefore there is no correct answer to the problem “2+2= ?” because you all thought you were correct but you all gave differing answers!”