Contradictions in Scripture??!!??

[taiko]

Simple one.....I can't believe that what you said has had such impact on the, "English Reformation".

 

Leviticus is speaking of one brother "taking" another living brother's wife, (for sex) while Deuteronomy is speaking of a brother taking over his dead brother's duty as, "husband" for the dead brother's surviving wife.

 

In both instances, in this time, day and age, either way the woman is defiled in their eyes.

 

She would be deemed worthless, and unclean to any other man and likely would die in poverty unless these rules were in place.

 

I hope that makes sense.....nite nite peoples....

 

I wonder if anyone is actually reading or just going to an "error" website. Verse 6 of Deuteronomy 25 gives the reason for verse 5. So that the dead man's name will remain as part of Israel when the widow and his brother have children. And should the brother refuse, well the elders give him a chance to change his mind. Then the widow spits in his face as he faces public scorn for failing in his duties as a man in that society

[Citizen Erased]

I wonder if anyone is actually reading or just going to an "error" website. Verse 6 of Deuteronomy 25 gives the reason for verse 5. So that the dead man's name will remain as part of Israel when the widow and his brother have children. And should the brother refuse, well the elders give him a chance to change his mind. Then the widow spits in his face as he faces public scorn for failing in his duties as a man in that society

 

I studied the verses as part of my obsession with the Tudors. And you are completely right.

 

Yes Moose, it did have an effect. In that the Church of England was established to give Henry VIII the divorce he wanted from his wife of almost 20 years. He married her because Deuteronomy gave him the right to, and divorced her because Leviticus gave him an excuse to leave her for some little whore. So yeah, I'd have to say that is a pretty large impact. Thousands of people died during the Tudor years because of this and I find it pretty funny you think it is quite so simple.

 

It is ALL about context.

[burning 4 revenge]

I studied the verses as part of my obsession with the Tudors. And you are completely right.

 

Yes Moose, it did have an effect. In that the Church of England was established to give Henry VIII the divorce he wanted from his wife of almost 20 years. He married her because Deuteronomy gave him the right to, and divorced her because Leviticus gave him an excuse to leave her for some little whore. So yeah, I'd have to say that is a pretty large impact. Thousands of people died during the Tudor years because of this and I find it pretty funny you think it is quite so simple.

 

It is ALL about context.

That little whore was Anne Bolyn, the mother of Elizabeth

 

I agree though. Nice to see you sticking up for the Catholics

[Storyrider]

To answer this one, I must admit that I don't understand how you came to the conclusion that, "Sarai" is Abraham's sister. As far as I can tell, when Noah, his wife and three sons, and their wives stepped off the Ark there were multitudes born afterwards. (Genesis 10: 1-32).

 

Maybe you can point out how you came to that conclusion? Thanks!

 

Abraham pretended Sara was his sister in one story, as a misguided way of protecting himself and her from some men who were attracted to her. Maybe that is where the misconception is coming from.

[Moose]

I studied the verses as part of my obsession with the Tudors. And you are completely right.

 

Yes Moose, it did have an effect. In that the Church of England was established to give Henry VIII the divorce he wanted from his wife of almost 20 years. He married her because Deuteronomy gave him the right to, and divorced her because Leviticus gave him an excuse to leave her for some little whore. So yeah, I'd have to say that is a pretty large impact. Thousands of people died during the Tudor years because of this and I find it pretty funny you think it is quite so simple.

 

It is ALL about context.

You're absolutely right! KUDOS!!!

 

You've proved a MAJOR point:

 

The context of the Scripture was ONLY for the people of the era, and THAT situation.

 

Since Henry wasn't even around (for what?), nearly three thousand years later, critical thinking would tell you that this didn't apply to him.

 

Does that explain why it seems so simpleton for me?

[Moose]

Abraham pretended Sara was his sister in one story, as a misguided way of protecting himself and her from some men who were attracted to her. Maybe that is where the misconception is coming from.

AH! Yes.....maybe so.

 

Maybe we should wait and see if the poster agrees with this.

 

Thanks!

[johan]

This might be a bit surprising to some, but the Bible was not originally written in English. Hearing scholars talk about what the original Greek or Hebrew text really meant is fascinating.

[Storyrider]

You're absolutely right! KUDOS!!!

 

You've proved a MAJOR point:

 

The context of the Scripture was ONLY for the people of the era, and THAT situation.

 

Since Henry wasn't even around (for what?), nearly three thousand years later, critical thinking would tell you that this didn't apply to him.

 

Does that explain why it seems so simpleton for me?

 

Couldn't we dismiss the ten commandments as not relevant to us if we accepted the above argument?

[ElvenPriestess]

These two verses are saying the same exact thing. They compliment each other, not contradict. That we can agree on, yes? (I'm assuming you agree here)

 

Yes, exactly

 

Your arguement is that the NEW Testament is the opposite of everything that Moses told God's Chosen people, or race to do. That is simply not the case. The New Testament NEGATES these, "rules and regulations".

 

My argument was more that the NT is blasphemy (please no offense intended here). Not that it negates the OT completely, but to me the mere idea of is contradicts Him saying the versus I quoted.

 

But I think perhaps since I myself do not believe the idea of the second coming, I do not believe Christ as the Messiah, I believe that we are awaiting His coming still, and I think these beliefs make it hard for me to accept the NT. This area maybe more affected by my faith than fact I think?

Think of it like today's books on software, "How to Run a Country for Dummies" designed to keep them in God's good graces.

 

Enter Christ, and the NEW Testament, or "Covenant" between God and ALL people.

Is this to say the NT was given to fit the way we all were 1400 years later? As in a new book for a new era?

He was sent to fulfill these, "rules and regulations" once and for all so that anyone who accepts or allows Him to pay their debt can have their relationship with God back, SINCE it's impossible to do this on our own, in especially in this day and age.

Impossible to do this on our own. I don't understand this. But I think it relates to what I was going to say anyway.

Did not Jesus say in:

 

John 14:6 "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

Well one of the ten (and there were others of course) commandments,

Exodus 20:3 "Thou shalt have no other gods before me"

 

There's a contradiction I've always believed strongly in. Who is Jesus to say this? Why can I not have a relationship with God, unless with Jesus too? He poses himself AS God, which as I understand that commandment is again blasphemy. Your thoughts?

Edited January 11, 2008 by a LoveShack.org Moderator
repaired codex

[Moose]

This might be a bit surprising to some, but the Bible was not originally written in English. Hearing scholars talk about what the original Greek or Hebrew text really meant is fascinating.

Yeah it is!

 

If not for LS, I wouldn't of even looked into it. I'm glad I have now....it's reinforced my belief, and is worthy of another thread topic....but after THIS.....I think I'll put that one on the back burner....

[burning 4 revenge]

This might be a bit surprising to some, but the Bible was not originally written in English. Hearing scholars talk about what the original Greek or Hebrew text really meant is fascinating.

It might be fascinating, but its fascinating in the same sort of way that some find Lord of the Rings fascinating as opposed to finding Thucydides fascinating or Sallust or Tacitus fascinating

[johan]

It might be fascinating, but its fascinating in the same sort of way that some find Lord of the Rings fascinating as opposed to finding Thucydides fascinating or Sallust or Tacitus fascinating

 

That's true. But it's probably not fascinating in the same way as watching two spiders fight is.

[disgracian]

Go back and reread post 18.

This was in response to post 18, which did not do a good job of answering the question I asked.

 

Moose, you appear to have missed my follow up amid the large volume of traffic this thread is generating. I understand you have your hands full, but when you get a chance I'd like you to give it some more thought.

 

Cheers,

D.

[burning 4 revenge]

I could show you guys what is probably the true story of the Old Testament, but it would hurt you guys too much

[ElvenPriestess]

I've covered this already, but I was skimming over and promised to address this point specifically.

 

If you read Dueteronomy 18:15 you'll see a little of Christ in the, "Torah".

 

I'll let you digest that, (and respond) I've got to prepare for another long day.....thanks for posting....!

 

So he's talking about the tribes of Levi, laying down how they will live their life. And then in verse 2 He talks about the priest whom they will give the the parts of the ox or sheep. When He talks in verse 5 about choosing him from all the tribes, is He not referring to the priest, or am I misunderstanding?

[Moose]

Is this to say the NT was given to fit the way we all were 1400 years later? As in a new book for a new era?

YES! and I'm smiling big time right now at your question.

 

The NT, (as I know it), isn't just for the way we all were, but for who we are now, who will be tomorrow, and who we will ultimately become for all eternity.

 

I want to expand on that, but we'll be off topic.

I understand you have your hands full, but when you get a chance I'd like you to give it some more thought.

I think I'm caught up now, (I hope ).....but I thought I made it pretty clear on post # 18 that different audiences receive information selectively, and that's the reason the same account is described as such....

 

If the gospels say it's raining cats and dogs, would you assume that it's literally raining felines and canines?

 

Have you ever seen the move, "Johnny Dangerously"?

 

There's a prison scene where a long table full of immates are eating a meal. On one end, a trustee whispers a message in the ear of one inmate for Johnny sitting on the farthest end.

 

The message was simple, his brother was to be killed at a theater that evening.

 

The message traveled through dozens of inmates, left ear of one, right ear to the next, but by the time the message got to Johnny, it was recited as, (i don't know the script so bare with me), something like, "the mountains are blue, but the water isn't safe to drink"......

 

Johnny looked at the table for a couple of seconds, put it together, then repeated the original message as delivered by the trustee that his brother was to be killed at the theater that evening...... ( I SO love that movie!)

 

Anyway.....without going any deeper, and since it's so late....I'm gonna take a break......does that make sense to you though?

 

If not, lemme know, and I'll do my best to clarify more.....thanks!

 

Doe

[Moose]

I could show you guys what is probably the true story of the Old Testament, but it would hurt you guys too much

Talk is cheap in this thread.....bring it.

[burning 4 revenge]

Talk is cheap in this thread.....bring it.

Im having a problem cutting and pasting, but google Tacitus on the Jews

[Moose]

So he's talking about the tribes of Levi, laying down how they will live their life. And then in verse 2 He talks about the priest whom they will give the the parts of the ox or sheep. When He talks in verse 5 about choosing him from all the tribes, is He not referring to the priest, or am I misunderstanding?

I'm sorry, I'll have to explain this one as I see it when I've had more rest, I don't want you to think I'm putting you off though.....thanks for your questions though, they're very helpfull!

[Moose]

Im having a problem cutting and pasting, but google Tacitus on the Jews

AH! That's a whole nuther' can o worms......one that would certainly derail the thread.....sorry, I can't comment on that here, but I'm sure we can tackle it elsewhere.....

[ElvenPriestess]

I'm sorry, I'll have to explain this one as I see it when I've had more rest, I don't want you to think I'm putting you off though.....thanks for your questions though, they're very helpfull!

 

Well thank you for being so thorough. I threw another contradiction out to you on page 6 I think it is btw;) Now pleasant dreams.

[Lovelybird]

About some prophecy about Jesus I paste some

 

 

1. The Messiah would be preceded by a messenger

Old Testament (Isaiah 40:3) says:

A voice of one calling: "In the desert prepare the way for the Lord; make straight in the wilderness a highway for our God."

 

New Testament (Matthew 3:1-2) says:

In those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the Desert of Judea, and saying, "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near."

 

2. The Messiah would be born in Bethlehem

Old Testament (Micah 5:2) says:

"But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times."

 

New Testament (Matthew 2:1) says:

After Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea, during the time of King Herod...

 

3. The Messiah would come from the tribe of Judah

Old Testament (Genesis 49:10) says:

This passage talks about a ruler coming from the Tribe of Judah, one whose rule will be all-powerful:

"The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs and the obedience of the nations is his."

 

New Testament (Luke 3:23-34 and Matthew 1:1-16):

Here you'll find a list of Jesus' ancestors, going back to Judah, who was one of the 12 sons of Jacob. (Jacob's 12 sons were the fathers of the 12 Tribes of Israel).

 

4. The Messiah would enter Jerusalem on a colt

Old Testament (Zechariah 9:9) says:

Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, Daughter of Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and having salvation, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.

 

New Testament (Luke 19:35-37) says:

They brought it to Jesus, threw their cloaks on the colt and put Jesus on it. As he went along, people spread their cloaks on the road. When he came near the place where the road goes down the Mount of Olives, the whole crowd of disciples began joyfully to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen

 

5. The Messiah would be betrayed by a friend

Old Testament (Psalms 41:9) says:

Even my close friend, whom I trusted, he who shared my bread, has lifted up his heel against me.

 

New Testament (Matthew 26:47-50) says:

While he was still speaking, Judas, one of the Twelve, arrived. With him was a large crowd armed with swords and clubs, sent from the chief priests and the elders of the people. Now the betrayer had arranged a signal with them: "The one I kiss is the man; arrest him." Going at once to Jesus, Judas said, "Greetings, Rabbi!" and kissed him. Jesus replied, "Friend, do what you came for." Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him.

6. The Messiah would be sold for 30 pieces of silver

Old Testament (Zechariah 11:12) says:

I told them, "If you think it best, give me my pay; but if not, keep it." So they paid me thirty pieces of silver.

 

New Testament (Matthew 26:14-15) says:

Then one of the Twelve--the one called Judas Iscariot--went to the chief priests and asked, "What are you willing to give me if I hand him over to you?" So they counted out for him thirty silver coins.

 

7. The Messiah would be spit upon and beaten

Old Testament (Isaiah 50:6) says:

I offered my back to those who beat me, my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard; I did not hide my face from mocking and spitting.

 

New Testament (Matthew 26:67-68) says:

Then they spit in his face and struck him with their fists. Others slapped him and said, "Prophesy to us, Christ. Who hit you?"

 

8. The Messiah would be wounded by His enemies

Old Testament (Isaiah 53:5) says:

But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed.

 

New Testament (Matthew 27:26) says:

Then he released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.

 

9. The Messiah would be silent before His accusers

Old Testament (Isaiah 53:7) says:

He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.

 

New Testament (Matthew 27:12-14) says:

When he was accused by the chief priests and the elders, he gave no answer. Then Pilate asked him, "Don't you hear the testimony they are bringing against you?" But Jesus made no reply, not even to a single charge--to the great amazement of the governor.

10. The betrayal money thrown in the temple and given for a potters field

Old Testament (Zechariah 11:13) says:

And the Lord said to me, "Throw it to the potter"--the handsome price at which they priced me! So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into the house of the Lord to the potter.

 

New Testament (Matthew 27:5-7) says:

So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself. The chief priests picked up the coins and said, "It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money." So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners.

 

11. The Messiah would have his hands and feet pierced

Old Testament (Psalm 22:16) says:

Dogs have surrounded me; a band of evil men has encircled me, they have pierced my hands and my feet.

 

New Testament (Luke 23:33) says:

When they came to the place called the Skull, there they crucified him, along with the criminals--one on his right, the other on his left.

 

12. The Messiah would be crucified with thieves

Old Testament (Isaiah 53:12) says:

Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

 

New Testament (Matthew 27:38) says:

Two robbers were crucified with him, one on his right and one on his left.

[Moose]

My Sister in Christ!

 

You've just saved me a lot of work......

[Lovelybird]

My Sister in Christ!

 

You've just saved me a lot of work......

you welcome:D. I saved it long ago, just paste it here

[taiko]

This might be a bit surprising to some, but the Bible was not originally written in English. Hearing scholars talk about what the original Greek or Hebrew text really meant is fascinating.

Here another step of faith is taken. The step that the scholars who made the translation did a good job, better then I could do by myself as it is a mutual decision. Sure we learn that some translation teams make major mistakes like turning "murder" into "kill" as in the King James Version. But then often I need a translation of King James into modern English anyway. Even if the original Greek, Hebrew of Aramaric is immediately understandable by a modern speaker of those languages when they turn words into English or American Anglish words like "gay", "bad" or "fag" have picked up new meanings as our language evolves.