Does the bible contradict itself?

[Godcares]

I have heard many people and sadly even some Christians state that the bible contradicts itself. However, is this really true? The answer is no and this is the reason.

Acts 1:8 - “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.”

Acts 2:32 - “This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.”

1 Peter 5:1 – “The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ.”

The bible is written by witnesses. This means that the information is written by the people who saw the events that happened. In court, a witness is regarded as one of the most credible sources of information. It is actually difficult to solve a case without a witness and there is a lot of reliance placed on witnesses.

Now imagine that there was a car accident and you are a police officer at the police station and four witnesses came to testify about what they saw.

• Witness 1 and 2 state that a red car hit a traffic light at an intersection. Witness 3 and 4 state that a maroon car hit a traffic light at an intersection.
• Witness 1 and 2 state that they saw three passengers in the car. Witness 3 states that he saw three adults and a child in the car. Witness 4 states that he saw four adults in the car.
• Witness 1 and 4 state that they saw that one of the wheels was flat. Witness 2 and 3 state that none of the wheels were flat.

Now as the police officer who would you choose to believe, since the stories of the witnesses seem to contradict one another? Since the witnesses seem to contradict each other, will you then conclude that there was no car accident and that the accident is something that the witnesses made up?
The answer is no, you will not conclude that. The witnesses stated what they saw from their perspective. What you will conclude is that there was a car accident which involved a reddish car that had either three or four passengers. You will then investigate further by inspecting the car and going to the hospital where the passengers were taken to.

The reason for the “contradictions” is because the witnesses were stating what they saw from their own standpoint.

• Witness 1 and 2 saw only three adults because they witnessed the scene from the back of the car and the fourth passenger was very short and was sitting in the front of the car and they could not see her.
• Witness 3 and 4 were standing at the front of the car and could see all four passengers. Because the fourth passenger in the front was short, witness 3 assumed that she was a child. However, witness 4 was closer to the vehicle and could see that, it was not a child but a very short lady.
• Witness 1 and 4 saw that one of the wheels on the left side of the car was flat because they were standing on the left side of the car. Witness 2 and 3 were standing on the right side of the car and did not see the flat wheel.

Therefore everything that all four witnesses stated was true from their standpoint and there were no contradictions.

The bible is the same way. Let as look at the four gospels Matthew, Mark, Luke and John that talk about the life of Jesus.

They were written by four witnesses. When you read them, some of them have more details than the others about a particular incident and some have missing information. These discrepancies are not contradictions; the witnesses are simply stating what they saw and heard. Because the bible is written by witnesses who do not 100% agree with one another, it does not mean that the bible contradicts itself. Actually the many witnesses are an indication that bible is credible and more reliance can be placed on it. If the witnesses agreed 100% word for word, then it would be suspicious and look like the account of the witnesses was tampered with and that the bible was altered on purpose to remove discrepancies. It is not possible for witnesses to agree exactly on what they saw and heard.

Although the bible looks like it has “contradictions”, although it really does not. What can be concluded from reading the gospels is that there was a man called Jesus. He was the Son of God. He showed love and kindness where ever He went. He died to save us from our sins and resurrected from the dead and physically went to heaven and has promised to come back very soon.

Therefore the focus should be on the main message and not what discrepancies there are between the witnesses.

 

[Bingo]

"No more...no less"

 

[Scribe]

I have heard many people and sadly even some Christians state that the bible contradicts itself. However, is this really true? The answer is no and this is the reason.

Acts 1:8 - “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.”

Acts 2:32 - “This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.”

1 Peter 5:1 – “The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ.”

The bible is written by witnesses. This means that the information is written by the people who saw the events that happened. In court, a witness is regarded as one of the most credible sources of information. It is actually difficult to solve a case without a witness and there is a lot of reliance placed on witnesses.

Now imagine that there was a car accident and you are a police officer at the police station and four witnesses came to testify about what they saw.

• Witness 1 and 2 state that a red car hit a traffic light at an intersection. Witness 3 and 4 state that a maroon car hit a traffic light at an intersection.
• Witness 1 and 2 state that they saw three passengers in the car. Witness 3 states that he saw three adults and a child in the car. Witness 4 states that he saw four adults in the car.
• Witness 1 and 4 state that they saw that one of the wheels was flat. Witness 2 and 3 state that none of the wheels were flat.

Now as the police officer who would you choose to believe, since the stories of the witnesses seem to contradict one another? Since the witnesses seem to contradict each other, will you then conclude that there was no car accident and that the accident is something that the witnesses made up?
The answer is no, you will not conclude that. The witnesses stated what they saw from their perspective. What you will conclude is that there was a car accident which involved a reddish car that had either three or four passengers. You will then investigate further by inspecting the car and going to the hospital where the passengers were taken to.

The reason for the “contradictions” is because the witnesses were stating what they saw from their own standpoint.

• Witness 1 and 2 saw only three adults because they witnessed the scene from the back of the car and the fourth passenger was very short and was sitting in the front of the car and they could not see her.
• Witness 3 and 4 were standing at the front of the car and could see all four passengers. Because the fourth passenger in the front was short, witness 3 assumed that she was a child. However, witness 4 was closer to the vehicle and could see that, it was not a child but a very short lady.
• Witness 1 and 4 saw that one of the wheels on the left side of the car was flat because they were standing on the left side of the car. Witness 2 and 3 were standing on the right side of the car and did not see the flat wheel.

Therefore everything that all four witnesses stated was true from their standpoint and there were no contradictions.

The bible is the same way. Let as look at the four gospels Matthew, Mark, Luke and John that talk about the life of Jesus.

They were written by four witnesses. When you read them, some of them have more details than the others about a particular incident and some have missing information. These discrepancies are not contradictions; the witnesses are simply stating what they saw and heard. Because the bible is written by witnesses who do not 100% agree with one another, it does not mean that the bible contradicts itself. Actually the many witnesses are an indication that bible is credible and more reliance can be placed on it. If the witnesses agreed 100% word for word, then it would be suspicious and look like the account of the witnesses was tampered with and that the bible was altered on purpose to remove discrepancies. It is not possible for witnesses to agree exactly on what they saw and heard.

Although the bible looks like it has “contradictions”, although it really does not. What can be concluded from reading the gospels is that there was a man called Jesus. He was the Son of God. He showed love and kindness where ever He went. He died to save us from our sins and resurrected from the dead and physically went to heaven and has promised to come back very soon.

Therefore the focus should be on the main message and not what discrepancies there are between the witnesses.

Thanks for the faith inspiring post. I am not sure that Luke was a witness. He probably gathered information from those who were. Mark might have been a witness but no one knows for sure. He was the same Mark that left the mission trip with Paul and Barnabas and later Paul would not take him on another trip but after he had proved himself Paul later found him faithful for ministry.

I really enjoy reading Harmonies of the Gospels where the events are put into some kind of Chronological order. However even these are not perfect, and some will differ from another.

One of the best examples of extra details included by comparing Gospels is discovered when Mary clings to Jesus feet in John, and Jesus says don't touch me (but scholars say the Greek means stop clinging to me) and that He must go to the Father. There has been strange teachings come from this that there were two ascensions. However when you compare with Matthew you will see that there were at least two women clinging to his feet. He tells them to go tell his disciples to meet him in Galilee. The others left but Mary keeps clinging to his feet.

It is obvious in Matthew that they "touched" him so we know by comparing both Gospels that the women touched him and Jesus could not have meant in John not to touch him until he makes a trip to the Father and comes back again because in Matthew it shows that they did indeed touch him. This message to Mary in John is that she needs to understand that she should not be afraid of loosing Jesus again.

He had told her to go tell His disciples to meet him in Galilee, the other woman let go of his feet and obeyed, but she kept on clinging to him and he had to tell her that he was going to the Father and this would result in the promise he had been telling them all through John that the Holy Spirit would come and He would make His abode in her, but He was not going to be physically there like she was wanting. That is why he mentions needing to go to the Father. This happened once in front of all the witnesses when he went up into the clouds.

Simply by comparing Matthew with John the confusion is cleared up. Yet some are so personally invested in the two ascension theory they will not consider Matthew long enough to re examine their position.

 

[Magenta]

Thanks for the faith inspiring post. I am not sure that Luke was a witness. He probably gathered information from those who were. Mark might have been a witness but no one knows for sure. He was the same Mark that left the mission trip with Paul and Barnabas and later Paul would not take him on another trip but after he had proved himself Paul later found him faithful for ministry.

Some believe Mark to be the young man who fled without his robe during Jesus' pre-crucifixion arrest scene in Gethsemane

A young man, wearing nothing but a linen garment, was following Jesus.
When they seized him, he fled naked, leaving his garment behind. Mark 14:51-52

 

[Scribe]

Some believe Mark to be the young man who fled without his robe during Jesus' pre-crucifixion arrest scene in Gethsemane

A young man, wearing nothing but a linen garment, was following Jesus.
When they seized him, he fled naked, leaving his garment behind. Mark 14:51-52

Might have been. Seems logical. Why else is it there?

 

[Magenta]

Might have been. Seems logical. Why else is it there?

And it is only recorded in Mark Some also postulate that the rich young
man was Mark, and if it is the same one in Luke 18:18, he was also a ruler.

As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before
Him. “Good teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

“Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone. You know the commandments: ‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, you shall not defraud, honor your father and mother.’”

“Teacher,” he declared, “all these I have kept since I was a boy.”

Jesus looked at him and loved him. “One thing you lack,” he said. “Go, sell everything you
have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

At this the man’s face fell. He went away sad, because he had great wealth. Mark 10:17-22; also Matthew 19:16-26.

 

[Runningman]

1 John 5:9-12
9If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son. 10He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son. 11And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

Revelation 19:10
10And I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

One does not have to be a literal eyewitness of Jesus in the flesh to have the testimony of God within them. They just have to believe in the Son of God.

I think some of the confusion that comes when people read the Bible is they are attempting to understand spiritual things in an unspiritual way. There is a lot of figurative language used in the Bible. It isn't all literal and about the material world.

 

[UCA4J]

Anyone who says the Bible contradicts itself, probably hasn't read the Bible.

 

[HillsboroMom]

If you try to read the whole thing literally, then sure, it contradicts itself. That's why you can't read it all literally. Because that's not how God wrote it!

The problem is, too many people are stuck forgetting that (a) Jesus mostly talked in parables, and (b) Jesus is God. Ergo....

 

[UCA4J]

If you try to read the whole thing literally, then sure, it contradicts itself. That's why you can't read it all literally. Because that's not how God wrote it!

The problem is, too many people are stuck forgetting that (a) Jesus mostly talked in parables, and (b) Jesus is God. Ergo....

there are no contradictions ..

 

[HillsboroMom]

Here's one of my favorites.

In Genesis 1, God creates animals first, then humans (both male and female at the same time), as the crowning achievement of his creation.

In Genesis 2, God creates man (Adam, which is Hebrew for "The Man") first, but he is alone. God sees that he is alone, and says, "It is not good that he is alone." Then he creates each animal, one at a time, to see if any of them are suitable. (Of course, we know, the last of the creations is then Eve, who is perfect for him.) If the animals had already been created, God wouldn't have said "It is not good that man is alone, we shall create a companion for him." Because he wouldn't have been alone.

Clearly, these are two different parables (told by God) to explain two different things. When atheists try to say it's proof that the Bible is "wrong," they're confused because they're mixing up two parables that are not supposed to be mixed up. It would be like if someone wondered why the Prodigal Son didn't just dig up the Talents that his father's son had buried. Mixing up two different parables. Why would you even do that?

 

[Scribe]

Here's one of my favorites.

In Genesis 1, God creates animals first, then humans (both male and female at the same time), as the crowning achievement of his creation.

In Genesis 2, God creates man (Adam, which is Hebrew for "The Man") first, but he is alone. God sees that he is alone, and says, "It is not good that he is alone." Then he creates each animal, one at a time, to see if any of them are suitable. (Of course, we know, the last of the creations is then Eve, who is perfect for him.) If the animals had already been created, God wouldn't have said "It is not good that man is alone, we shall create a companion for him." Because he wouldn't have been alone.

Clearly, these are two different parables (told by God) to explain two different things. When atheists try to say it's proof that the Bible is "wrong," they're confused because they're mixing up two parables that are not supposed to be mixed up. It would be like if someone wondered why the Prodigal Son didn't just dig up the Talents that his father's son had buried. Mixing up two different parables. Why would you even do that?

I don't know if it can be agreed upon but I think Chapter 2 is reiteration, repetition, parallelism. It has already been established in Chapter 1 that the animals were made first but in chapter 2 it may be just referring to the fact that the animals were created from the ground not that they were just then being created from the ground. I understand how it could be understood as saying that the man was created first but I don't think that is the point it is making. I think that Chapter 1 shows the order and Chapter 2 explains the reason which is that animals were created FOR man.

Like saying that God never intended for man to be alone so he created the animals from the ground and brought them to Man after man was created. But I don't know if it really matters. The order shows that they were both made on the 6th day and maybe that is enough.

The bigger question is how was it that Adam was said to be alone as in lonely, the animals created, and the woman created all on in a 24 hour day? The "evening and the morning were the sixth day" Adam got lonely quick!

I don't think these are parables, because parables have a lessons that are obvious based on cultural familiar settings and this does not fit the characteristics of the literary style of a parable. I have read that they might be songs. Whatever they are I think they make their point.

It's a good topic and I appreciate your thoughts.

 

[HillsboroMom]

I don't think these are parables, because parables have a lessons that are obvious based on cultural familiar settings and this does not fit the characteristics of the literary style of a parable. I have read that they might be songs. Whatever they are I think they make their point.

It's a good topic and I appreciate your thoughts.

Maybe "parable" is not the correct word. I use that word to show that they are stories, similar to the stories Jesus told his disciples. I had a professor who called them "myths," but I find using that word makes people think they are "false," because a lot of people think of "myth" as the opposite of "truth," and that is problematic (to me, at least). So I prefer using a word that makes it clear that God is the author, not humans.

But you are quite right in saying they don't fit the literary form of a parable, in the strictest sense.

Thank you for your thoughts, too! God bless!

 

[Eph2all]

I have heard many people and sadly even some Christians state that the bible contradicts itself. However, is this really true? The answer is no and this is the reason.

Acts 1:8 - “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.”

Acts 2:32 - “This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.”

1 Peter 5:1 – “The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ.”

The bible is written by witnesses. This means that the information is written by the people who saw the events that happened. In court, a witness is regarded as one of the most credible sources of information. It is actually difficult to solve a case without a witness and there is a lot of reliance placed on witnesses.

Now imagine that there was a car accident and you are a police officer at the police station and four witnesses came to testify about what they saw.

• Witness 1 and 2 state that a red car hit a traffic light at an intersection. Witness 3 and 4 state that a maroon car hit a traffic light at an intersection.
• Witness 1 and 2 state that they saw three passengers in the car. Witness 3 states that he saw three adults and a child in the car. Witness 4 states that he saw four adults in the car.
• Witness 1 and 4 state that they saw that one of the wheels was flat. Witness 2 and 3 state that none of the wheels were flat.

Now as the police officer who would you choose to believe, since the stories of the witnesses seem to contradict one another? Since the witnesses seem to contradict each other, will you then conclude that there was no car accident and that the accident is something that the witnesses made up?
The answer is no, you will not conclude that. The witnesses stated what they saw from their perspective. What you will conclude is that there was a car accident which involved a reddish car that had either three or four passengers. You will then investigate further by inspecting the car and going to the hospital where the passengers were taken to.

The reason for the “contradictions” is because the witnesses were stating what they saw from their own standpoint.

• Witness 1 and 2 saw only three adults because they witnessed the scene from the back of the car and the fourth passenger was very short and was sitting in the front of the car and they could not see her.
• Witness 3 and 4 were standing at the front of the car and could see all four passengers. Because the fourth passenger in the front was short, witness 3 assumed that she was a child. However, witness 4 was closer to the vehicle and could see that, it was not a child but a very short lady.
• Witness 1 and 4 saw that one of the wheels on the left side of the car was flat because they were standing on the left side of the car. Witness 2 and 3 were standing on the right side of the car and did not see the flat wheel.

Therefore everything that all four witnesses stated was true from their standpoint and there were no contradictions.

The bible is the same way. Let as look at the four gospels Matthew, Mark, Luke and John that talk about the life of Jesus.

They were written by four witnesses. When you read them, some of them have more details than the others about a particular incident and some have missing information. These discrepancies are not contradictions; the witnesses are simply stating what they saw and heard. Because the bible is written by witnesses who do not 100% agree with one another, it does not mean that the bible contradicts itself. Actually the many witnesses are an indication that bible is credible and more reliance can be placed on it. If the witnesses agreed 100% word for word, then it would be suspicious and look like the account of the witnesses was tampered with and that the bible was altered on purpose to remove discrepancies. It is not possible for witnesses to agree exactly on what they saw and heard.

Although the bible looks like it has “contradictions”, although it really does not. What can be concluded from reading the gospels is that there was a man called Jesus. He was the Son of God. He showed love and kindness where ever He went. He died to save us from our sins and resurrected from the dead and physically went to heaven and has promised to come back very soon.

Therefore the focus should be on the main message and not what discrepancies there are between the witnesses.

No.

There are no contradictions though there are different perspectives.