Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Judas had asked the chief priests what they would give him to betray Jesus (Matthew 26:14). They gave him 30 pieces of silver which he accepted. Afterwards, when he saw that Christ was condemned, Judas felt remorse and returned the money. Since he had accepted that silver and then returned it, although the chief priests actually bought the potter's field, it was Juda's money which bought it. So Judas can rightfully be said to have bought the field as it was his silver which paid for it. Though Judas himself did not personally buy the field, he did so indirectly. The priests used the betrayal money Judas had flung into the temple to make the purchase in Judas' name That should not be difficult to understand?
Also, ancient tradition says that Judas had hanged himself from a tree on the edge of a cliff above the Valley of Hinnom. The branch broke and Judas fell onto a rock at the bottom of the valley and his insides spilled out.
Neither is there any contradiction here. God is not inflexible. God is indeed immutable which refers to His nature. He cannot change any of the attibutes of His nature or essence.
However, God can take a different course of action based upon human response to His offers of blessing or His threats of judgment. To demonstrate this simply refer to Jeremiah 18:5-10. 'Then the word of the LORD came to me saying, 6] ''Can I not, O house of Israel, deal with you as this potter does?'' declares the LORD. ''Behold, like the clay in the potter's hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel. 7] ''At one moment I might speak concerning a nation or concerning a kingdom to uproot, to pull down, or to destroy it; 8] if that nation against which I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent concerning the calamity I planned to bring on it. 9] ''Or at another moment I might speak concerning a kingdom to build up or to plant it; 10] if it does evil in My sight by not obeying My voice, then I will think better of the good with which I had promised to bless it.
Based on Moses entreaty, which by the way God had always known that Moses would make such an entreaty on behalf of the people, God relented from His threatened course of action.
Also, on a related note, God made both unconditional and conditional promises or covenants with Israel. An unconditional covenant depended only on what God Himself had promised to do. A conditional covenant depended on Israel's obedience to God.
Refer to Psalm 106 and see how God severely punished Israel for their rebelliousness but then relented when they cried out to Him.
Refer also to Amos 7:1-6 in which God relented from all the punishment He would have carried out except for Amos's prayer on behalf of Israel.
God responds to cries for mercy.
These two apparent but non-existent contradictions vanish in the light of understanding.
Right Mike! Sadly people are always trying to discredit the Bible, but it can't be done. It is error free and there are no contradictions, I have yet to see anyone prove there is.
I grew up in southern baptist churches being taught the message of bible inerrancy and infallibility, and being taught that the bible was literally given by God. Since then, I have come to my own personal conclusion that this idea is completely illogical, and I personally do not understand why it has ever been taught that way.
I, too, grew up in the Southern Baptist church. I have never heard anyone state that the bible was "literally given by God". In every church body I have associated with over the last 49 years the belief is that the "word was inspired by God". It is believed that the bible texts were written down by man as a result of this inspiration.
The bible today is NOT that holy inspired text, but the best imitation of it possible after so many years of interpretation and censorship and editing. Some parts have been corrupted and some have been lost. We must now read the bible with an open heart and mind and derive meaning from a whole reading to determine truth. We cannot take a single verse and interpret it, because we do not have a confidence that a specific verse is not changed by language or vernacular unless corroborated by other verses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXboomerang
I think that God would not give us something that is so divisive and contradictory, and that would end up being interpreted and translated dozens of times over so that the meaning of key passages could be taken different manners depending on the translation as well as what context the individual reading it takes in.
I agree. Man has given us the document we call the bible. God gave us something much more meaningful and man has molded that to his own purpose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXboomerang
It seems that those who believe bible inerrancy always accuse those who question it of being deceived. The irony is that there are plenty of people who passionately believe in bible inerrancy and infalllibility, and are good people who follow Christ in their prayers and actions, yet they disagree about the meaning of different parts of the bible and often accuse each other of either being deceived or of wanting to deceive others.
People will often exaggerate and mask truth with absolute statements that something "Always" occurs when in fact it is often just the extremist or heretical factions that commit these actions. Because something offends or irritates us, does not mean it always occurs or even occurs the majority of time. "Everything" can be abused regardless of it's inherent purity or innocence, "Nothing" is "always" abused or misused regardless of frequency or glaring nature of the abuse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXboomerang
Why would God give us a book that is so complex in order to teach us how to live?
Asked and answered. God did NOT give us a book.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXboomerang
Why does the bible itself contain glaring contradictions if we are supposed to view it as God's inerrant and infallible word? (example Exodus 33:11 states that "God spoke to Moses face to face, as one speaks to a friend, John 1:18 states "No one hath ever seen God".)
Modern language is difference than ancient language and even within eras various languages have different levels of precision for various aspects of life that are more or less important to those speaking the language.
I am told that the Inuit language have many more terms for ICE than most other languages. If you are translating a detail narration of a journey across the ice pack from Inuit into Swahili, it is a given that much information will be lost or misinterpreted in your translation just because of the inherent cultural differences. It is just as likely that a translation from ancient Inuit might have difficulties being understood accurately by a modern Inuit speaker.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXboomerang
Why does being able to deeply understand the bible require a person to gain a deep understanding of different cultures over millenia, the language and practices of those cultures, as well as the writing styles of those cultures and the writer of the particular book being read?
If I write "grab you a ho and rake in the chedder", do you think that might be misunderstood by an Amish farmer from the 1800's? Without an understanding of the culture and conventions at the time of the writing it is impossible to comprehend the meaning of the language.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXboomerang
Most importantly, why would God choose to use the bible as our source of revelation of His will and instruction for our lives, yet there are still many nations where the literacy rate is less than 50%?
God did not choose the bible as our source of revalation. He chose direct revelation and personal example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TXboomerang
My feeling is that the bible has been used as a tool by those who wish to keep religion in control. Christ came to destroy the hierarchy of religion. With his sacrifice, there is no priest, pastor, or religious figure that has a higher standing with God than any other person. Many churches seek to maintain the hierarchy with an established system of worship, even though Christ only references a body of believers as church, not a building.
I agree with you on this aspect. I feel it is also used by people in a faithful attempt to divine God's will and as a tool for developing an appropriate lifestyle. Just because something is abused or misused does not invalidate the value of the item for it's intended purpose.
Judas had asked the chief priests what they would give him to betray Jesus (Matthew 26:14). They gave him 30 pieces of silver which he accepted. Afterwards, when he saw that Christ was condemned, Judas felt remorse and returned the money. Since he had accepted that silver and then returned it, although the chief priests actually bought the potter's field, it was Juda's money which bought it. So Judas can rightfully be said to have bought the field as it was his silver which paid for it. Though Judas himself did not personally buy the field, he did so indirectly. The priests used the betrayal money Judas had flung into the temple to make the purchase in Judas' name That should not be difficult to understand?
Also, ancient tradition says that Judas had hanged himself from a tree on the edge of a cliff above the Valley of Hinnom. The branch broke and Judas fell onto a rock at the bottom of the valley and his insides spilled out.
Neither is there any contradiction here. God is not inflexible. God is indeed immutable which refers to His nature. He cannot change any of the attibutes of His nature or essence.
And where does it give any of your explanations in the bible? It doesn't. Which is my point. The bible is full of things like this where things contradict in the written words. Then there is this long explanation which requires the knowledge of ancient culture, language, tradition, and also usually relies on one or several of the following:
It is meant literally here
It is not meant literally here
This was a parable
This was symbolic
This was from the writer's viewpoint
That is a transcription error
This is a copyist error
This is a translation error
This makes sense if you apply verse x, y, and z, and consider the culture, traditions, etc.
Using one or a combination of the above tactics, people have made the bible say almost anything they want it to say.
If God wanted to give us a book that is inerrant and infallible for us to base our lives on, it wouldn't require such verbal contortion and acrobatics. It would be straightforward and understandable by all. IF THE BIBLE WAS SO IMPORTANT, GOD WOULD HAVE MADE EVERYONE LITERATE AND MADE SURE EVERYONE GOT A COPY. Considering there have been billions who have lived who never learned to read, never saw a bible, or both, HOW ARE THEY SUPPOSED TO LEARN ABOUT GOD? DID GOD HAVE A REASON FOR THEM NOT TO HAVE A BIBLE?
Quote:
However, God can take a different course of action based upon human response to His offers of blessing or His threats of judgment. To demonstrate this simply refer to Jeremiah 18:5-10. 'Then the word of the LORD came to me saying, 6] ''Can I not, O house of Israel, deal with you as this potter does?'' declares the LORD. ''Behold, like the clay in the potter's hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel. 7] ''At one moment I might speak concerning a nation or concerning a kingdom to uproot, to pull down, or to destroy it; 8] if that nation against which I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent concerning the calamity I planned to bring on it. 9] ''Or at another moment I might speak concerning a kingdom to build up or to plant it; 10] if it does evil in My sight by not obeying My voice, then I will think better of the good with which I had promised to bless it.
Based on Moses entreaty, which by the way God had always known that Moses would make such an entreaty on behalf of the people, God relented from His threatened course of action.
Also, on a related note, God made both unconditional and conditional promises or covenants with Israel. An unconditional covenant depended only on what God Himself had promised to do. A conditional covenant depended on Israel's obedience to God.
Refer to Psalm 106 and see how God severely punished Israel for their rebelliousness but then relented when they cried out to Him.
Refer also to Amos 7:1-6 in which God relented from all the punishment He would have carried out except for Amos's prayer on behalf of Israel.
God responds to cries for mercy.
These two apparent but non-existent contradictions vanish in the light of understanding.
I don't see how any part of what you just said relates in any way to Exodus 32. Moses doesn't pray or beg or ask for mercy at all in Exodus 32. Lets look again:
Quote:
11 Then Moses entreated the LORD his God, and said, “O LORD, why does Your anger burn against Your people whom You have brought out from the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand? 12 Why should the Egyptians speak, saying, ‘With evil intent He brought them out to kill them in the mountains and to destroy them from the face of the earth’? Turn from Your burning anger and change Your mind about doing harm to Your people.
I am not sure where any of that applies to Exodus chapter 32.
Moses tells God to turn from his burning anger. And then he tells God what the Egyptians will say about God having evil intent. He doesn't tell God they have changed, are changing, or will change. And they DIDN'T change at all. The story continues with Moses going down to the camp AFTER he talked God out of destroying the people, and thats when Moses broke the tablets in his own anger because they were still doing the same thing that had made God mad to begin with.
Then Moses (after gathering the sons of Levi) instructed them that God commands them to go from gate to gate in the camp and every man KILL HIS BROTHER, KILL HIS FRIEND, KILL HIS NEIGHBOR. So God directs the people to go kill their brother, friend, and neighbor immediately after Moses talked God out of killing them first. God wanted to kill all of them for worshiping a golden calf, but since Moses talked him out of it, the command that Moses says comes from God is to go kill 3,000 brothers, friends, and neighbors.
It was only after going down, breaking the tablets in anger, then instructing the men who came forward to go on a killing spree (3,000 killed) that Moses went back up (the next day) to ask God for atonement for their sin. Then God said that those who had sinned against him would be blotted out of his book and in the last verse of chapter 32, God still smote the people who worshiped the golden calf.
Again, the point is to read Exodus chapter 32 and ask the question, does this story make sense? Does this sound like the nature of God? Moses didn't tell God anyone would change, and in fact, the chapter goes on to say very clearly that they didn't. And in the end, God chose to go ahead and kill them anyway.
Judas had asked the chief priests what they would give him to betray Jesus (Matthew 26:14). They gave him 30 pieces of silver which he accepted. Afterwards, when he saw that Christ was condemned, Judas felt remorse and returned the money. Since he had accepted that silver and then returned it, although the chief priests actually bought the potter's field, it was Juda's money which bought it. So Judas can rightfully be said to have bought the field as it was his silver which paid for it. Though Judas himself did not personally buy the field, he did so indirectly. The priests used the betrayal money Judas had flung into the temple to make the purchase in Judas' name That should not be difficult to understand?
Also, ancient tradition says that Judas had hanged himself from a tree on the edge of a cliff above the Valley of Hinnom. The branch broke and Judas fell onto a rock at the bottom of the valley and his insides spilled out.
Mike, I just repped you on another thread, and I agree with a lot of what you say. This I do not agree with. You're dancing to try and make something not a contradiction.
It was no longer Judas' silver. He gave it back, and the priests bought the field. Then scripture flat out says Judas bought the field, then went and hung himself (or fell, which, btw, I can see how him falling and insides spilling out could happen after hanging himself, so no contradiction there). That's a contradiction.
No where does it say it was bought in Judas' name. That only comes from man, to try and make scripture fit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I LOVE NORTH CAROLINA
Right Mike! Sadly people are always trying to discredit the Bible, but it can't be done. It is error free and there are no contradictions, I have yet to see anyone prove there is.
People don't try to discredit the bible, it does it on its own. It is full of error and contradictions, but people like you and Mike want so badly to believe it's not, that you'll come up with anything you can to make it not.
Even people on the internet, who have sites devoted to proving there are no contradictions, will even admit there are errors. There are way too many numerical errors in the OT. So, they blame it on "copyist error". Just one of the many things txboomerang mentioned.
Judas had asked the chief priests what they would give him to betray Jesus (Matthew 26:14). They gave him 30 pieces of silver which he accepted. Afterwards, when he saw that Christ was condemned, Judas felt remorse and returned the money. Since he had accepted that silver and then returned it, although the chief priests actually bought the potter's field, it was Juda's money which bought it. So Judas can rightfully be said to have bought the field as it was his silver which paid for it. Though Judas himself did not personally buy the field, he did so indirectly. The priests used the betrayal money Judas had flung into the temple to make the purchase in Judas' name That should not be difficult to understand?
Also, ancient tradition says that Judas had hanged himself from a tree on the edge of a cliff above the Valley of Hinnom. The branch broke and Judas fell onto a rock at the bottom of the valley and his insides spilled out.
Mike, I just repped you on another thread, and I agree with a lot of what you say. This I do not agree with. You're stretching to try and make something not a contradiction.
It was no longer Judas' silver. He gave it back, and the priests bought the field. Then scripture flat out says Judas bought the field, then went and hung himself (or fell, which, btw, I can see how him falling and insides spilling out could happen after hanging himself, so no contradiction there). But as to who bought the field is a blatant contradiction.
No where does it say it was bought in Judas' name. It is very clear, scripture says Judas bought the field.
Another contradiction in this account, that hasn't been mentioned, is why is it called the field of blood? Is it because the priests bought it to bury foreigners, or is it because Judas hung himself there?
Quote:
Originally Posted by I LOVE NORTH CAROLINA
Right Mike! Sadly people are always trying to discredit the Bible, but it can't be done. It is error free and there are no contradictions, I have yet to see anyone prove there is.
People don't try to discredit the bible, it does it on its own. It is full of error and contradictions, but people like you and Mike want so badly to believe it's not, that you'll come up with anything you can to make it not.
Even people on the internet, who have sites devoted to proving there are no contradictions, will even admit there are errors. There are way too many numerical errors in the OT. So, they blame it on "copyist error". Just one of the many things txboomerang mentioned.
3 When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders. 4 “I have sinned,” he said, “for I have betrayed innocent blood.”
“What is that to us?” they replied. “That’s your responsibility.”
5 So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself.
6 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.” 7 So they decided to use the money to buy the potter’s field as a burial place for foreigners. 8 That is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day. 9 Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: “They took the thirty pieces of silver, the price set on him by the people of Israel, 10 and they used them to buy the potter’s field, as the Lord commanded me.”[a]
Acts 1:15-19 says:
15 In those days Peter stood up among the believers (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty) 16 and said, “Brothers and sisters,[d] the Scripture had to be fulfilled in which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus. 17 He was one of our number and shared in our ministry.”
18 (With the payment he received for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. 19 Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)
So in Matthew, Judas throws the silver down in the temple and goes to hang himself. The priests pick up the money and decide to buy a field to bury foreigners in.
In Acts, verse 18 clearly states JUDAS bought a field and fell headlong so that his body burst open.
So who bought the field? The priests to bury foreigners in it? Or Judas to fall headlong in it? BTW, falling headlong and bursting open is far different than hanging oneself.
Not a problem, Tex. Witnesses to a crime often have small discrepancies in their testimonies. In fact, it is precisely the LACK of lock-step uniformity that suggests to detectives that the witnesses have not consulted with one another about the event that they witnessed. Only rehearsed stories are uniform in all detail.
The authors of the New Testament, inspired by the Holy Spirit, were real witnesses and REAL authors (not merely secretaries taking dictation) - so their writings are not uniform but reflect their individual perspectives.
These people aren't looking for answers but pride-driven debate.
We'll all learn the truth eventually. Death is the great equalizer.
Hebrews 9:27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
We are either accountable to a Creator for our lives or not. If there is no Creator, we go into the ground to decompose in the earth. Our choices in life really mean NOTHING.
If there is a Creator our Soul/Our element of our very Existence goes back to him. He reads YOUR LIFE back to you like a BOOK. It doesn't work out well for those that have rejected God in Messiah.
We are talking about YOUR existence. You're very element of being. Take time to Convince yourself. The answers are a click of a button away.
The good news is you're not some accident brought forth from a Rock. This fallacy is mathematically and scientifically absurd. The bad news is you don't know who God is. So go find out.
People don't try to discredit the bible, it does it on its own. It is full of error and contradictions, but people like you and Mike want so badly to believe it's not, that you'll come up with anything you can to make it not.
I believe God is certainly capable to keeping His Word error free. The devil tries to make people think it has contractions, he just loves doing that. I don't have to defend the Bible, it stands on it's own and never returns void, Isaiah 40:8
I believe God is certainly capable to keeping His Word error free.
Capable . . . Yes. But where in the world do you find any evidence or suggestion even that He did so??? There is NOTHING in the hands of humans that is error-free or uncorrupted, period.
Quote:
The devil tries to make people think it has contractions, he just loves doing that. I don't have to defend the Bible, it stands on it's own and never returns void, Isaiah 40:8
Every time you override what your heart tells you is right and good and kind and decent because of your mistaken belief that the Bible is inerrant and you are supposed to think it is evil . . . you ignore the Holy Spirit within and sin against your own soul.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Right Mike! Sadly people are always trying to discredit the Bible, but it can't be done. It is error free and there are no contradictions, I have yet to see anyone prove there is.
