Why deny that the bible contradicts itself?

Question

How else do you get dozens of denominations?
Catholics, Orthodox, Baptists, Lutherans, Adventists, Methodists, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Pentacostals... the list goes on.

Each and every denomination can quote verses that support their position and deny others'. Each other denomination feels that those verses are being misinterpreted, but that their own interpretation is the actual "truth."

Yet, for some strange reason, each one will maintain that the bible doesn't contradict itself... and will agree with someone of another denomination who also feels this way! It boggles the mind.

So how do you justify the multitude of denominations? (not to mention the Jews who disagree with much of Christians' interpretation of the Old Testament.) Is there some Christian disease that keeps you from looking through another's eyes, and seeing that your own arguments can be used against you?

Schneb, religion is the expression of the bible. Even if you only recognize the broad categories of Judaism and Christianity. And Jews and Christians differ widely about many fine points in the Old Testament.

zombiehive:

because the mandate of Christianity is to do their best to make the world Christian. It's funny you should mention homosexuality. It's because Christians believe in the contradictory bible, and legislate those beliefs, that these poor individuals have to be looked at like second class citizens in America.

Ok, for everyone who says that the denomination separation is not indicitive of biblical contradiction... then how, HOW, does it come about? EACH of them can use the bible to support why they are right and others are wrong.

Answer 1

I do not deny it, I state that it does. As a "Christian" I am aware that the Bible is incomplete for it states as much in it. When others state that it is complete, they have not read it enough to see the facts printed before them.

People choose to hold on to their perceptions of what they believe to be correct and are terrified of being proved wrong. True belief for me is the acceptance of all.

An Example :
The Old Testament tells us (Reads)
"An Eye for an Eye"
And then the New Testament tells us (Reads)
"Turn the other Cheek"

So God tells us to do one thing and then Jesus tells us to do something different. Is this not a contradiction?

So since Jesus is the Son of God and God is the Father, and people claim that they are one, then why do they not agree?

A Christian

Answer 2

The diversity of denominations and religions just proves that people interpret the same Scriptures in different ways. To show the contradictions in the Bible, you need to cite specific examples. Try Acts 9:7 with Acts 22:9.

Answer 3

Blame all of it on the Bishops of Nicaea in 325 A.D. They desperate which testaments must be risk-free in the valid Christian Bible. heavily, they might have saved themselves various hassle if that they had merely ignored the whole of the previous testomony. The previous and New contradict one yet another in maximum of approaches, it would have been plenty cleanser if that they had caught completely to the words of Christ's disciples (the hot testomony). certainly a gospel compiled in merely one era is going to be greater consistent that books accumulated and sure at the same time over the span of centuries.

Answer 4

Er, the bible is actuallly nothing but pretty basic contradictions..

1. God is satisfied with his works
Gen 1:31
God is dissatisfied with his works.
Gen 6:6
2. God dwells in chosen temples
2 Chron 7:12,16
God dwells not in temples
Acts 7:48
3. God dwells in light
Tim 6:16
God dwells in darkness
1 Kings 8:12/ Ps 18:11/ Ps 97:2
4. God is seen and heard
Ex 33:23/ Ex 33:11/ Gen 3:9,10/ Gen 32:30/ Is 6:1/
Ex 24:9-11
God is invisible and cannot be heard
John 1:18/ John 5:37/ Ex 33:20/ 1 Tim 6:16
5. God is tired and rests
Ex 31:17
God is never tired and never rests
Is 40:28
6. God is everywhere present, sees and knows all things
Prov 15:3/ Ps 139:7-10/ Job 34:22,21
God is not everywhere present, neither sees nor knows all
things
Gen 11:5/ Gen 18:20,21/ Gen 3:8
7. God knows the hearts of men
Acts 1:24/ Ps 139:2,3
God tries men to find out what is in their heart
Deut 13:3/ Deut 8:2/ Gen 22:12
8. God is all powerful
Jer 32:27/ Matt 19:26
God is not all powerful

(out of almost 150)

If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.
- John 5:31

I am one that bear witness of myself...
- John 8:18
[Jesus was the speaker in both of these quotes]

etc etc etc

Answer 5

You're crossing two very different issues. The original writings of the bible are beyond question some of the most fabulous literature written - with no contradictions. The denominations issue is a separate topic altogether.

Answer 6

Denominations don't demonstrate Biblical contradictions. You have pointed out a very good example of human contradictions.

Answer 7

Let us discuss the Bible. You look at Eastern Orthodoxy and see many things Orthodox Christians do and believe which are not specifically mentioned in the Bible. You then wonder how we can justify doing and believing these things. This discrepancy exists because the Orthodox accept other authorities as sources of Truth in addition to the Bible. But before I explain about these other authorities, I wish to research this belief in the Bible. When I first began to study Orthodoxy, I was bothered by the question, why should I believe that the Bible is the Word of God? Why should it contain the books that it does? Why not other books, or should all those it includes be there?

You see, I discovered that the Christians of the first several centuries had differences of opinion as to which books of Scripture were from God and which were writings of mere men (perhaps holy, wise men, or perhaps false and heretical books, but nevertheless not divinely inspired writings). For example, even in 300 A.D. there were questions about the validity of the books of James, II Peter, II and III John and a definite division of opinion about the Apocalypse (the Revelation of John). There was a book called the Gospel according to Peter in existence. There is the letter called the Didache, which is the letter from the first century sent by the Apostles after they met in council at Jerusalem (see Acts 15:1-32). There are letters from Sts. Polycarp and Ignatius, disciples of St. John the Apostle, just as Sts. Mark, Matthew and Luke were disciples of various of the Twelve Apostles-and yet those three gospels were included in the Bible but not the letters of Sts. Polycarp or Ignatius. Yet I have read their writings and do not think that they were denied admittance to Holy Scripture because they were strange or because the authorship was doubted; rather they seem very good and holy letters, yet they are not regarded as Scripture. And these are just some of the books and letters which might have been considered Holy Scripture. So who judges which books are human and which divine?

Historically, I can tell you that the reason you read and revere the collection of books known as the Bible is because of the decisions of church councils which were held to decide this issue (in addition to other issues). Local councils were held in 58-65?, 364, and 419, and councils of the whole church took place in 691 and 787 A.D. They made their decisions which together with the Church’s confirmation and emendation became the established Word of God. Much later, when the Protestants rebelled against and separated from the Roman Catholics (1400 A.D. on) they kept most of the doctrine about Scripture even though they discarded many other doctrines. Thus you were taught that these books are the Bible, God’s communication to mankind. This is historically why Protestants believe the Bible to be God’s Word.

So it was these councils which decided with the Church’s approval what constituted Holy Scripture. What criteria did they use? Basically, there were two criteria: (1) who wrote the book (and how certain it was that the alleged authorship was valid), and (2) whether or not the teachings of the book agreed with apostolic tradition (also called Holy Tradition). I do not imagine that you would object to the first criterion. As for the second, in the early Church the canon of Scripture was not completely set-heresies were rampant and the Church was often in turmoil. Some people invented strange new doctrines and terrible heresies and started their own "churches," seeking to deceive if possible even the elect (Matt. 24:24). These heretics would sometimes write their own pseudo-apostolic books to try to lure the faithful away from the true Church. Therefore, Christians had to judge the correct way to believe and act by the oral as well as by the written teachings of the apostles as they were passed from one generation to another. For the apostles taught that Christians were to obey all that they taught whether by word or letter. St. Paul writes, Therefore brethren, stand fast and hold to the traditions which you have been taught, whether by word or our letter (II Thess. 2:15); Now I praise you, brethren,... that you keep the traditions as I delivered them to you (I Cor. 11:2); and, The things you have learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, practice these things (Phil. 4:9). Some would argue that these oral traditions were ultimately included in one or more of the writings of the New Testament. If this were so, then why would God leave us these purposeless instructions in Holy Scripture? These three verses would then be totally superfluous. No, these verses must refer to teachings of the apostles given in unrecorded sermons, as well as to the lessons taught by their manner of living. It is in accordance with these traditions that the validity of the books was judged.

These were the criteria used. Now what about the method used to determine the contents of the Bible-a council of bishops meeting to judge a doctrinal issue? This is the very method the apostles taught should be used, and the Bible itself bears witness to this.

In Acts 15:1-32, we are told there was a doctrinal dispute over whether Gentile Christians should have to follow the Jewish rites. The apostles met and decided they should not and sent a letter to all the Churches informing them of their decision. Thus a doctrinal dispute was judged by a council of the apostles. "But that council" you may say, "was composed of apostles. What entitles bishops to do this?" It is historically certain that the apostles taught that the bishops they set up in each city were to do the work that they themselves had been doing; that is, the bishop should preside over the services, appoint elders (presbyters or priests) in each church, consecrate the people chosen to be deacons, and to meet in councils to decide doctrinal and other disputes, etc. Thus when a doctrinal dispute arose, bishops would gather to decide the issue. This is-the tradition we have and follow. This is the foundation for believing that councils are an authority Christians must obey. This authority is established by Scripture and attests to the validity of the Scriptures. It is established by God to winnow the wheat from the chaff of new problems, questions and heresies.

The Old Testament canon of Scripture is that of the Septuagint, which was the Bible of the apostles. Other Christian communions through the years have deviated somewhat from this apostolic canon which the Orthodox Church still uses. The canon of the New Testament was developed over the early centuries of the Church. Its first known listing in its final form is the Paschal Letter of St. Athanasius of Alexandria in A.D. 367.

Answer 8

"Is there some Christian disease that keeps you from looking through another's eyes, and seeing that your own arguments can be used against you?"

Yup. The disease is blind faith and ignorance. Even when a blatant contradiction is shown to someone of "faith," they will adamantly refuse to see it. "It's out of context..." Yeah right. Not everything is out of context. The contradictions between Matthew and Luke enough are mind boggling.

Answer 9

the Bible most certainly does not contradict itself,it isnt religion that gets you in heaven its the confession of sins and acceptance of Christ as savior.a basic bottom line belief with all denominations.we all have the basic same doctrine practice is different thats all.

Answer 10

the bottom line is humans are the problem, not the bible.

within the pages of the bible it's clear, it says not to lean unto our own understanding, yet the ones who claim they are obeying the word, are indeed ignoring what it directly says, and interpreting it on their own without drawing on the very Spirit that inspired it.