If The Bible has so many contradictions, an example:
"Women have semen" which we all know they do not, cause men have semen.
How can we say the Bible is the word of God, when God does not even know his own science? This is to the devout Christian believers, not the converts to Islam. Thank you.
2007-09-23 00:06:45 · 19 answers · asked by Hattiyah 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Before anyone posts...
Understand when God says Women Have Semen...
"God" is apparently very stupid in this thinking.
2007-09-23 00:14:50 · update #1
Okay PEOPLE ASKED FOR BIBLICAL CONTRADICTIONS, HERE THEY ARE:
How many singers accompanied the assembly?
(a) Two hundred (Ezra 2:65)
(b) Two hundred and forty-five (Nehemiah 7:67)
What was the name of King Abijah’s mother?
(a) Michaiah, daughter of Uriel of Gibeah (2 Chronicles 13:2)
(b) Maachah, daughter of Absalom (2 Chronicles 11:20) But Absalom had only one daughter whose name was Tamar (2 Samuel 14:27)
Did Joshua and the Israelites capture Jerusalem?
(a) Yes (Joshua 10:23, 40)
(b) No (Joshua 15:63)
Who was the father of Joseph, husband of Mary?
(a) Jacob (Matthew 1:16)
(b) Hell (Luke 3:23)
Jesus descended from which son of David?
(a) Solomon (Matthew 1:6)
(b) Nathan(Luke3:31)
2007-09-23 00:16:00 · update #2
the bible is the word of man, not a god! if everyone accepted this the world would be a better place!
2007-09-23 00:14:05 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 3⤋
How many singers accompanied the assembly?
(a) Two hundred (Ezra 2:65)
(b) Two hundred and forty-five (Nehemiah 7:67)
Look at this logically. Really. Let's pretend that there were 279 singers. If there were 279 singers, then were there 245? Of course. If there were 279 singers, then were there 200? Of course. How many *exactly* were there? Who knows. Perhaps, when the author of Ezra counted, there were 200 singers. Maybe 45 were using the little singers' room, maybe 45 came of age *after* Ezra's count but prior to Nehemiah's. Were either wrong? Of course not! Indeed, considering that Ezra specifically mentions "men and women", it it certainly reasonable that the 45 "extra" in Nehemiah were (legally) children at the time of Ezra's accounting.
What was the name of King Abijah’s mother?
(a) Michaiah, daughter of Uriel of Gibeah (2 Chronicles 13:2)
(b) Maachah, daughter of Absalom (2 Chronicles 11:20) But Absalom had only one daughter whose name was Tamar (2 Samuel 14:27)
Hi. My name is Jim. Actually, my *legal* name is James, but I usually go by Jim, and occasionally by a few other names. I used to date a girl named Christina. She went by Tina, Chris, Chrissy, Christy, and I believe a few others. I could generally tell where she had met her friends by what they called her. Surely, I must be contradicting myself! In ancient Hebrew, there were *no* vowels written. As can clearly be seen, these two names have identical consonants - and, therefore, are *identical* in ancient Hebrew.
Did Joshua and the Israelites capture Jerusalem?
(a) Yes (Joshua 10:23, 40)
(b) No (Joshua 15:63)
Joshua 10:23 Joshua defeats the king of Jerusalem's army *and* kills the king, but is not recorded to have taken the city itself. It doesn't matter why he didn't - presumably, the city was not left unguarded. All we know for certain is, the bible does *not* claim that Joshua took Jerusalem at this time.
Joshua 10:40 also makes no mention of Joshua conquering Jerusalem. We cannot say with absolute certainty of which territory verse 40 is speaking, but judging from the context (38 and 39), this verse is speaking of the kingdom of Debir - definitely not part of the kingdom of Jerusalem (see 10:3).
Who was the father of Joseph, husband of Mary?
(a) Jacob (Matthew 1:16)
(b) Hell (Luke 3:23)
Finally, a reasonable "contradiction". Although there is no (logical) reason for believing that any of these other things are contradictions, it actually *is* reasonable to believe that this is a contradiction. Of course, there is a *very* reasonable explanation for this "contradiction" - if you are cognizant of Jewish Law. Note that I say "reasonable". There is no *proof* that the solution I provide is true - it is simply an entirely reasonable explanation of this apparent "contradiction". In a nutshell, one father was father by Law of the Levirate, which means that Joseph was *legally* the son of the previous (dead) husband of his mother. If the biological father had no previous sons, then Joseph was also legally *his* son. Thus, this well-known practice, specified with great detail in The Law itself, provides a quite reasonable explanation for Joseph having two fathers, both - it should be noted - of the same tribe, a necessary requirement in levirate marriages.
Jesus descended from which son of David?
(a) Solomon (Matthew 1:6)
(b) Nathan(Luke3:31)
Ditto.
Jim, http://www.jimpettis.com/wheel/
2007-09-26 19:09:05 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
a million. There at the instant are not "2 introduction debts." you have misunderstood a literary gadget. 2. The debts of Judas' dying do no longer conflict. He hung himself. A suicide by ability of putting, if accomplished incorrect, can effect interior the physique bursting open. there are various strategies this could ensue. they're too grotesque to point in this context. 3. the classic Hebrew language has an identical be conscious for fish and whales, so there may be no contradiction there. 4. Genealogies will fluctuate if one strains his line contained in direction of the father vs tracing his line contained in direction of the mummy. The Hebrew custom of genealogies allowed one to bypass ancestor's names. those stated have been stated for a definite reason. you do no longer understand their subculture. 5. i don't recognize what you recommend by ability of "0.33 hand account" or what you recommend to coach. An account does no longer unavoidably must be an eyewitness account to be inspired of God. Are there the different (meant) contradictions interior the Bible that i will help you with?
2016-10-09 16:49:50 · answer #3 · answered by staude 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Good question - three comments:
1. The Bible's claim to be the word of God is used by people in one of two ways. The right way is to support YOU interpreting the Bible for yourself. The wrong way is to try and manipulate or control you. The Bible itself says God exercises his power through his message not through brainwashing or power tactics.
2. The Bible's claim to be the word of God is based primarily on the compelling nature of the message. For a book to be useful it needs to provide useful information. If you could learn everything in the Bible from outside the Bible you wouldn't need the Bible.
3. Traditionally, when we talk about the Bible being the word of God, we are talking about the original manuscripts. And so if a translation contains such nonsense as "Women have semen" then I would be willing to guess it's a bad translation.
2007-09-23 00:26:21 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
First, nothing written by ANY man is "Word of God". And please, post the scripture where you got the "Women have semen" as I have never seen it - not even on websites that post contradictions... I'm thinking you're just repeating what someone has said on that one.
The Bible itself doesn't state Scripture is the "Word of God" (obviously you haven't read it, but don't worry - neither do it's followers). The Bible itself states God IS the Word of God - which many transfer to mean Jesus as well but that part is solely based on their personal belief. the "Word of God" in the Bible is the actual Spoken Words of God Himself - not what man decided to write about it later.
Pagan
2007-09-23 01:30:40 · answer #5 · answered by River 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Of course we can, God is not a slave master and certaintly looks to human partnership in all things, He revealed Himself to humanity and has always seeked co-operation with us, and this is why we see the truth of God in the Bible but also the hand of humanity as well, the Bible is not a work of Gods dictatorship but the history of God intervening in time and history with the compliance of those who have heard and learned from Him.
As a friend once said God threw us the ball of truth and said` now run with this and see how far you can go.
2007-09-23 00:18:19 · answer #6 · answered by Sentinel 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think you need to get out more rather than pore over a book and try to find contradictions in it. Of course there are contradictions - it's a series of ancient texts written by men and put into book form by other men. You expect too much.
2007-09-23 00:21:32 · answer #7 · answered by chris n 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are 100 s of contradictions. Drop them. Semen may be a wrong TRANSLATION
Bible is the word of god containing man-made literal mistakes.
2007-09-23 00:17:35 · answer #8 · answered by Muthu S 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The only contradictions in the bible are from mans interpretation or lack of study of meaning or surrounding verses
2007-09-23 00:13:01 · answer #9 · answered by pestie58 the spider hunter 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The Bible isn't the word of God. 2000 years ago people didn't have much to do, no tv or internet, so writing a book must have seemed like a pretty good time killer.
2007-09-23 00:11:43 · answer #10 · answered by Luke V 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
you can say "it's the word of God", as long as you follow that with "as interpreted by man". man is fallible, hence all the contradictions in the bible.
2007-09-23 00:17:53 · answer #11 · answered by redwolf0367 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋