What Are The Most Damning Contradictions In The Bible?

[★ Citsonga ★]

I thought of this contradiction immediately upon seeing this thread title. It is the most damning because there is actually no consensus between Paul, the person who wrote the book of James, and the purported words of Jesus himself.

 

This is at the core of Christianity, too, because how do you know you are saved? These people obviously can't agree on what you need to do to be saved, or if you need do anything at all other than "have faith". Its a hopeless mess and it doesn't hang together no matter how preachers try to spin it. This is why we have all the different denominations "Arminian," "Holiness", etc..

 

Right! Jesus apparently has no control over those New Testament authors. When I was a believer and read those verses, I tried to resolve the conflicts. I finally gave up and assumed I wasn't knowledgeable enough to figure it out. I concluded to "Just trust and obey, for there's no other way". But this phrase also confuses faith and works!

 

I always viewed it as though true faith would generate good deeds. When James says that faith without works is dead, I saw that as meaning that if you don't follow through with works, then you really don't have faith. In a sense that is true, because how we behave is built upon how we think.

 

I no longer see the varying NT passages as being as consistent as I had thought they were, but I also don't think they are as damning to Christianity as some of the other contradictions (such as the resurrection accounts). Of course, I can see how one coming from a different background from myself could see that differently.

[Spectrox]

I agree that probably the worst inconsistency is the 2 accounts of Judas' death. It's been fun reading the moronic disingenuos depths that apologists will go to to justify this nonsense. They are technically correct that they don't constitute a contradiction because neither account spells out word for word that this is the manner in which Judas died. I think it's stretching believability much too far though. Is this really the best written account that an all-knowing creator of the universe can come up with?! At best it's confusing and ambiguous.

 

Another irreconcilable set of inconsistencies can be found in the 4 accounts of the resurrection.

There are different numbers of angels present depending on which Gospel, different women present and in Mark, Luke & John the stone has already been moved away from the entrance to the tomb but in Matthew's Gospel there is an earthquake (Matthew's quite keen on them!) and the stone rolls dramatically to one side revealing an empty tomb. I genuinely do not know what anyone is supposed to believe in detail here. And if the detail isn't important, why has it been included? God is such a rubbish script editor! If he'd worked for the BBC he would have been fired ages ago. Of course Xians spout brainwashed crap about the important thing to know is that Jesus is risen - pathetic! This is arguably the worst inconsistency because it's the hingepin of their religion.

 

Other contradictions

 

1. Jesus journey to Copernium in Matthew 17 states that the journey took 6 days and an almost identical account in Luke's Gospel says "about 8 days."

 

2. Jesus believed that the end of the world was imminent in Matthew 16. He spends the whole chapter talking to his disciples about judgement day and concludes by saying:

 

"..and everyone shall be rewarded according to what he has done. I tell you the truth, there are people standing here (his disciples) who shall not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

 

Paul also concedes that there isn't much time left in 1Corinthians 7 (?) when advising women not to have more babies - "Time is short."

 

Most Xians will always wriggle out of any criticism of their beloved book because they have invested so much of their life in it that to admit the Bible is wrong is to admit that they are wrong. It's about ego not about an honest pursuit of truth. Of course many ex-Xians on this blog have been courageous enough to break free of that and have come clean instead of living a lie.

[agnosticator]

I always viewed it as though true faith would generate good deeds. When James says that faith without works is dead, I saw that as meaning that if you don't follow through with works, then you really don't have faith. In a sense that is true, because how we behave is built upon how we think.

 

Yes, that is Paul's view. I don't see how the Jewish Christians would agree with that. Faith is a Pauline construct. It isn't O.T. at all.

[Deva]

I thought of this contradiction immediately upon seeing this thread title. It is the most damning because there is actually no consensus between Paul, the person who wrote the book of James, and the purported words of Jesus himself.

 

This is at the core of Christianity, too, because how do you know you are saved? These people obviously can't agree on what you need to do to be saved, or if you need do anything at all other than "have faith". Its a hopeless mess and it doesn't hang together no matter how preachers try to spin it. This is why we have all the different denominations "Arminian," "Holiness", etc..

 

Right! Jesus apparently has no control over those New Testament authors. When I was a believer and read those verses, I tried to resolve the conflicts. I finally gave up and assumed I wasn't knowledgeable enough to figure it out. I concluded to "Just trust and obey, for there's no other way". But this phrase also confuses faith and works!

 

 

One of the reasons I left Christianity was that I realized with crystal clarity that there was no way a person could honestly be absolutely sure of their salvation. The contradictions made that impossible and I could not live with the uncertainty, given that we were supposed to be certain.

 

I know that probably sounds strange to those from a different type of Christian tradition, but I came out of pure black and white fundamentalism, which completely backfired on me.

[Eugene39]

I know that probably sounds strange to those from a different type of Christian tradition, but I came out of pure black and white fundamentalism, which completely backfired on me.

 

Same here. Once I had a huge discussion with someone who was trying to show me that Genesis has two differing creation accounts, with me trying to defend it as one account. When the inerrant, infallible...the very Word of God began falling apart, it wasn't pretty.

[mymistake]

Barabbas' name appears as bar-Abbas in the Greek texts. It is derived ultimately from the Aramaic בר-אבא, Bar-abbâ, "son of the father".

 

So, a more accurate rendering of Matthew might read like this...

 

²¹ “Which of the two [men called Jesus] do you want me to release to you?” asked the governor. “Barabbas,” they answered.

 

Hmmmm?

So it looks like the crowd actually wanted Pilate to release...

 

Jesus, the Son of the Father.

 

Wow. Thanks so much BAA. Great analysis, thanks for sharing. I'm thinking that the Jesus myth isn't built on one historical person but rather a whole bunch of real people some of who had the common name Jesus and others who did not while Christ is something completely invented by Paul of Tarsus.

[sethosayher]

I am loving this thread- please keep posting more important contradictions! Because I really hate the fact that I know it's all bullshit, but cannot, as yet, articulate exactly why it is bullshit. I will be going and buying a bible to read properly, with the blinkers off, but I'm a little broke at the mo. I briefly considered asking a christian if they had a spare bible they could lob my way (they usually do), but that would go against my principles, as entertaining as I find the thought

 

I don't know how it is in Australia, but some dollar stores in the US have Bibles for $1.

 

Anyway, if you're interested, feel free to check out a very detailed letter I sent my parents a few months ago, dealing specifically with several categories of Bible problems. You can download it from post #13 in the following thread:

 

http://www.ex-christ...__fromsearch__1

 

I read your letter while I was at a prayer meeting my mother pressued me attend tonight...It's phenomenal, and does a job of summarizing some of the best contradictions in the bible. By the way, how did your parents react to the letter?

 

Thanks. How did those at the prayer meeting respond to you reading such a letter, or were you able to conceal it?

 

So far not much has been said about religion between us since I sent them the letter. What little has been said is posted in that thread. I plan to be there in a few days for Thanksgiving weekend, so there may be some interesting details to add to that thread afterwards.

 

 

I read it on my iphone. I need to keep myself occupied during that boring shit somehow!

[agnosticator]

One of the reasons I left Christianity was that I realized with crystal clarity that there was no way a person could honestly be absolutely sure of their salvation. The contradictions made that impossible and I could not live with the uncertainty, given that we were supposed to be certain.

 

I know that probably sounds strange to those from a different type of Christian tradition, but I came out of pure black and white fundamentalism, which completely backfired on me.

 

I have wondered what I would have believed had I not been seized upon by ministers in my house as a teen. My brother had them over for Bible study, and I got sucked into it. I didn't realize what I was in for! I was brought up as a liberal Catholic, not having to worry or obsess over salvation until then.

 

The verse that says to "work out your salvation with fear and trembling" (among others) kept me on my toes. "Once saved, always saved" can be easily refuted, especially when it states (I can't think of where right now) a believer can lose salvation.

[★ Citsonga ★]

"Once saved, always saved" can be easily refuted, especially when it states (I can't think of where right now) a believer can lose salvation.

 

You're probably referring to the passage in Hebrews that refers to those who were once enlightened and turn away. There are a few ways to interpret those verses, but it is often used to say that salvation can be lost. Ironically, it even proves problematic for the freewill camp because if it's talking about a loss of salvation, then it clearly states that they can't come back. That would mean that salvation cannot be regained, yet most who use the passage would say that salvation can be regained.

 

Anyway, there is actually a lot of NT support for the doctrine that salvation cannot be lost. As is typical of the Bible, though, it doesn't spell it out in a clear-cut, one-sided fashion, and therefore it is easy for both sides to make their arguments. One would think that a perfect deity could inspire a more coherent book than the Bible.

[Deva]

 

I have wondered what I would have believed had I not been seized upon by ministers in my house as a teen. My brother had them over for Bible study, and I got sucked into it. I didn't realize what I was in for! I was brought up as a liberal Catholic, not having to worry or obsess over salvation until then.

 

Yes, I often wonder if I had been brought up Catholic if I would ever have left. Instead, my mother let some Methodist minister talk to her when I was about 3.

[blackpudd1n]

Wow. Thanks so much BAA. Great analysis, thanks for sharing. I'm thinking that the Jesus myth isn't built on one historical person but rather a whole bunch of real people some of who had the common name Jesus and others who did not while Christ is something completely invented by Paul of Tarsus.

 

The similarities between the life of Jesus, and the ancient Egyptian myth of Horus, son of Isis, are interesting to me.

 

http://www.religious.../chr_jcpa5b.htm

 

http://www.religious.../chr_jcpa5d.htm

 

When I was deconverting, it was a big blow to my belief in him. Especially as I had recently read a book by an archaeologist about the Jewish community that existed in Egypt around the time of Jesus, and how well they got along with the Egyptians. Even the bible tells of Jesus being taken to Egypt as a child to be hidden from King Herod.

 

So now I kind of think that if Jesus was an actual person, he's had mythical properties added, and it makes sense to me that those properties could well be of Egyptian origin, considering the close relationship between the Jews and the Egyptians at that time.

[blackpudd1n]

The verse that says to "work out your salvation with fear and trembling" (among others) kept me on my toes. "Once saved, always saved" can be easily refuted, especially when it states (I can't think of where right now) a believer can lose salvation.

 

It's funny, but that verse was actually the start of my deconversion, in a roundabout way. I took that verse to mean "don't blindly believe what you are told. Question everything! Work it out for yourself!" Thus, years later, the verse that started my intense desire to really know god and what it meant to be a christian lead me here- sitting on the other side of the fence lol. It's so ironic.

 

The fear of blaspheming against the holy spirit kept me from making that final leap for a long time. The One Unforgivable Sin, from which there is no turning back.

[blackpudd1n]

One would think that a perfect deity could inspire a more coherent book than the Bible.

 

My four year old niece could write a more coherent book.

[bornagainathiest]

Barabbas' name appears as bar-Abbas in the Greek texts. It is derived ultimately from the Aramaic בר-אבא, Bar-abbâ, "son of the father".

 

So, a more accurate rendering of Matthew might read like this...

 

²¹ “Which of the two [men called Jesus] do you want me to release to you?” asked the governor. “Barabbas,” they answered.

 

Hmmmm?

So it looks like the crowd actually wanted Pilate to release...

 

Jesus, the Son of the Father.

 

Wow. Thanks so much BAA. Great analysis, thanks for sharing. I'm thinking that the Jesus myth isn't built on one historical person but rather a whole bunch of real people some of who had the common name Jesus and others who did not while Christ is something completely invented by Paul of Tarsus.

 

No problem, MM!

 

Your angle is a possibility, but I take a somewhat different line.

 

Puting it simply, I reckon the Gospels have been ****ed around a LOT since they were written and these kinds of problems are just the symptoms of all the adding, embellishing, splicing, doctoring and editing that's taken place. Christians will try to claim that everything's just dandy and that scripture is one seamless, integrated whole - but that's not really true.

 

I can show you what I mean, if you're interested. Just let me know, ok?

 

BAA.

[★ Citsonga ★]

Puting it simply, I reckon the Gospels have been ****ed around a LOT since they were written and these kinds of problems are just the symptoms of all the adding, embellishing, splicing, doctoring and editing that's taken place. Christians will try to claim that everything's just dandy and that scripture is one seamless, integrated whole - but that's not really true.

 

I quite agree.

[Inqui]

So now I kind of think that if Jesus was an actual person, he's had mythical properties added, and it makes sense to me that those properties could well be of Egyptian origin, considering the close relationship between the Jews and the Egyptians at that time.

This is an interesting one. My take on it is that Jesus existed, but in a similar way to Robin Hood or King Arthur. There was a person attached to the myth, but writers in years after his death began a system of Chinese whispers that changes the way people think about him. At the end of the day, Jesus was such a common name that saying Jesus of Nazareth existed is like saying Bob of Boston existed: you'll find one somewhere.

 

Just goes to show how much you can lose by taking the Bible too literally.

[blackpudd1n]

So now I kind of think that if Jesus was an actual person, he's had mythical properties added, and it makes sense to me that those properties could well be of Egyptian origin, considering the close relationship between the Jews and the Egyptians at that time.

This is an interesting one. My take on it is that Jesus existed, but in a similar way to Robin Hood or King Arthur. There was a person attached to the myth, but writers in years after his death began a system of Chinese whispers that changes the way people think about him. At the end of the day, Jesus was such a common name that saying Jesus of Nazareth existed is like saying Bob of Boston existed: you'll find one somewhere.

 

Just goes to show how much you can lose by taking the Bible too literally.

 

welcome to Ex-C, Inqui

 

I find the concept interesting, myself. Of course, I could be wrong. I am not a scholar. But I think it warrants further investigation.

[Inqui]

 

welcome to Ex-C, Inqui

 

I find the concept interesting, myself. Of course, I could be wrong. I am not a scholar. But I think it warrants further investigation.

Cheers blackpudd1n.

 

I'm following a similar discussion on another forum (interestingly enough a sports forum), and one guy pointed out that there were around 50 recognised historians from the time of Jesus (though that number seems rather high....). 4 of them talk about Jesus of Nazareth: of which 2 were written by jews and proven to be forgeries and the other 2 are Roman and of disputed authenticity.

 

Personally I think the Bible's a philosophy book, which could make Jesus another philosopher of the day (and all bias aside, he did say some pretty insightful things).

 

I also really like what you and a few others said somewhere about a heavy Egyptian influence. You throw in a few religious elements like the Romans did to the Greeks and you have a man to the myth. But now I'm rambling and probably wrong on most of what I just said.

[blackpudd1n]

 

welcome to Ex-C, Inqui

 

I find the concept interesting, myself. Of course, I could be wrong. I am not a scholar. But I think it warrants further investigation.

Cheers blackpudd1n.

 

I'm following a similar discussion on another forum (interestingly enough a sports forum), and one guy pointed out that there were around 50 recognised historians from the time of Jesus (though that number seems rather high....). 4 of them talk about Jesus of Nazareth: of which 2 were written by jews and proven to be forgeries and the other 2 are Roman and of disputed authenticity.

 

Personally I think the Bible's a philosophy book, which could make Jesus another philosopher of the day (and all bias aside, he did say some pretty insightful things).

 

I also really like what you and a few others said somewhere about a heavy Egyptian influence. You throw in a few religious elements like the Romans did to the Greeks and you have a man to the myth. But now I'm rambling and probably wrong on most of what I just said.

 

 

I don't think there's anything to be lost by being unsure of yourself. It just means you're still open to learning I've learned my lesson from being dogmatic

[Margee]

The whole topic of 'unanswered prayer is a huge contradiction:

 

[Margee]

On slavery:

 

Leviticus 25:39-41 - SLAVERY NOT PERMITTED

 

Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

 

³⁹ "If your brother among you becomes destitute and sells himself to you, you must not force him to do slave labor. ⁴⁰ Let him stay with you as a hired hand or temporary resident; he may work for you until the Year of Jubilee. ⁴¹ Then he and his children are to be released from you, and he may return to his clan and his ancestral property.

 

SLAVERY PERMITTED:

 

Leviticus 25:44-46

 

Holman Christian Standard Bible (HCSB)

 

⁴⁴ Your male and female slaves are to be from the nations around you; you may purchase male and female slaves. ⁴⁵ You may also purchase them from the foreigners staying with you, or from their families living among you—those born in your land. These may become your property. ⁴⁶ You may leave them to your sons after you to inherit as property; you can make them slaves for life.