Does Bible Contradict Itself?

[robert derrick]

Satan's "cunningness", is to seek, entice, connive, tempt (with lies), the Weak.

The Weak; thereafter, "USE" a multitude of "tactics", to "connive, tempt," the strong...

They...disobeyed.
First the female, then the male.

The male 'trusted the female", and did also take, and eat.

Taken

An interesting thing about the 'weak' trying to gain prominence over the stronger.

We are admonished not to wound and defile the conscience of the weaker (1 Cor 8); however we are also supported in not allowing the weaker to dominate the stronger (1 Cor 10:29).

As new babes in Christ we carry with us lots of baggage about right and wrong. We may have had practices of sin that nearly destroyed us, and we did not yet understanding by Scripture that it is lust that corrupts all things on earth, which are indeed given us by God to richly enjoy (1 Tim 6:17). I.e. too much of a good thing is indeed bad.

And so, in all things we are to exercise judgment, forbearance, control, sober-mindedness...(I Cor 6:12, 10:23). We are no delivered form such things thesmelves, but rather delivered from the lustful practices of them (James 4:5)(I John 2:16).

There is plenty of liberty in the law of the Lord (James 1:25), and the stronger in His Word we become, the greater the liberty of His law we may enjoy. But new babes do not yet understand that, nor perhaps even want to. They only know some main thing they were delivered from by the grace and goodness of Jesus Christ, and they dont want to have anything more to do with it. (You can fill in the blank) They are 'weak' of conscience in such things.

We who know better, that nothing is unclean of itself (Rom 14:14), are not to force the weaker into knowledge and liberty. We dont force our liberty in the Lord upon others.

However, they who are stronger in the Word are not expected to allow the perpetually weak to force their weakness of conscience upon them. We do not flaunt nor force-feed our liberty before the new babes, and the old babes are not to judge our liberty by their conscience.

Paul clearly admonishes in Hebrews 5 against remaining in a state of baby-hood, being perpetually stuck on repentance and things of conscience. Rather we are expected to grow to full age and finally learn the strong meat of discerning between right and wrong. That knowledge of strong meat is by Scripture, where we learn what God says sin is according to His law vs. what man says sin is according to their own conscience.

It is perfectly fine to have all the 'carnal ordinances' (Heb 9:10) we want in our personal lives with Jesus. However we are NOT to then proceed to forcing them, and ourselves on other believers, as though our great and grand holier-than-thou conscience were akin to God Himself. I say (by experience) there is absolutely nothing worse in the church than some pompous, self-righteous, better-Christian-than-you and great 'evangelizer' going about trying to ensure that as many believers as possible are enlightened and converted to their far-superior way of living for God...(Matthew 23:15) Afterall, isn't it Antichrist the Great that comes riding in on his whited horse to save your day, when you believed your day already was saved? (Rev 6)

"Not for that we have dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your for by faith ye stand." (2 Cor 1:24)

 

[Taken]

1. Satan's first lie on earth was a half-lie. He did directly contradict God in 'you shall not surely die'. But now the conversation had turned from what God said, to what Eve said, and so as pertaining to 'neither shall you touch it', the serpent was correct that they would not surely die. The devil's subtilty is half-lies and half-truths. If he had just come out and plainly said you will not die for eating it, they would have most likely rebuked him for it.

2. I believe it is all important for believers to understand that the first transgression, Adam's transgression, was proceeded by the first error of ministry. Yes, we are warned not to transgress God's command, but I believe it is clear that much transgression by believers is a direct result of false ministry. False prophets, apostles, teachers, and christs have been the greatest source of destruction in God's house and church, with the most amount of condemnation and warning from God. Afterall, she is called Babylon 'the Great'.

The first half-lie of the devil on earth was preceded by the first half-truth of the woman. The question before them was 'what did God say'. The answer of 'not eat of it, neither touch it' was only half true. One of the two, apparently Eve, added to His commandment 'neither shall you touch it', and the serpent had her. He used her own words against her. She then proceeded to transgress His commandment, not by touching it but by eating it. Why did she eat it in direction contradiction to God's command? Perhaps because she saw there was no death in touching it, and she believed 'not touching it' was part of God's command; therefore she was able to believe God must be lying also about not eating it.

I believe that when Eve reached out to take hold of the fruit, she was testing God's Word on the matter by touching it first. No death there, so no death in eating. That is the real danger of adding our, or others' own personal rules and things to God's Word, as though God actually said it Himself. Afterall, we are supposed to be living by faith in God and His Word. If we believe a lie about His Word, then our faith in Him will be corrupted, and our living for Him will then be corrupt. If we are living by faith...

I call it the sea-saw effect. If you add to, you will take away, because what goes up must come down.

Thanks for your reply.
We are pretty much on the same page.

God Bless,
Taken

 

[robert derrick]

Does Bible Contradict Itself?
OP^

- robert derrick -

Answer; No.
Page 1 of 2

The Bible is Book of "knowledge".
The "knowledge" IS: complied writings.
The "writings" ARE;
* Inspired - by God (in-spirited- By God)
The "writings" ARE;
* According TO; the person Who Heard and Saw.

Men "HEARD": the Word of God:
... In visions.
... From spirits (who have the POWER to Appear as things common to a earthly mans eyes).
... Earthly men "HEARD" other Earthly mens thoughts, expressed in their words.

Men "HEARD": the Word of God:
Which proclaimed: God Himself IS the
Creator and Maker of ALL things.

Men "SAW": the Creations of God:
... Earth, Water, Sky's, Stars, Sun, Moon, Plants, Fruits, Herbs, Animals, Man, Ores, Weather Effects, etc. ie. "kinds" of things.

From the get go TO THIS DAY:
No man, HAS Created or Made:
Gods "KIND" of things.

"Knowledge" IS One thing...
Then there "IS" the "UNDERSTANDING" of the "Knowledge".

Earthly men Are Created, out of their own Habitat (Earth).
What ARE the "ELEMENTS" of mankind Are the Same "ELEMENTS" of the Earth.
Thus...the mans Habitat, Earth, was Designed, TO SUSTAIN a mans LIFE.
(Ores, Minerals, Vitamins that ARE IN the Earth, come forth out of the Earth, into a man, that the mans NATURAL LIFE Physical LIFE, continues LIVING.)

That is "Knowledge" and a FORESHADOW of "additional Knowledge".

Earthly man, can Experiment, with Gods "Creations"..."and DID...and DOES".
Earth, Plants, Animals.
(Man sheltered in Caves, Ate Plants, Ate fruit, Ate Herbs, Built shelters from Trees, from Rock, Ate Animals, Made Clothing from Plants and Animals, Air Waves, Planting Seeds from Plants, Mixing Plants, Mixing Ores, etc.
(Discovering and Experimenting: the very basics of Science... First Taught... AND THE UNDERSTANDING "thereof"; First Given Men, Expressly BY God Himself.).

^ THAT also IS: a foreshadow. About the "UNDERSTANDING" of "KNOWLEDGE".

Knowledge...OF man; IS the mans Ability, to Receive Information and the Information become PROCESSED IN the mans;
CARNAL MIND.

Understanding....OF man: IS the mans Ability, to Receive Information IN his CARNAL MIND...and the CARNAL MIND; "LOGICALLY" assess BETWEEN...
two or more things for the mans most advantaged CHOICE.
* Here, a man "assesses" a favorable Advantage", Based ON his "LIMITED" Knowledge.
* As the mans "Knowledge" increases, the mans "Carnal Minded LOGICAL Conclusions", may Change at any moment.

The Foreshadowing: Of Gods "Understanding" (OVER a mans "understanding")

Ancient man was Directed (TOLD) to build.
"The Materials", were already Provided.
"The Understanding", of Precisely How and in What Manner to "assemble" the
Materials...Was:
Precisely "ACCORDING TO Gods Understanding".



* So ... HOW DOES an Earthly man...
NOT rely ON HIS "CARNAL MIND" to establish a "LOGICAL CONCLUSION" of "UNDERSTANDING"... and INSTEAD...
Receive and Rely ON:
Gods "Understanding" ?

The Foreshadow -
EXODUS 31:
[3] And I have filled him with the spirit of God , in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship...

The SPIRIT OF GOD!!!
The Fact...IS;
Earthly men Can SEE what God has Created.
Earthly men Can USE their Carnal Mind, to MAKE "logical conclusions" of Understanding...
However "Gods UNDERSTANDING", IS ONLY received unto an Earthy man...
BY the Spirit of God IN a man

Scripture..."Reiterates", Understanding OF Gods Word...IS ONLY given A MAN, By Gods SPIRIT, unto the man, BY Gods Giving.

Luke 24:
[45] Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures...

Simon Barajona's ability to Answer Jesus' Question...regarding WHO IS Jesus...and Simon answers; Jesus IS THE CHRIST...HOW DID Simon "KNOW"?
The Spirit of God, Gave Simon Gods Understanding...Jesus IS THE CHRIST

Matt: 16:
[17] And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Scripture ... WARNS:
Of Philosophers, (Carnal minded teaching).
Of Preachers, (Whose Teaching of Knowledge, CAN NOT be verified IN Scripture)

And THE HIGHLIGHT...
1) The "KNOWLEDGE" of Gods Word, IS Spoken, IS WRITTEN, for mankinds Advantage.
2) The "UNDERSTANDING" of Gods Word, IS Revealed Exclusively BY Gods Spirit.
3) The "UNDERSTANDING" of Gods Word, IS A GIFT, Expressly Given to a man, WHO Believes, Gods Word IS TRUE.

Man HAS Options, (freewill).
* Man can Hear Gods Word.
* Man can Read Gods Word.
* Man can Believe Gods Word...Doubt it, Wonder it, Deny it, Believe parts, Fear His Word, Embrace His Word...

There IS an itty bitty BLIP of very IMPORTANT "Scriptural" KNOWLEDGE...
Matt 17:
[17] So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

FAITH is a GIFT from God.....FOR HEARING the Word of God.

IF a man HEARS/reads, the Word of God, (even while believing, trusting, doubting, wondering, denying, believing some...)
That man IS being gifted, "MEASURES" of Gods gift of FAITH.
This IS "TASTING".
This IS "PARTAKING", in Gods Word.
This IS "PARTAKING", in Gods Gift of Faith.

Hear a LITTLE ..... Receive a Little Faith.
Stop Hearing....... Stop receiving Faith.
....Result, "Fallen from Faith".
Continue Hearing;
...Knowledge Increases; Faith Increases;
Belief Increases.

It is the individuals mans election: (freewill)...
To Continue Hearing, Increase Knowledge, Receive Increased Faith, his Belief Increases....and the Individual man...ELECTS TO... open his mouth and DECLARE ... "his Heartful Belief IN the Lord God Almighty".

FOR that ^ Confession...
AND FOR a man, Repenting of "Having HAD "Disbelief"...
That man...
IS Forgiven, (By the Lord God)
That man...
IS Given the Gift of the "FULLNESS" of Faith...
That man...
IS "MADE" changed, by the Power of God.
That man...
IS "KEPT" changed, by the Power of God.

We SEE, and HEAR..."understanding of men"...all day long, argue, debate, disagree...what and why...Something DOES or DOES NOT APPLY to a man.

ALL SCRIPTURE IS TRUE.
BUT ALL SCRIPTURE "DOES NOT APPLY"
TO EVERY MAN.

* Laws that Applies to Israel, may or may NOT Apply to a Gentile.
* Scripture that Appies to a man, may or may NOT Apply to a woman.
* Scripture that Applies to A Converted man, may or may NOT Apply to an UnConverted man.
* A Converted man IS FREE from Sin.
(He is NOT Sinless. He Can NOT continue to Commit Sin.)
His IS Forgiven his SIN.
His SIN IS Covered.
His SIN IS remembered no more (by God).
He can certainly TRESPASS Against men.
He can certainly FORGIVE men of Trespasses.
(And that DOES occur, "intentionally" and "unintentionally"....BECAUSE MEN DO NOT KNOW ALL THINGS.)
* What a man SHOULD have LEARNED, from GODS WORD...IS SIN IS AGAINST GOD...and ONLY GOD FORGIVES SIN.
* And BY the Spirit of God "within" a man, The Power of God, Gods Spirit IN A man, IS THE POWER that KEEPS a man FROM SINNING AGAINST GOD.
* And a man who Trespasses "AGAINST" a man...there are PRECEPTS...Scriptural teachings ON HOW TO handle "Trespasses" and "BEHAVIORS" "BETWEEN" men.
* THE Consequence;
For Trespasses (and behaviors) BETWEEN men,,,
1)...Any man who DOES as Gods Word Teaches...IS a Trespass God forgives.
2)...BUT WARNING...men HAVE THEIR OWN Consequences for Trespassing and behaviors..."Against them"...
(May be arrested, sued, May...instigate a physical beating, a drive by, a slander vendetta, etc.)

And Scriptural Knowledge says:
Gal 6:
[5] ... every man shall bear his own burden.

Every man...HAS FREEWILL...
* He can Hear, Learn, Continue TO ACCEPT Gods Word...or Reject it.
* He can Hear, Learn, Continue TO ACCEPT
Mans Word...or Reject it.
* Gods Inspired Word of Knowledge expressly Reveals "the Consequence" of ACCEPTING Gods Word and Gods Understanding, IS Favorable For TWO things;
1) Avoiding Gods Wrath.
2) Eternal LIFE "WITH" the Lord God.
* Gods Inspired Word of Knowledge expressly Reveal "the Consequence" of
ACCEPTING mans word and mans understanding, (over Gods Word and Gods Understanding)... IS unfavorable For Two things:
1) Subjection to Gods Wrath.
2) Rejection of Receiving Eternal LIFE "with" God.

I.e. God spoke and they wrote...

 

[robert derrick]

It would seem that way. Yes it is the trial of our new born again faith. .The believing power of the gospel that works in us with us.

In regard to that un-redeemed mankind is reckoned as faithless, no faith not little none. Believers are reckoned as little faith as in He our faithful Creator must increase as we continually decrease.

Faith the treasure we guard in our new hearts that we have in these earthen bodies (2 Corinthians 4:18)

We defend it as putting on the armorof God and not taking it off .It defends us as just as the Father defends the Son two working as one.

No armor for the rear. He is our rear guard.

Nicola tans interesting doctrine .I would offer.


The sect or denomination called the Nicolaitans under the leadership of Nicolas.

They were glorying in the flesh of their leader who did preach the gospel. It would seem some trusted in Nicolas the apostle,( sent one) who was preaching the gospel.

We are informed that we can plant the incorruptible seed the word of God and water it with the doctrines of God that fall like rain But Christ does the forming of new spirit life and a new desire. The apostles/prophets are considered as nothing, having little faith coming from the same storeroom of faith. . . “The glory of God”

The Holy Spirit repenting them wooing them by reminding them of first work Christ performed in them, their first love or experience hearing and believing God not seen

They returned hopefully with Nicolas.

A loving warning to all the denominations to put on the prescribed armor. What I would call the 20/20 safety glasses

(2 Corinthians 4:18) While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

Again to all believers 7 churches the loving warning. . Let him who has ears to hear the understanding of our invisible God the faithful and true one . . . to him alone all glory is due.

If there was a leader or founder of the Nicolaitans, then we know for sure he was a false one who produced some particularly hateful followers, who's doctrine and deeds the Lord Himself hated.

My look to Nicolas the proselyte is because he was one of several faithful men appointed over the 'business' of serving tables to the widows.

My own experience saw the ministry over time turned into a business for profit. I am not talking about T.V donation drives nor healing circuses. What I mean is a literal business, the 'people business', where soulwinning is turned into a zealous church recruitment program, which produced more tithes and offerings to the leadership. And to seal the deal, member retention was based upon that church organization being the truly most righteous and legitimate of God's churches. And like a cult, if you even visited other churches, you were suspect of following away from God. The justification for this 'business', which included much time as 'fellowship tables' after services, was that Jesus called the ministry the Father's business...

1. Nicolas (Nike Laos) means "victory over the common people', which is not at all like Nicodemas (Nike Demos), which is 'victory of the citizenry'. An antichrist as in Rev 6, comes in conquering souls: Nike.

2. He was appointed over a business in the ministry, particularly of serving tables.

3. He was also a proselyte, which efforts Jesus condemned (Matthew 23:15). While there were many proselytes mentioned in the Church, it is still notable that Nicolas is singled out by Scripture as one in particular.

So, taking these three things together, it is not a far leap for me to think Nicolas may have proceeded over time to turn the whole ministerial service of tables into a profit-making and personal proselytizing group. A profit making business of a Great Founding Leader, who's doctrinal hold over them is accompanied by a zealous church-work program of 'soulwinning' deeds. Sort of like Babylon the Great.

A founder of doctrine and deeds that Jesus never gave to His apostles. Also note that an antichrist is someone who comes out of the doctrine and fellowship of the apostles (1John 2:19) to establish his own doctrine and church program for personal power and benefit.

What i learned out of it all? The Father's business is not the people business, but the loving people business...

 

[robert derrick]

There is at least one possible answer to the charge of contradiction of Scripture.

The true record of the events on the road to Damascus are given by God to Luke in Acts 9. Unless Luke was mistaken by not writing exactly what God told Him--which means ALL the Bible is not necessarily Scripture of God--then the men with Paul did hear a voice as is written (v 7). The lesson about Scripture is that it is inspired of God, not the accounting and hearsay of men. Luke plainly did not write Ch 9 as an account he had heard from Paul.

Likewise the true record of the events in Acts 20 was recorded by Luke from God of what Paul said happened with those with him. And the real question here is how did Paul know what happened with them?

It was evident to him that they saw the light, because he saw them standing afraid, or speechless as God said in Ch 9. But how could Paul have possibly known what they heard or not? We can be at the same event and see the same things and can see the reactions of others, but we cannot be sure what another heard, except we ask them, or they volunteer to tell us.

It is certain therefore as they were leading Paul by hand to Damascus that Paul did ask them if they also heard the Lord, which would have been natural to do, and unnatural not to. We know they told Paul something about it; otherwise, he would not have known one way or the other, and would have said so.

And so, Paul told the lynch mob what he believed: that they did not hear the voice. Why? Because they told him so and lied about it. And we know they lied about it to Paul, because God said they did hear His Son's voice in 9:7.

2 things come of this definite possibility:
1. The question about what happened to the men with Paul afterward, certainly includes the fact that they were not converted when Paul did, else they would not have lied about not hearing the voice. They chose to remain loyal to the leading persecuting Jews at that time, and if any did later repent, then they did not have the chance to tell Paul the truth before Ch 22.

2. Paul was such an honest man, that when it would have been near life-saving to lie about them hearing, he did not. He told the murderous Jews what he believed to be the truth.

And so, this may or may not be true, and Scripture does not confirm nor deny it; however, it certainly is possible and thus an viable explanation that rejects a certain contradiction of Scripture.

Remember, there is a certain contradiction only if there is no reasonable possibility otherwise. People can choose not to believe all the Bible is Scripture if they want. That is simple unbelief. But and if they also choose to believe a contradiction here and reject any possibility otherwise, then that is willful antagonism to Scripture and plain intellectual dishonesty and childishness.

With such there is no reasonable conversation of God and the Bible. "An heretic after the first and second admonition reject.: (Titus 3:10)

 

[Gary Urban]

There is at least one possible answer to the charge of contradiction of Scripture.

The true record of the events on the road to Damascus are given by God to Luke in Acts 9. Unless Luke was mistaken by not writing exactly what God told Him--which means ALL the Bible is not necessarily Scripture of God--then the men with Paul did hear a voice as is written (v 7). The lesson about Scripture is that it is inspired of God, not the accounting and hearsay of men. Luke plainly did not write Ch 9 as an account he had heard from Paul.

Likewise the true record of the events in Acts 20 was recorded by Luke from God of what Paul said happened with those with him. And the real question here is how did Paul know what happened with them?

It was evident to him that they saw the light, because he saw them standing afraid, or speechless as God said in Ch 9. But how could Paul have possibly known what they heard or not? We can be at the same event and see the same things and can see the reactions of others, but we cannot be sure what another heard, except we ask them, or they volunteer to tell us.

It is certain therefore as they were leading Paul by hand to Damascus that Paul did ask them if they also heard the Lord, which would have been natural to do, and unnatural not to. We know they told Paul something about it; otherwise, he would not have known one way or the other, and would have said so.

And so, Paul told the lynch mob what he believed: that they did not hear the voice. Why? Because they told him so and lied about it. And we know they lied about it to Paul, because God said they did hear His Son's voice in 9:7.

2 things come of this definite possibility:
1. The question about what happened to the men with Paul afterward, certainly includes the fact that they were not converted when Paul did, else they would not have lied about not hearing the voice. They chose to remain loyal to the leading persecuting Jews at that time, and if any did later repent, then they did not have the chance to tell Paul the truth before Ch 22.

2. Paul was such an honest man, that when it would have been near life-saving to lie about them hearing, he did not. He told the murderous Jews what he believed to be the truth.

And so, this may or may not be true, and Scripture does not confirm nor deny it; however, it certainly is possible and thus an viable explanation that rejects a certain contradiction of Scripture.

Remember, there is a certain contradiction only if there is no reasonable possibility otherwise. People can choose not to believe all the Bible is Scripture if they want. That is simple unbelief. But and if they also choose to believe a contradiction here and reject any possibility otherwise, then that is willful antagonism to Scripture and plain intellectual dishonesty and childishness.

With such there is no reasonable conversation of God and the Bible. "An heretic after the first and second admonition reject.: (Titus 3:10)

Thanks for that. . great way of sharing.

Hearing the gospel and being empowered to believe I think are two different things . we can plant the incoruptible seed and water it but Christ must cause the growth if any . the apotles are considered nothing when it comes to growth .How beatiful are the feet shod with the gospel of the peace of the Father and Son

It’s like the group that walked after what the eyes see and not moved from within. Dead works, a assumed work of human faith toward God. Dead faithless works coming from a corrupted creation.

And the other group. Christ in us working to both will and empower (faith)to do his good pleasure . They who walked after the flesh turned things upside down .The other group receiving the promise that our Father will not forget the good works we offer towards his power Making our burden lighter yoked with him .

Think it would apply to the Nicolaitan sect , the loving call to repentance at the end of each rebuke “let him who has ears hear to hear the understanding of the Spirit .it could of included Nichole .The bible does not give that detail




Hebrew 4:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Hebrew 4:9-10 But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak. For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love, which ye have shewed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister.

Same applies with the parable in Luke 16 “No man can serve two teaching masters “.

1# disembodied workers with familiar spirits (necromancy) the dead empowering the living.

2# all things written in the law and the prophets (sola scriptura. )

In the end the Holy Spirit in effect replied. . if they are not trusting sola scriptural as the authority to believe God as it is written then they will not believe even when Jesus arises from the dead . Faith does not come by seeing the temporal corrupted things seen.

We have the power of that treasure in these earthen bodies but that power of faith is of God.

 

[Enoch111]

And so, Paul told the lynch mob what he believed: that they did not hear the voice. Why? Because they told him so and lied about it. And we know they lied about it to Paul, because God said they did hear His Son's voice in 9:7.

How do you know they "lied about it"? Why are you trying to make up your own scenarios about what happened or did not happen? Just like the four Gospels, one has to harmonize different accounts in Scripture.

So let's take another look at this account: And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man. (Acts 9:7)...And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice [the actual words voiced] of him that spake to me. (Acts 22:9)

How should one reconcile this? Saul heard the actual words of Christ, but the men surrounding him simply heard THE SOUND of that voice. The words were hidden from them, since they were specifically for Saul. No one lied. There are times when we can hear the sound of voices without understanding a word that is being said. That is exactly what Christ did at this time. The Greek word phone in Acts 22:9 can means either a sound or an actual language.

Strong's Concordance
phóné: a voice, sound
Original Word: φωνή, ῆς, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: phóné
Phonetic Spelling: (fo-nay')
Definition: a voice, sound
Usage: a sound, noise, voice, language, dialect.

 

[Taken]

There is at least one possible answer to the charge of contradiction of Scripture.

Looking back (ancient history).
* God commanded Moses to Write, things Moses Heard and Saw.
* God further commanded Moses to, give the younger, the Same written Knowledge, Verbally in the younger's Ears.

Ex 17:14
[14] And the LORD said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua...

Looking back (ancient history).
Copy's made, distributed.

Deut 17:18
[18] And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites:

Looking back (ancient history).
"Preserving" Written Scripture...
Was a "Constant" Task;
Keeping it Available...
* While Hiding it from "others desiring to Destroy" the Writings...
* Consider the Paper itself, subject to the element of natural deterioration...
* Consider the Recopying, and Updating AS another Prophet was given MORE knowledge from God...
* Consider the Additional Copies of Updating, to be Distributed to the (Levite) Priests, and forward to the Tribes.
* Consider the Scribes, ability of Writing, word for word what they Heard.
* Consider the words used BY men, to Express a Contextual Truth, in a Language the Listener could relate to and comprehend, "without" corrupting the literal knowledge.

* WE KNOW...writing material was unstable to be preserved for Centuries.
* WE KNOW...kings of authority and means of power, at times, burned and destroyed sacred writings.
* WE KNOW...facts of Gods TRUTHFUL Knowledge, IS spoken BY individual MEN, BY "different words" of individual MEN, with intent TO KEEP the integrity of Gods TRUTHFUL Knowledge intact.

* Burnings of the "rolls" (sacred writings)...
Occured...
BY Enemies of ISRAEL/Tribes: Gentile Kings.
"AND" (as well ...
BY Corrupt ( Tribal kings of ISRAEL). Jews.

* Example: Tribal king of ISRAEL,
king Jehoiakim the king of Judah...
Burned sacred writings.

* Such writings were given TO Prophet Jeremiah, (via God).
* The Specific Scribe who Wrote What Jeremiah Said, was called: Baruch.

Gods INSTRUCTION, to Jeremiah was TO:
"REWRITE the roll, (by Jeremiah's Speech and Baruch's Writing) that king Jehoiakim (of Judah) ordered burned.

So... DID Jeremiah SPEAK "word for word", From Memory, what had been written, but was burned?
No.

Prophet Jeremiah SPOKE Gods Truthful Knowledge, "in Jeremiah's own words", KEEPING Gods Truthful Knowledge intact.
And Baruch (the Scribe) rewrote what Prophet Jeremiah Spoke.

The Account is Recorded in:
The Book of Jeremiah, 36: 1-32

The Point is; We have no way to KNOW, IF every Word God gave to men, VIA;
* Visions, Dreams, Angels Appearing as Men, the Word of God Appearing as a Man...
* IF such Words ARE Written "Word for Word" out of Gods Mouth...TO men...Recorded BY men on Paper.
* What WE TRUST, IS Gods "TRUE" Knowledge IS Revealed to US, "by" the Devine Authority of God, IN and WITH men, "according to" such mens, own words.

Jer 36:
[27] Then the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah, after that the king had burned the roll, and the words which Baruch wrote at the mouth of Jeremiah, saying,
[28] Take thee again another roll, and write in it all the former words that were in the first roll, which Jehoiakim the king of Judah hath burned.

[32] Then took Jeremiah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah; who wrote therein from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire: and there were added besides unto them many like words.

Every Prophet;
Every Disciple;
Every Apostle;
Speaking the SAME EXACT WORDS? Doubtful.
Every Scribe;
Writing the SAME EXACT WORDS? Doubtful.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Gary Urban]

How do you know they "lied about it"? Why are you trying to make up your own scenarios about what happened or did not happen? Just like the four Gospels, one has to harmonize different accounts in Scripture.

So let's take another look at this account: And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man. (Acts 9:7)...And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice [the actual words voiced] of him that spake to me. (Acts 22:9)

How should one reconcile this? Saul heard the actual words of Christ, but the men surrounding him simply heard THE SOUND of that voice. The words were hidden from them, since they were specifically for Saul. No one lied. There are times when we can hear the sound of voices without understanding a word that is being said. That is exactly what Christ did at this time. The Greek word phone in Acts 22:9 can means either a sound or an actual language.


Strong's Concordance
phóné: a voice, sound
Original Word: φωνή, ῆς, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: phóné
Phonetic Spelling: (fo-nay')
Definition: a voice, sound
Usage: a sound, noise, voice, language, dialect.

I would agree the meaning or understanding of the parable was hid from them . In the same way it was hid from Peter in the parable in Mathew 17 .They heard the voice and saw the glory of God but did not mix faith the unseen will of God .

Matthew 17:4 Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.

It was not seeing what was there the signified understanding using of Moses and Elias to represent the witness of God word (sola scriptura)

 

[robert derrick]

How do you know they "lied about it"? Why are you trying to make up your own scenarios about what happened or did not happen? Just like the four Gospels, one has to harmonize different accounts in Scripture.

So let's take another look at this account: And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man. (Acts 9:7)...And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice [the actual words voiced] of him that spake to me. (Acts 22:9)

How should one reconcile this? Saul heard the actual words of Christ, but the men surrounding him simply heard THE SOUND of that voice. The words were hidden from them, since they were specifically for Saul. No one lied. There are times when we can hear the sound of voices without understanding a word that is being said. That is exactly what Christ did at this time. The Greek word phone in Acts 22:9 can means either a sound or an actual language.

Strong's Concordance
phóné: a voice, sound
Original Word: φωνή, ῆς, ἡ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine
Transliteration: phóné
Phonetic Spelling: (fo-nay')
Definition: a voice, sound
Usage: a sound, noise, voice, language, dialect.

Thanks, that is a new one for me.

1. Are you saying my explanation is not possible at all?

My effort is to disprove a claim of contradiction by offering a reasonable possibility of explanation to the contrary; not to prove the possibility as fact. I never said I know for a fact they lied. I have only offered it is a reasonable possibility, because such a possibility is all that is required to disprove a charge of contradiction.

(You might also consider the foolishness of Paul getting caught up in a nuance of 'hearing' vs 'understanding', in the midst of a trial for his life before an enraged and murderous lynch mob. You wouldn't do that, and neither did he)

2. Your effort of retranslation is the same as inserting 'understood not the voice' in Ch 22, by saying 'heard not what was voiced'. (As you said, understood not what a word that was indeed heard)

That simply doesnt fly, because you are purposely translating differently the same words 'hear' and 'voice' that are in both Scriptures (Akouή and Phonή). To be consistent, i.e. intellectually honest as a purely objective translator, you must translate both verses the same: 'understood the voice' or 'heard what was voiced' in the first, vs. 'understood not the voice' or 'heard not what was voiced' in the second.

In either case of translation, the apparent contradiction between the 2 verses is the word 'not' (ouk).

I simply offer a possible explanation to deny the contradiction, without getting myself tangled up in forced retranslations. A genuine sceptic of Scripture, that is taking seriously a rebuttal to his claim of contradiction, would not accept your effort as accurate nor even reasonable. Whereas, the same person must accept at least the possibility of mine in order to remain honest in the debate.

(This is another case, where I believe 'going to the original language' can be more damaging than helpful. With my possible explanation it is not necessary.)

 

[robert derrick]

Looking back (ancient history).
* God commanded Moses to Write, things Moses Heard and Saw.
* God further commanded Moses to, give the younger, the Same written Knowledge, Verbally in the younger's Ears.

Ex 17:14
[14] And the LORD said unto Moses, Write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of Joshua...

Looking back (ancient history).
Copy's made, distributed.

Deut 17:18
[18] And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book out of that which is before the priests the Levites:

Looking back (ancient history).
"Preserving" Written Scripture...
Was a "Constant" Task;
Keeping it Available...
* While Hiding it from "others desiring to Destroy" the Writings...
* Consider the Paper itself, subject to the element of natural deterioration...
* Consider the Recopying, and Updating AS another Prophet was given MORE knowledge from God...
* Consider the Additional Copies of Updating, to be Distributed to the (Levite) Priests, and forward to the Tribes.
* Consider the Scribes, ability of Writing, word for word what they Heard.
* Consider the words used BY men, to Express a Contextual Truth, in a Language the Listener could relate to and comprehend, "without" corrupting the literal knowledge.

* WE KNOW...writing material was unstable to be preserved for Centuries.
* WE KNOW...kings of authority and means of power, at times, burned and destroyed sacred writings.
* WE KNOW...facts of Gods TRUTHFUL Knowledge, IS spoken BY individual MEN, BY "different words" of individual MEN, with intent TO KEEP the integrity of Gods TRUTHFUL Knowledge intact.

* Burnings of the "rolls" (sacred writings)...
Occured...
BY Enemies of ISRAEL/Tribes: Gentile Kings.
"AND" (as well ...
BY Corrupt ( Tribal kings of ISRAEL). Jews.

* Example: Tribal king of ISRAEL,
king Jehoiakim the king of Judah...
Burned sacred writings.

* Such writings were given TO Prophet Jeremiah, (via God).
* The Specific Scribe who Wrote What Jeremiah Said, was called: Baruch.

Gods INSTRUCTION, to Jeremiah was TO:
"REWRITE the roll, (by Jeremiah's Speech and Baruch's Writing) that king Jehoiakim (of Judah) ordered burned.

So... DID Jeremiah SPEAK "word for word", From Memory, what had been written, but was burned?
No.

Prophet Jeremiah SPOKE Gods Truthful Knowledge, "in Jeremiah's own words", KEEPING Gods Truthful Knowledge intact.
And Baruch (the Scribe) rewrote what Prophet Jeremiah Spoke.

The Account is Recorded in:
The Book of Jeremiah, 36: 1-32

The Point is; We have no way to KNOW, IF every Word God gave to men, VIA;
* Visions, Dreams, Angels Appearing as Men, the Word of God Appearing as a Man...
* IF such Words ARE Written "Word for Word" out of Gods Mouth...TO men...Recorded BY men on Paper.
* What WE TRUST, IS Gods "TRUE" Knowledge IS Revealed to US, "by" the Devine Authority of God, IN and WITH men, "according to" such mens, own words.

Jer 36:
[27] Then the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah, after that the king had burned the roll, and the words which Baruch wrote at the mouth of Jeremiah, saying,
[28] Take thee again another roll, and write in it all the former words that were in the first roll, which Jehoiakim the king of Judah hath burned.

[32] Then took Jeremiah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah; who wrote therein from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire: and there were added besides unto them many like words.

Every Prophet;
Every Disciple;
Every Apostle;
Speaking the SAME EXACT WORDS? Doubtful.
Every Scribe;
Writing the SAME EXACT WORDS? Doubtful.

Glory to God,
Taken

If I get you correctly, you are saying the words penned by prophets and apostles have the inspired knowledge of God, without necessarily having the exact words of God? Especially when writing down what they saw on earth or in visions from heaven?

1. I suppose that could be the case, but only in descriptions of what is seen in person or in vision and what is heard in sound. The former does not include words seen (such as Daniel seeing the writing on the wall), and the latter is such as describing a 'rushing mighty wind...'

2. However, in cases of God's own voice given to write, such as in doctrine and law, it is not acceptable to believe just a knowledge, or general idea was imparted, without the actual words from God to codify them on paper. Scripture being "given by inspiration of God' (2 Tim 3:16) and "holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost" (2 Peter 1:21), implies a certain knowledge by the writer of what God said word for word by His Spirit.

This is confirmed by Jesus: Man shall live "by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God." Every word out of His mouth, not just some knowledge imparted...

This is demonstrated by the first error of ministry with Eve. She gave a general knowledge or idea of the commandment of God, but because it was not the exact words of God's mouth, then a great transgression occurred by her and Adam.

And so in all cases of prophets and apostles writing what God told them to write, it must be the exact words out of His mouth, in order for Scripture to be imparted accurately to us.

And in the case at hand, that is true. God is giving Luke the exact words to write about exactly what happened with Paul and the men with him, as well as the exact words of God are given to Luke pertaining to the accounting of Paul later on. Luke is not just giving us a general idea of what happened. And it is God who knows exactly what did happen in both cases.

 

[robert derrick]

I would agree the meaning or understanding of the parable was hid from them . In the same way it was hid from Peter in the parable in Mathew 17 .They heard the voice and saw the glory of God but did not mix faith the unseen will of God .

Matthew 17:4 Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.

It was not seeing what was there the signified understanding using of Moses and Elias to represent the witness of God word (sola scriptura)

Agreed, perhaps they did not know what they saw, nor understood what they heard, but it is Scripture fact that they did see a light and did hear a voice, and that by Paul's testimony he knew they saw a light, but believed they did not hearing anything at all...

 

[Taken]

If I get you correctly, you are saying the words penned by prophets and apostles have the inspired knowledge of God, without necessarily having the exact words of God? Especially when writing down what they saw on earth or in visions from heaven?

1. I suppose that could be the case, but only in descriptions of what is seen in person or in vision and what is heard in sound. The former does not include words seen (such as Daniel seeing the writing on the wall), and the latter is such as describing a 'rushing mighty wind...'

2. However, in cases of God's own voice given to write, such as in doctrine and law, it is not acceptable to believe just a knowledge, or general idea was imparted, without the actual words from God to codify them on paper. Scripture being "given by inspiration of God' (2 Tim 3:16) and "holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost" (2 Peter 1:21), implies a certain knowledge by the writer of what God said word for word by His Spirit.

This is confirmed by Jesus: Man shall live "by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God." Every word out of His mouth, not just some knowledge imparted...

This is demonstrated by the first error of ministry with Eve. She gave a general knowledge or idea of the commandment of God, but because it was not the exact words of God's mouth, then a great transgression occurred by her and Adam.

And so in all cases of prophets and apostles writing what God told them to write, it must be the exact words out of His mouth, in order for Scripture to be imparted accurately to us.

And in the case at hand, that is true. God is giving Luke the exact words to write about exactly what happened with Paul and the men with him, as well as the exact words of God are given to Luke pertaining to the accounting of Paul later on. Luke is not just giving us a general idea of what happened. And it is God who knows exactly what did happen in both cases.

Men can speak what they saw and heard, in theirs own words.
Each of the four gospels are According TO the speaker.
And there is The work of the Holy Spirit to put the words in their mouth.

 

[robert derrick]

Men can speak what they saw and heard, in theirs own words.
Each of the four gospels are According TO the speaker.
And there is The work of the Holy Spirit to put the words in their mouth.

I would say that in 'their own words' would be ok, so long as they did not conflict with God's words in the rest of the Bible.

You also agree that even in 'descriptions' the Holy Spirit is there to guide them in how to say it.

And so, each of the 4 gospels are written according to the observer's perspective, with help from the Holy Spirit to remember it right, and to get it right?

I am more than willing to agree that prophets and apostles were allowed latitude, with the guiding help of the Spirit, to 'describe' things seen and heard in their own words, which makes the Bible even more real for us humans, even as they were human.

However, that does not apply to doctrine and law, which must be written by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. Doctrine and law are not generalized on paper, but codified distinctly and literally.

As Nehemiah 8:8 says, "They read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading."

(This also happens to be the Scripture from which I believe God is also the Author of all natural and common sense. Interpretation of Scripture must always agree with common sense of what is written. No personal agendas, no aged ideas and ideals, but simple reading and understanding of what is actually written. Sort of like a child, who has no personal axe to grind, nor agenda to promote. I.e., we should always come to our reading of Scripture as a little child (Mark 10:15), with a blank slate of mind, and heart to simply take in what God has said, without any preconceived notions, ideas, learning, etc... Not a so-simple and easy task sometimes)

 

[Taken]

I would say that in 'their own words' would be ok, so long as they did not conflict with God's words in the rest of the Bible.

Correct.

And so, each of the 4 gospels are written according to the observer's perspective, with help from the Holy Spirit to remember it right, and to get it right?

Correct.

I am more than willing to agree that prophets and apostles were allowed latitude, with the guiding help of the Spirit, to 'describe' things seen and heard in their own words, which makes the Bible even more real for us humans, even as they were human.

Agree.

However, that does not apply to doctrine and law, which must be written by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. Doctrine and law are not generalized on paper, but codified distinctly and literally.

Correct. Not our job to rewrite Scripture.

(This also happens to be the Scripture from which I believe God is also the Author of all natural and common sense. Interpretation of Scripture must always agree with common sense of what is written. No personal agendas, no aged ideas and ideals, but simple reading and understanding of what is actually written. Sort of like a child, who has no personal axe to grind, nor agenda to promote. I.e., we should always come to our reading of Scripture as a little child (Mark 10:15), with a blank slate of mind, and heart to simply take in what God has said, without any preconceived notions, ideas, learning, etc... Not a so-simple and easy task sometimes)

I believe there are two "understandings" of Scripture.
A) earthly mankind's understanding.
B) Gods understanding.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[robert derrick]

[QUOTE="Taken, post: 1004344, member: 7756"
I believe there are two "understandings" of Scripture.
A) earthly mankind's understanding.
B) Gods understanding.

Glory to God,
Taken[/QUOTE]
True. We now see through a glass darkly. However, I also believe that God gives equal inspiration to prophets and apostles to write His Word and to us that read to understand what is written.

I see no reason why we cannot be as perfect in understanding of all things that Luke laid claim to.

In fact, I would say we have an advantage: When the prophets and apostles wrote Scripture for God, they did not have access to all Scripture of the Bible, as we do...(And it is confirmed that the writers themselves did not have full understanding of what they were writing.)

 

[Taken]

[QUOTE="Taken, post: 1004344, member: 7756"
I believe there are two "understandings" of Scripture.
A) earthly mankind's understanding.
B) Gods understanding.

Glory to God,
Taken

True. We now see through a glass darkly. However, I also believe that God gives equal inspiration to prophets and apostles to write His Word and to us that read to understand what is written.

I see no reason why we cannot be as perfect in understanding of all things that Luke laid claim to.

In fact, I would say we have an advantage: When the prophets and apostles wrote Scripture for God, they did not have access to all Scripture of the Bible, as we do...(And it is confirmed that the writers themselves did not have full understanding of what they were writing.)[/QUOTE]

I believe Every Earthly man is an Individual.
Thousands of thoughts are within a mans Mind, unknown to other men, less the individual mans expels his thoughts in Expression, Verbally or A groan (indistinct) sound, or A Facial Expression.

The thousands of thoughts unexpressed are known only to that Individual man AND God.
So, in the Big Scheme of things, NO, I do not believe, God "TREATS" every man "EQUALLY", but rather, God "TREATS" every man ACCORDING TO that which Occupies a mans "THOUGHTS".

Certainly as we Observe Jesus Selected Disciples, each man an Individual, each man Different in their own thoughts, AND Efforts.
A denier, A doubter, A rejector, A meek, A highly Educated in Jewish Law, Leadership qualities, follower qualities, etc.

Point being, men Appointed Position and Titles and Tasks does not automatically mean "equal" in capable talent.

The Disciples/ Apostles, were given Exponential masses of Knowledge, in the Three years Daily and Long Hours of the Days they Personally Spent with Jesus.
So much Knowledge IN FACT, Scripture says:

John 20:
[30] And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:

John 21:
[25] And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

Just saying, There is So Much Knowledge, About the Lord God, NOT REVEALED TO US,
While, Interesting, NOT NECESSARY FOR US TO KNOW, To Become MADE His People. And He Our Lord God Almighty.

And the Knowledge of that Which "IS" recorded, written, published For our Benefit, "IS", for every Individual man to Decide HOW much of his own "thoughts and efforts" he chooses to diligently focus on.

And the Understanding of that Which "IS" heard, learned, studied, by an Individual...
I believe is directly proportionate to the "UNDERSTANDING" (of that Knowledge, According to God), is Given a man, BY God.

In short. God gives Understanding of Scriptures to Individual (Spiritual ) men.

A Carnal mans Understanding of Scripture, IS, opinions and private interpretation.

 

[michaelvpardo]

I have heard stories of people like doctors and lawyers who set out to prove the Bible is false, because it contradicts itself at times, and they end of being believers, because they ultimately saw none.

The first time I had sure knowledge, and not just wishful ideas, that there is a God in heaven, was when I also came to this conclusion as an amateur historian. And so from my heart I knew if the Bible said it, it's true, and If the Bible says that Jesus is Lord, it's true. Whether I knew Him personally or not, was not the point. I just began to know, at least with my mind, that Jesus is Lord.

I believe God has written His Word in such a way as to ensnare those who would believe the Bible is not His written Word, by readily seeing or agreeing that there is a contradiction in it. It is how He takes the so-called 'wise' in their own craftiness (1 Cor 3:19) He exposes both their lack of faith as well as intelligence.

For their to be a true contradiction in anything, then there cannot be any reasonable nor possible explanation to the contrary. Or rather, no way to reconcile the two things contradicting each other. Such as 1 + 1=2, and 1+1=3.

I was once challenged with this supposed contradiction:

On the one hand Scripture says the men with Paul stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man. (Acts 9:7) And on the other hand Scripture quotes Paul saying plainly that the others with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spoke to me. (Acts 22:9)

Apparently they agree they saw the light and stood speechless and were afraid, but did they or did they not hear a voice?

I admit it had me stumped for quite a while, but since by faith I refused to believe there is in fact a contradiction in the Bible. So, I stayed at, until I finally saw the light.

Actually there are verses that do appear contradictory but are reconciled by doctrinal understanding. For example, in the book of Genesis we find a passage where Abraham is commanded to take Isaac to the land of Moriah and offer him as a burnt offering. The angel of the Lord stays Abraham's hand before he takes Isaac's life and says to him, "And He said, “Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.” Genesis 22:12
We know from the same book that Abraham had another son, Ishmael, who was the child of Hagar, an Egyptian woman that served Sarah, and who was born years before Isaac. The JPS Tannach, an approved Jewish modern translation of the Old Testament resolves the "error" by translating "your only son" as " your favored son", but Christian theologians resolve the contradiction by identifying Isaac as "the son of promise" and the "legitimate heir."
There are many verses that appear to contradict one another, but can be resolved by understanding the "spiritual " meaning of the verses, the true doctrines being taught.

 

[michaelvpardo]

I do.
When some translations say Mary was a "good woman" and don't mention she was a virgin.
I also question some translations when they deleted the last verse of the prayer Jesus told us to pray.....

The "good woman" argument is over linking the Greek from the NT passages to the Hebrew of Isaiah's prophecy "the virgin shall give birth". Jewish translations use young woman rather than virgin and claim that the word translated doesn't imply virginity.

 

[michaelvpardo]

And many have PRINT THAT IS WAY TOO LITTLE !

Using reading glasses AND A MAGNIFYING GLASS - I can make out the two NIV's I have

That's why it's nice to have digital copies that allow you to change font size.