The Bible: One of the Believer's Biggest Problems

[Truth OT]

The Bible presents a very broad general narrative many believe and have built varying beliefs systems around. Yet, the book is very ambiguous, at times contradictory, and downright confusing regarding numerous religious subjects that would appear to be of upmost importance. Such ambiguity appears to clearly demonstrate that the writings are the musings of men, however, many still attribute its contents to a deity figure. Why?!

Let me point out just a few of the issues of contention below:

1. The plan of salvation
- By grace thru faith alone (Romans 10:9-10)?
- Repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38)?
- is baptism immersion?
- is baptism simply sprinkling

2. The role of the church vs. Sola Scriptura

3. Should any part of the OT Law be kept? (Matthew 5:18)

4. Apostolic succession and the Papacy (Matthew 16:18)

5. Dispensationalism vs. Amillennialism vs. Preterism
- with each able to use scripture in some form or fashion to support what they promote

These are but a few internal issues a couple thousand years have not been able to provide clarify on and there are many others. Again, with such doubletalk and ambiguity, WHY Oh WHY would it not be obvious that human authorship is all over the pages. The Bible is just so..................... human

 

[atpollard]

1. The plan of salvation
- By grace thru faith alone (Romans 10:9-10)?
- Repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38)?
- is baptism immersion?
- is baptism simply sprinkling

THIS (salvation) is the ONLY issue on your list of “upmost importance”.
Salvation is “by grace through faith alone” [and not of works lest any man boast] (Ephesians 2:1-10) and it is through “repentance and baptism”. They are two sides of the same coin. One side describes how God saves people and the other side describes how people respond to the “touch” of God.

The mode of baptism is not an “essential”, it ranks up there with agreeing that “breakfast is the most important meal of the day” and then arguing over what to have for breakfast. “Eating” vs “not eating” is important, the choice of “what” is secondary. In the same way, “repenting” vs “not repenting” is important, the details of the external response are secondary to the REALITY of the internal change.

The “conflict” is manufactured smoke-and-mirrors mumbo-jumbo. A mist giving the appearance of reality, but having no real substance.

 

[atpollard]

Such ambiguity appears to clearly demonstrate that the writings are the musings of men, however, many still attribute its contents to a deity figure. Why?!

When Moses wrote Genesis 3:15 thousands of years ago, making things up out of whole cloth as men do, what insanity possessed him to claim that the one to right the wrong would be from the SPERM of the woman? (The literal meaning of “her seed”).

How freaky is it that thousands of years later people started claiming that a virgin had given birth and dying rather than admit that they made it up. Clearly there can’t be anything to this God speaking through the Bible, since men disagree on the role of traditions in the church.

Agnostics.

 

[Curtis]

When Moses wrote Genesis 3:15 thousands of years ago, making things up out of whole cloth as men do, what insanity possessed him to claim that the one to right the wrong would be from the SPERM of the woman? (The literal meaning of “her seed”).

How freaky is it that thousands of years later people started claiming that a virgin had given birth and dying rather than admit that they made it up. Clearly there can’t be anything to this God speaking through the Bible, since men disagree on the role of traditions in the church.

Agnostics.

Jesus taught the law and the prophets as the absolutely authoritative word of God.

Everything Moses wrote was given to him during the 40 days he spent with God on the mountain.

That settles that.

The Old Testament was translated from Hebrew. The word translated as seed in Genesis 3, has several definitions, and in the 16th century they picked seed from the list of meanings, and they didn’t make the best choice for the KJV..

The Hebrew word is Zera, which the Hebrew dictionary definition is:

H2233 (Strong)

זֶרַע

zera‛

zeh'-rah

From H2232; seed; figuratively fruit, plant, sowing time, posterity: - X carnally, child, fruitful, seed (-time), sowing-time.

Total KJV occurrences: 229

It can mean fruit, or child, or seed, among others.

Modern English bibles therefore use offspring in that verse, instead of seed.

Gen 3:15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.” ESV

Your big expose on the Bible fizzled out.

The verse is a non issue.

 

[Nancy]

When Moses wrote Genesis 3:15 thousands of years ago, making things up out of whole cloth as men do, what insanity possessed him to claim that the one to right the wrong would be from the SPERM of the woman? (The literal meaning of “her seed”).

How freaky is it that thousands of years later people started claiming that a virgin had given birth and dying rather than admit that they made it up. Clearly there can’t be anything to this God speaking through the Bible, since men disagree on the role of traditions in the church.

Agnostics.

 

[atpollard]

Jesus taught the law and the prophets as the absolutely authoritative word of God.

Everything Moses wrote was given to him during the 40 days he spent with God on the mountain.

That settles that.

The Old Testament was translated from Hebrew. The word translated as seed in Genesis 3, has several definitions, and in the 16th century they picked seed from the list of meanings, and they didn’t make the best choice for the KJV..

The Hebrew word is Zera, which the Hebrew dictionary definition is:

H2233 (Strong)

זֶרַע

zera‛

zeh'-rah

From H2232; seed; figuratively fruit, plant, sowing time, posterity: - X carnally, child, fruitful, seed (-time), sowing-time.

Total KJV occurrences: 229

It can mean fruit, or child, or seed, among others.

Modern English bibles therefore use offspring in that verse, instead of seed.

Gen 3:15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.” ESV

Your big expose on the Bible fizzled out.

The verse is a non issue.

= [roll eyes] = an emoji indicating sarcasm

Look up the other verses that use H2233 and see how it is used throughout the OT when referring to Human Offspring ... it is a common representation for the "ejaculation" of the male (as the source of pregnancy). However in Genesis 3, God makes TWO specific points that should not go unnoticed:

1. Adam and not Eve was cursed (a fact that the NT writers also noted)
2. The "solution" would come through the "seed" of the woman (and not the "seed" of the man)

Jesus is the fulfillment of both of these ... a "new Adam" not born of the seed of man (therefore not inheriting the curse of Adam) ... born of the seed of the woman, making Him fully human and the one promised in Genesis 3 to correct Adam's fall (ie. to deliver us and restore us to God).

Thank you for defending the word of God, but it needs no defending from me. I am a HUGE fan of God's Word.

 

[Truth OT]

When Moses wrote Genesis 3:15 thousands of years ago, making things up out of whole cloth as men do, what insanity possessed him to claim that the one to right the wrong would be from the SPERM of the woman? (The literal meaning of “her seed”).

Your interpretation of this text is almost laughable. Sperm of the woman, really?! You know good and well the text says no such thing. Stop reaching.

The mode of baptism is not an “essential”, it ranks up there with agreeing that “breakfast is the most important meal of the day”

Again, YOUR interpretation. This position you take is quite opposed to many within Christendom and even with certain texts like 1 Peter 3:21 which directly says baptism saves and other texts like Colossians 2:12 and Romans 6:4 which specify that baptism is a burial.

When Moses wrote Genesis 3:15 thousands of years ago

You're opening a whole other can of worms here. Why do you subscribe to the notion that Moses wrote the Torah? You do know Deuteronomy chronicles his death making his authorship slightly, IMPOSSIBLE.

Jesus is the fulfillment of both of these ... a "new Adam" not born of the seed of man (therefore not inheriting the curse of Adam) ... born of the seed of the woman,

Stop it! So Mary had no biological father who her firstborn son would have descended from? And her father was not descended from Adam, thus as you say, inheriting Adam's curse. Your logic really is not filling in the holes here my friend.......

 

[atpollard]

You're opening a whole other can of worms here. Why do you subscribe to the notion that Moses wrote the Torah? You do know Deuteronomy chronicles his death making his authorship slightly, IMPOSSIBLE.

Keep straining those gnats and swallowing those camels.
There are MANUSCRIPTS of Genesis that are hundreds of years older than the stories of Jesus ... so even if Genesis was written in the 3rd Century BC, that still makes it an allusion to a virgin birth long before the birth of the people claiming to have seen a virgin birth.

Why would any lunatic predict that a woman (and not a man) would "beget" a child to destroy evil?
(I cannot fix your unwillingness to accept the meaning of Hebrew words or look up the other verses that use the word to confirm what I say. Willful ignorance is YOUR choice.)

 

[atpollard]

Your interpretation of this text is almost laughable. Sperm of the woman, really?! You know good and well the text says no such thing. Stop reaching.

[Gen 3:15 ESV] 15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring (seed) and her offspring (seed); he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel."
[Lev 15:16-18, 32 NASB20]
16 'Now if a man has a seminal emission (seed), he shall bathe all his body in water and be unclean until evening.
17 'As for any garment or any leather on which there is a seminal emission (seed), it shall be washed with water and be unclean until evening.
18 'If a man sleeps with a woman [so that] there is a seminal emission (seed), they shall both bathe in water and be unclean until evening. ...
32 This is the law for the one with a discharge, and for the man who has a seminal emission (seed) so that he is unclean by it,
[Lev 18:20 NASB20] 20 'And you shall not have sexual intercourse (seed) with your neighbor's wife, to be defiled with her.
[Lev 19:20 NASB20] 20 'Now if a man has sexual relations (seed) with a woman who is a slave acquired for [another] man, but who has in no way been redeemed nor given her freedom, there shall be punishment; they shall not, [however,] be put to death, because she was not free.
[Num 5:13 NASB20] 13 and a man has sexual relations (seed) with her and it is hidden from the eyes of her husband and she remains undiscovered, although she has defiled herself, and there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act,

Exact same Hebrew word in every case.
God told the serpent that it would be the child of the WOMAN that would defeat him ... not a child of the man (Adam).

 

[atpollard]

Stop it! So Mary had no biological father who her firstborn son would have descended from? And her father was not descended from Adam, thus as you say, inheriting Adam's curse. Your logic really is not filling in the holes here my friend.......

Did Mary's biological father impregnate her? No. Therefore he plays no part in passing the curse of Adam to the "seed" of Adam ... Jesus is the "seed" of God, not Adam ... the unique "seed" of Eve (woman) as predicted in Genesis 3.

 

[atpollard]

Again, YOUR interpretation. This position you take is quite opposed to many within Christendom and even with certain texts like 1 Peter 3:21 which directly says baptism saves and other texts like Colossians 2:12 and Romans 6:4 which specify that baptism is a burial.

Do you have this much trouble with allegory and metaphors when reading other literature?

One piece of free advice: Verses will make more sense if you read them in context ... at least the whole paragraph. Dickens is also confusing if you pluck one sentence from each book and attempt to jam them together because they share a common word. That manufactured confusion does not indicate that Charles Dickens does not exist.

 

[GRACE ambassador]

op: The BIBLE: one of the believer's BIGGEST problems

bibleS, as in modern-day, newer, easier-to-read/understand versions,
IS a big problem, as God only has One English Version/Underlying
Manuscripts/other language translations, As "HIS PRESERVED Word."
+

THIS (salvation) is the ONLY issue on your list of “upmost importance”.
Salvation is “by GRACE Through faith alone” [and not of works lest any man boast] (Ephesians 2:1-10) and it is through “repentance and baptism”. They are two sides of the same coin. One side describes how God saves people and the other side describes how people respond to the “touch” of God.

Amen!

When THIS Salvation Occurs, And, "The Teacher" Indwells," Then:

There IS NO big problem, IF one has Proper instruction, OR, "finds out
on his/her own," That The The Holy Spirit IS That "Blessed TEACHER,"
And that "study" under the tutelage Of Such A One Can Be Very
Beneficial, when certain PRESERVED "Biblical Rules" are known,
And Applied! Amen?:

Bible "study" Rules!

GRACE And Peace...

 

[Truth OT]

Did Mary's biological father impregnate her? No. Therefore he plays no part in passing the curse of Adam to the "seed" of Adam ... Jesus is the "seed" of God, not Adam ... the unique "seed" of Eve (woman) as predicted in Genesis 3.

Are you being willfully blind or just dishonest? Seriously in one keystroke you talk about how a parent passes something to their offspring and then you ignore the FACT that Mary had a father that passed things to her that she in turn passes to her children as well.

So for your point to make any sense you must assert that Mary's father did not pass the curse of sin and death to her or that because she was a woman she could not pass the curse to her offspring. Which one is it?

If you say the second, remember that Jesus was supposed to be descended from David's seed, so if he had no biological father, everything would have had to pass through Mary's lineage INCLUDING the curse unless David's entire line was somehow exempt. Let the special pleading begin..........

 

[Truth OT]

When THIS Salvation Occurs, And, "The Teacher" Indwells," Then:

There IS NO big problem, IF one has Proper instruction, OR, "finds out
on his/her own," That The The Holy Spirit IS That "Blessed TEACHER,"
And that "study" under the tutelage Of Such A One Can Be Very
Beneficial, when certain PRESERVED "Biblical Rules" are known,
And Applied! Amen?:

Mark 16:16 for $300, Alex.

 

[GRACE ambassador]

Mark 16:16 for $300, Alex.

"believe AND be baptized Shall Be Saved" pay Up, Alex

 

[GEN2REV]

The Bible presents a very broad general narrative many believe and have built varying beliefs systems around. Yet, the book is very ambiguous, at times contradictory, and downright confusing regarding numerous religious subjects that would appear to be of upmost importance. Such ambiguity appears to clearly demonstrate that the writings are the musings of men, however, many still attribute its contents to a deity figure. Why?!

Let me point out just a few of the issues of contention below:

1. The plan of salvation
- By grace thru faith alone (Romans 10:9-10)?
- Repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38)?
- is baptism immersion?
- is baptism simply sprinkling

2. The role of the church vs. Sola Scriptura

3. Should any part of the OT Law be kept? (Matthew 5:18)

4. Apostolic succession and the Papacy (Matthew 16:18)

5. Dispensationalism vs. Amillennialism vs. Preterism
- with each able to use scripture in some form or fashion to support what they promote

These are but a few internal issues a couple thousand years have not been able to provide clarify on and there are many others. Again, with such doubletalk and ambiguity, WHY Oh WHY would it not be obvious that human authorship is all over the pages. The Bible is just so..................... human

The bottom line is this:

For those who God actually sends to His Word, ...

"Nobody can come to Me unless the Father draws them..."
John 6:44

...none of those topics you listed as contradictions, or issues with scripture, will even be a factor.

God draws those that He chooses to the Bible and gives them the tools to discern it properly.

Nobody can get to Jesus unless the Father draws them; and nobody can get to God/Salvation except through Jesus, God's Word - The Bible.

"...no man cometh unto the Father but by Me."
John 14:6

With the Holy Spirit to guide them through it and give them discernment, there are no contradictions or issues with scripture. Only those who study the Bible seeking contradictions and proof of error will find passages and verses they perceive as such. And that's no accident; God absolutely intended it that way.

God's Word must be taken as a whole, not piecemealed out to prove the position of a doubter.

 

[Enoch111]

The Bible presents a very broad general narrative many believe and have built varying beliefs systems around.

It is simply *beautiful* when agnostics pontificate about the Bible. Sure there is a very broad general narrative. But there are also specifics, one of them being that God commands YOU to repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. Everything else will fall into place once you obey God. And therein lies your problem. You do not wish to obey God.

 

[atpollard]

Are you being willfully blind or just dishonest? Seriously in one keystroke you talk about how a parent passes something to their offspring and then you ignore the FACT that Mary had a father that passed things to her that she in turn passes to her children as well.

Neither.
I am steadfastly presenting the truth that God cursed ADAM not EVE and the curse passes through the SONS of ADAM to their Children. (Why were Jewish BOYS circumcised as part of the covenant, but girls required no “sign”?) Eve inherited the curse of ADAM from her Human Father (Federal Headship is the concept).

Who was Jesus’ biological Human Father that he would have inherited the curse of Adam from?

My job is not to convince you of the truth (God is in charge of “belief”); my job is just to make the truth known so you are without excuse. I get paid the same whether you believe or you don’t.

 

[atpollard]

A quick lesson in genetics. Women only have X chromosomes while men have an X and a Y chromosome. So a baby girl (XX) inherits one X chromosome from the mother and one X chromosome from the father. A baby boy (XY) inherits one X chromosome from the mother and one Y chromosome from the father.

Any genetic data linked to an X chromosome may have been inherited from either the mother or father in a baby girl. Any genetic data linked to an X chromosome can only have been inherited from the mother in a baby boy and any genetic data linked to an Y chromosome can only have been inherited from the father in a baby boy.

Sin is not as simple as the XY chromosomes that determine gender, however, like the Y chromosome, only the Father can pass on the Adamic curse because only the Father is the “federal head of the family” (like Adam). Just as the Father passes on the Family name, so too, the Father passes on the family curse.

Just as a woman can inherit an X chromosome from her father, a woman can inherit the “Adam’s family curse”. Just as a woman cannot pass on a Y chromosome to her children, a woman does not pass on the “Adam’s family curse”. Just as the father determines the gender of the baby, the father passes on the “Adam’s family curse”.

Just trying to explain a spiritual reality using a more mundane “genetic” analogy (that fails if pressed too hard, like all analogies).

 

[Behold]

The Bible presents a very broad general narrative many believe and have built varying beliefs systems around. Yet, the book is very ambiguous, at times contradictory, and downright confusing

Its confusing to you.