Originally posted by aldsar
you forget to take these in context.
what about exodus 33:20?
These people were not necessarily speaking literally about seeing the face of God as no human could see Gods face and live

Was Job Human? How about Jacob? Maybe Moses?

Ok, you asked for a contradiction. I will give you one for now. Then if you want more, we can go on indefenitely.

Take a look at the New Testament. Read through Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, and the Acts. After brushing up on them a little (take it all in so you can defend your position), I want you to tell me where Jesus ascended into heaven from. Let me know what each book says. Consult Older texts and older versions of the Bible, and if you have access to it, please site some Hebrew and Aramaic text. Find out what these texts all say. Then tell me, where the Bible says that Jesus ascended into heaven from.

Good Luck

P.S. When you are done with this project I will give you as many more as you would like.

P.P.S. I can help you find the information that answers these questions if you want. The only reason I haven't is so that you can't use my guidance as an excuse for your answers.

Contradictions with a counting problem:
1)Genesis 7:2 vs Gen 7:8- How many animals did Noah take on the ark
2)I Kings 4:26 vs II Chronicles 9:25-How many stalls did Solomon have.
3)II Kings 24:8 vs II Chronicles 36:9- How old was Jeroiachin when he began to reign.
There's more but that's enough for now.

Originally posted by Seapeople
Ok, you asked for a contradiction. I will give you one for now. Then if you want more, we can go on indefenitely.

Take a look at the New Testament. Read through Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, and the Acts. After brushing up on them a little (take it all in so you can defend your position), I want you to tell me where Jesus ascended into heaven from. Let me know what each book says. Consult Older texts and older versions of the Bible, and if you have access to it, please site some Hebrew and Aramaic text. Find out what these texts all say. Then tell me, where the Bible says that Jesus ascended into heaven from.

Good Luck

P.S. When you are done with this project I will give you as many more as you would like.

P.P.S. I can help you find the information that answers these questions if you want. The only reason I haven't is so that you can't use my guidance as an excuse for your answers.

i already went over this in another thread and i know it off the top of my head.
Jesus ascended near a village called Bethany.
it was a small village on the mount of olives

Originally posted by KSoze
Contradictions with a counting problem:
1)Genesis 7:2 vs Gen 7:8- How many animals did Noah take on the ark
2)I Kings 4:26 vs II Chronicles 9:25-How many stalls did Solomon have.
3)II Kings 24:8 vs II Chronicles 36:9- How old was Jeroiachin when he began to reign.
There's more but that's enough for now.

1)Noah needed 7 pairs of clean animals as they would be needed for sacrifices in addition to repopulation, the unclean only needed one pair to repopulate the world.

2)ill just direct quote.
1 Kings 4:26 Solomon had four thousand stalls for chariot horses and twelve thousand horses.
2 Chronicles 9:25 Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horses, which he kept in the chariot cities and also with him in Jerusalem
wheres the contradiction there?

3)direct quotes again
2 Kings 24:8 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he became king...
2 Chronicles 36:9 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he became king...
both are word for word the same...what contradiction, KSoze?

[Edited on 28/4/2004 by aldsar]

Just as I figured. You use a translation of the bible that seeks to possibly correct the mistakes. What version are you using? Obviously not the King James. Also, what manuscript does your bible use the Septuagint or the Masoretic Text, or a combination.

From the King James:
II Chronicles 9:25- solomon had 4000
I Kings 4:26- "And solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses

II Kings 24:8- Jeroiachin was 18yrs old
II Chronicles 36:9- Jeroiachin was 8 yrs old.

The Jewish Publishing Society Tanack also has the same translations as the KJV with conflicting numbers. That is where I see the contradiction. I'm assuming the Masoretic text was used. So its a fact the masoretic text has this error.
My New living translation doesn't have the contradictions I mentioned. However, it does have a footnote clearly indicating a different reading is possible and indicates it drew from a variety of sources so its a possible contradiction.
This brings me to my next point. Which manuscript is right: The Masoretic, the Septuagint, Dead sea scrolls, Pe#ta, Vulgate, Samaritan, etc....One must decide this first if we are going to have these bible literal discussions. Because clearly they are not all gods word. If they are then some of them have contradictions when looked at by themselves.
Please don't think that I'm setting out to destroy the bible. Because I'm not, I really think that gods word is in there its just amongst other stuff. In other words, I believe it has been tampered with.
As for your Noah's ark explanation I will get to it later. I'm quite busy right now. Take care

Originally posted by KSoze
Just as I figured. You use a translation of the bible that seeks to possibly correct the mistakes. What version are you using? Obviously not the King James. Also, what manuscript does your bible use the Septuagint or the Masoretic Text, or a combination.

From the King James:
II Chronicles 9:25- solomon had 4000
I Kings 4:26- "And solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses

II Kings 24:8- Jeroiachin was 18yrs old
II Chronicles 36:9- Jeroiachin was 8 yrs old.

The Jewish Publishing Society Tanack also has the same translations as the KJV with conflicting numbers. That is where I see the contradiction. I'm assuming the Masoretic text was used. So its a fact the masoretic text has this error.
My New living translation doesn't have the contradictions I mentioned. However, it does have a footnote clearly indicating a different reading is possible and indicates it drew from a variety of sources so its a possible contradiction.
This brings me to my next point. Which manuscript is right: The Masoretic, the Septuagint, Dead sea scrolls, Pe#ta, Vulgate, Samaritan, etc....One must decide this first if we are going to have these bible literal discussions. Because clearly they are not all gods word. If they are then some of them have contradictions when looked at by themselves.
Please don't think that I'm setting out to destroy the bible. Because I'm not, I really think that gods word is in there its just amongst other stuff. In other words, I believe it has been tampered with.
As for your Noah's ark explanation I will get to it later. I'm quite busy right now. Take care

my bible also has footnotes making light of this.
it is a combination of most sources including the dead sea scrolls, etc.
it very may well have been tampered with.
you have to remember that for years and years, priests copied these texts over.
unless i am mistaken, in hebrew it is very easy for one to change a number by a factor of ten with something like one line, or the lack thereof.
i have a zondervan study bible.
my bible also has footnotes making light of this.
it is a combination of most sources including the dead sea scrolls, septuagint, masoric, etc.
the noahs ark question is not really a question, i didnt even have to go to my study notes to answer that one lol.
i just find it amazing that the dead sea scrolls were in a cave for thousands of years and yet they are essentially the same as texts we have today.

someone once explained how we have so many reliable sources compared to other books from history.
the fact is that there were so many copies of the old testament, torah (i know its part of the OT), and the new testament when they first came out, that many of the errors could simply not occur if they were all exact copies.
some other books like platos symposium for example had very few copies in the world up until modern ages.
this allowed for errors to occur in the different copies and such.
im glad that you arent a bible basher, it seems to me you are just curious and ill be happy to clear things up for you

[Edited on 28/4/2004 by aldsar]

Originally posted by aldsar


i already went over this in another thread and i know it off the top of my head.
Jesus ascended near a village called Bethany.
it was a small village on the mount of olives

Ok, here is what I found.

In the book of Matthew, there is no ascention. The book does end though on a mountain in Galilee.

In the book of Mark, the ascention occured in Jeruselem (Mark 16:19)

In the book of Luke, the ascention occured as you said in Bethany. (Luke 24:50)

The books of John and Paul describe no ascention at all.

Finally, the Acts, Jesus ascended from the Mount of Olives (like you said). (Acts 1:9)

Now, all of these locations are relatively close. My point is clear. In another thread I compared the accounts of Jesus's life in the new testament to a police report with several witnesses. Getting a statement from all of them will tell you what happened. Taking one persons statement literally over another, without being there yourself, is impossible. Small discrepancies in the description of Jesus and His ascention into heaven are negledgeable ONLY if you choose to accept that they exist. In other words, it is YOUR opinion after consulting the books, that Jesus ascended into heaven from the Mount of Olives. Still, literal interpretation is impossible. You must make assumptions and come to conclusions on your own in this case.

At least you looked though.

Here is another Challenge:

How long did Jesus stay on earth after He rose from the dead?

i beg to differ about Mark.
Mark merely says that after Jesus spoke to them, he went up to heaven, it does not specify a location.

Originally posted by Seapeople
Here is another Challenge:

How long did Jesus stay on earth after He rose from the dead?

i could find no clear evidence on how long Jesus remained here after He rose again.
but it is not the question of my knowledge here, it is the question of if it actually happened.
and Bethany and the Mount of Olives are the same place.
did you also not interpret Mark to your own liking to bring an argument against me?

Originally posted by aldsar

Originally posted by Seapeople
Here is another Challenge:

How long did Jesus stay on earth after He rose from the dead?

i could find no clear evidence on how long Jesus remained here after He rose again.
but it is not the question of my knowledge here, it is the question of if it actually happened.
and Bethany and the Mount of Olives are the same place.
did you also not interpret Mark to your own liking to bring an argument against me?

Look harder.. read the entire ending of mark...and choose an older Bible...the newer ones dont specify a location....(couldn't have that contradiction).

I have clear evidence of how long Jesus was on earth according to the Bible. Again...when you check these...READ AN OLDER BIBLE. The newer ones are conveniently different than the older ones.

Ok....

According to Mark Jesus stayed on earth only sunday. You need to read a great portion of the book to truly understand this, but refer to (Mark 16:14.)

According to Luke, Jesus was only on earth for that Sunday. (Luke 24:50-52)

According to John Jesus was on earth after his resurection at least 8 days. You will need to read all of chapter 20 and 21 to understand this. More specifically (John 20:26 and John 21:1-2.)

According to The acts Jesus walked the Earth at least 40 days after his resurrection. (Acts 1:3)

Again, read carefully.

Now...Challenge #3:

According to the Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John......when the women arrived at the tomb that Jesus was burried in...was it open...or closed?

Matthew: When Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were on their way to the tomb, they encountered a large earthquake and the stone was rolled away.

Mark: Mark 16:4 But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away.

Luke 24:2 They found the stone rolled away from the tomb.

John 20:1 ...and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance.

it is fairly safe to say that it was open then

you still havent responded about whether you interpretted Mark for your own purposes previously.

Originally posted by aldsar
Matthew: When Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were on their way to the tomb, they encountered a large earthquake and the stone was rolled away.

Mark: Mark 16:4 But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away.

Luke 24:2 They found the stone rolled away from the tomb.

John 20:1 ...and saw that the stone had been removed from the entrance.

it is fairly safe to say that it was open then

Read Matthew a little harder. Well, read your own words a little harder.

As far as me interpreting before. No. I told you to check into other Bibles that were older. I made no interpretation. You must read the entire story from the ressurection to the end and pay attention to location to understand.

And besides....if I had to make an interpretation to get the location...wouldn't that support the exact point I am trying to make.

I am hammering this portion of the Bible hard I know. But oh well. Here is challenge #4.

After appearing to the women, who was first to see Jesus?

Help:
Matthew 28:16
Mark 16:12-14
Luke 24:13-36
John 20:19
Corinithians 15:5

ok so the stone was rolled away as they were on their way there, maybe God wanted them to be the first ones to know Jesus had risen (Ill use Matthew 28:10 to support this.)

well to say im not exactly a bible scholar is an understatement.
but for a 16 yr old im doing good, eh?
well Luke and Mark both include notes about 2 people on the road that met Jesus, one of them being named Cleopas and the other Simon.
Some say that this Simon was Peter, it very well may have been.

but is there a contradiction if one account does not include what another one does?
maybe we should be using thses to build a more complete picture of Jesus life and death, rather than asking which one is right.
have you read The Life of Jesus by Josh McDowell?
he compares all of the Gospels in it, I am reading it right now and you might find it informative.
hes the expert, not me.

Originally posted by KSoze

Originally posted by aldsar
it is funny that you say these things as one of my christian friends had someone ask him these very things.
there are no contradictions in the bible.
at first sin was unforgiveable and you had to give sacrifices to God to make up for your sin.
then cam Jesus.
he was the Sacrifice for ALL.
it is your choice whether you accept this sacrifice or not to.

Have you read the book of Isaiah? It plainly states that sin WAS FORGIVEABLE before jesus. All a person had to do was turn their heart to god to be forgiven. Sacrifices were never required either. Atleast That's what Jeremiah 7 says.
If you hold the view that jesus was the sacrifice for sins. Then I'd like to know how come jesus forgave sins BEFORE the cross (its in the NT). Also, How could god (in Isaiah) forgive sins before the cross if the purpose of the cross was to enable him to forgive your sins. That doesn't make sense.
As for the contradictions, I have a very long list of them.

were you using Isaiah 59:1 for this basis cause you only have to continue on to the next verse to see where youre wrong there.
sorry it took so long to respond, i forgot about it.