Interactive map traces 463 of the Bible's contradictions.

page: 10
22
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by TheBrother
 




No I chose this verse to show you that when you find a contradiction it is with good reason and hinting to you there is much more to those words than to be literally read.


The verse you chose to explain is NOT a contradiction, in the spirit of this thread. There are plenty contradiction posted in this thread.

Any good piece of literature has depth and layers. I understand your "onion skin" analogy, but it doesn't apply to down right contradictions.




posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheBrother

The Lord's prayer IS a parable, no not every single word from Jesus was a parable but much of it was. There were multiple levels of understanding depending on the level of the persons thinking. One level is the natural, the other level which I speak for is this spiritual. For starters, there is a reason why it is written in KJV "In Earth" not "On Earth" in this prayer and other verses like Job 1 verse 7.

No I chose this verse to show you that when you find a contradiction it is with good reason and hinting to you there is much more to those words than to be literally read.


It's things like this that make me wonder why the bible cant be taken literally, and why there isn't an bible made to be efficient, understandable, and literal. What's the point of trying to get these words out there if they only make sense to people that can make sense of the nonsensical and contradictory.

Just an aside, but I wanted to share a Freakonomics episode I just listened to about the harm dogmatic people bring to the table. It's the host (Dubner) speaking to (Tetlock) on the follies of prediction. Philip Tetlock has done a lot of research on cognition and decision-making and bias, pretty standard stuff for an Ivy League psych PhD. But what really fascinates him is prediction. Here is an excerpt from the transcript.


TETLOCK: I think the most important takeaway would be that the experts are, they think they know more than they do. They were systematically overconfident. Some experts were really massively overconfident. And we are able to identify those experts based on some of their characteristics of their belief system and their cognitive style, their thinking style.

DUBNER: OK. So now we’re getting into the nitty-gritty of what makes people predict well or predict poorly. What are the characteristics then of a poor predictor?

TETLOCK: Dogmatism.

DUBNER: It can be summed up that easily?

TETLOCK: I think so. I think an unwillingness to change one’s mind in a reasonably timely way in response to new evidence. A tendency, when asked to explain one’s predictions, to generate only reasons that favor your preferred prediction and not to generate reasons opposed to it.



posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Rychwebo
 
One word, Steganography in short.

en.wikipedia.org...

Those that want to truly find God and love him must search him otherwise how will God know who really wants to find him and how will we know when we are truly ready to find him. Life is all about finding our way back "home" to God and have the gift of experiencing that. Also it's to protect the original teachings, look what happaned to the literal word when man got ahold of it.
edit on 26-8-2013 by TheBrother because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 09:46 PM
link   
reply to post by TheBrother
 



I won't be side tracked with a response to this, because you still haven't responded with any contradiction from the OP's map with an understanding using, what you call, a "spiritual eye". It's okay if there isn't such an articulable understanding for any mind to conceive of, that would just mean that previously you were incorrect. If you are correct, then I would please ask for any explanation to any contradiction in the previously requested format... A,B,C.



posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by colbe
 


God is loving, He doesn't leave you in the dark not knowing.

Bollocks.


2 Thessalonians 2
11 They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie


I also said which isn't included above, God did not give every person reading Scripture the AUTHORITY to interpret it. He gave His authority to interpret Scripture to the Church.

I looked in the translation of the first Bible to see if there were any footnotes to help understand the meaning 2 Thessalonians. You can't, no use to isolate a verse, you have to look at the verses surrounding it. Read the footnotes to the above and a the footnotes to the verses before and after the one verse.

How long are you going to say the Bible isn't true or it is errant? How long are you going to say "the faith" God
established is not Roman Catholicism? That's what the above verse is about. "REVOLT" from the Truth in history and to happen again very soon with anti-Christ. The Romans didn't believe, Islam says no, Luther left the Truth and look at his fruit.

Before the anti-Christ comes to full power, God is going to send a divine awakening, a warning to every soul
on the earth. If after you experience it, you disbelieve, "revolt" from the Truth God has shown you, He will let you follow the lie.

That is the meaning of the above verse. You will have refused His great love and mercy again. Believe, only God can show you every moment of your life.

Read the verses surrounding 2 Thess 2:11 that 3NL posted and the footnotes. Read the verse in context. NOTICE, in the Douay Rheims Bible, verse 11 is verse 10. ADULTEROUS King James and his translators CH
ANGED the original words "operation of error" to "powerful delusion!" Those two do not mean the same at all,
trash your KJV, to keep from ever looking at it again.

+ + +

2 Thess 2:3-11
[3] Let no man deceive you by any means, for unless there come a revolt first, and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition, [4] Who opposeth, and is lifted up above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself as if he were God. [5] Remember you not, that when I was yet with you, I told you these things?



[3] A revolt: This revolt, or falling off, is generally understood, by the ancient fathers, of a revolt from the Roman empire, which was first to be destroyed, before the coming of Antichrist. It may, perhaps, be understood also of a revolt of many nations from the Catholic Church; which has, in part, happened already, by means of Mahomet, Luther, &c., and it may be supposed, will be more general in the days of the Antichrist.

[3] The man of sin: Here must be meant some particular man, as is evident from the frequent repetition of the Greek article: 'the man of sin, 'the son of perdition, 'the adversary or opposer. It agrees to the wicked and great Antichrist, who will come before the end of the world.

[4] In the temple: Either that of Jerusalem which some think he will rebuild; or in some Christian church, which he will pervert to his own worship: as Mahomet has done by the churches of the east.


[6] And now you know what withholdeth, that he may be revealed in his time. [7] For the mystery of iniquity already worketh; only that he who now holdeth, do hold, until he be taken out of the way. [8] And then that wicked one shall be revealed whom the Lord Jesus shall kill with the spirit of his mouth; and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming, him, [9] Whose coming is according to the working of Satan, in all power, and signs, and lying wonders, [10] And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying:


[10] God shall send: That is God shall suffer them to be deceived by lying wonders, and false miracles, in punishment of their NOT entertaining the love of truth.


[11] That all may be judged who have not believed the truth, but have consented to iniquity.



posted on Aug, 26 2013 @ 10:06 PM
link   
2 Thessalonians 2:11

King James Version (KJV)

And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:


2 Thessalonians 2:10

Douay-Rheims (DRBO)
And in all seduction of iniquity to them that perish; because they receive not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. Therefore God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying:

+ + +

Oh my gosh, I would become Catholic for the lone reason of the thousands of alterations in the KJV to the original writings! It makes you ill. Look at the difference!

Purchase a Douay-Rheims paperback Bible, we will not have the Internet much longer, says prophecy.

www.drbo.org...



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 01:17 AM
link   
I used to "see" bible as a book with false teachings.

But not all of them are false.

The false stuffs/teachings/stories are there to confuse the secrets, or hide them from the blinds to see, so that knowledge won't be burned, destroyed by the blinds.

For example:

And everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.
(2 Chronicles 15:13)

You might think from this sentence, that God is cruel and whoever follow the doctrine in those times, have to kill those who dont want to seek God. Maybe the killing did happen, maybe not. We dunno.

Most of us "forget" or didn't live in those era. But it is those who misinterprets the meanings who are cruel, Not God.

But if you see how "modern Christians" behave, you will see it's not God who is cruel. A blind follower will do whatever he/she can to force people to believe. Imagine if inquisition still exists today, these "modern Christians" will butcher you alive, most likely (with stoning etc).

Before we read bible, we need some extra "knowledge" (esoteric??) from other religions/philosophies/whatever-you-call-them, like gnosticism, hinduism, buddhism, etc, and some rational knowledge (scientific research)

Rational knowledge is necessary to remove all bulls*** stories that does not make sense like flood, sodom/gomorrah, etc, leaving only the necessary parts to read.

If people agree to accept those knowledge subconsciously and they combine the puzzle above with Matthew 6:33:
But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.

Then things will click in everyone's head.

This is just one of the examples, there are many. even in Revelations (which imho, talking about Chakra channels)
edit on 28-8-2013 by dodol because: (no reason given)
edit on 28-8-2013 by dodol because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 03:54 AM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 



Why couldn't Jesus have been carrying the cross first (recounted in Johns version), and been unable to carry it any longer considering the fact he had been beaten, so they forced another man to do so?(Other three)

So John didn't put Simon in his account of the journey, and the other three did. That is not a proven contradiction. Just different accounts of the same event. If you were to witness a crime with a group of say 20 people, and the cops ask you for your recollection of the event do you seriously believe that all the testimonies would be the same? There are many scenarios in which all three statements could be accurate, so next question plz



posted on Aug, 28 2013 @ 04:14 AM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 


Again, you are just attempting to pervert Scripture. Since you are having a really hard time with this I'll break it down. Carrying his own cross...okay so jesus has the cross at the moment.....He went out.....ok so they started leaving...Now lets swap to any of the other three Matthew 27:32-33 for example As they were going...ok so they are on their way still, and then they meet simon the other three tell of this event John apparently saw fit to leave it out.



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 07:36 AM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Sorry for the late reply. Yes those may seem like contradictions but they are not. Jesus said we are all forgiven, and Paul says the same but also goes on to say if you do not forgive others than you are not forgiven. The truth is if you embrace and accept Jesus' forgiveness, then your heart will be changed and you will naturally forgive others. You will find a lot about the heart in the OT, your heart is what matters, meaning if you are saved your heart will be one of forgiveness. So no it does not actually mean that if you don't forgive someone that you're not saved.

Not forgiving someone is a sin, but you are already free from that sin if you accept Jesus, but if you accept Jesus and do not forgive someone, then you are already forgiven for that sin, but since you are saved the Lord will change your heart and you ill naturally be aligned to Christ and will forgive others more easily.

The other one about the Law is not a contradiction either. It shows that the Law does not bind us, that we are free from it, that the works required by the Law are already fulfilled by Jesus thus we have zero work to do and we only have to accept Jesus sacrifice. The reason Jesus brought this up and saying the Law is still valid, is because the law was fulfilled by Jesus alone. If there was no law, there would be no foundation or system by which we could be judged and then forgiven.

It is like saying x equals freedom, but there would be no freedom if x was not still valid. X being Jesus in my illustration there.
edit on 9/12/13 by honested3 because: grammar again (or some attempt)



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by honested3
 



Jesus said we are all forgiven, and Paul says the same but also goes on to say if you do not forgive others than you are not forgiven.


No. That's not accurate. Again:


Matthew 6:14
For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15 But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions .


Jesus said here, that our sins are NOT forgiven until we forgive others first.

Paul said that we should forgive, just as we have already been forgiven:


Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you (Ephesians 4.32).



The truth is if you embrace and accept Jesus' forgiveness, then your heart will be changed and you will naturally forgive others. You will find a lot about the heart in the OT, your heart is what matters, meaning if you are saved your heart will be one of forgiveness. So no it does not actually mean that if you don't forgive someone that you're not saved.


That's not what Jesus said. Forgiveness is necessary in order to receive forgiveness, that's what Jesus said.


Not forgiving someone is a sin, but you are already free from that sin if you accept Jesus, but if you accept Jesus and do not forgive someone, then you are already forgiven for that sin, but since you are saved the Lord will change your heart and you ill naturally be aligned to Christ and will forgive others more easily.


Not forgiving the murderer of your child, for example, is not a sin. Forgiveness can't be forced. I think what Jesus meant, in requiring forgiveness, has to do with forgiving others for the same sins that you yourself have committed. Its hypocritical to accept forgiveness for a certain sin, and not forgive another for the same sin.


The other one about the Law is not a contradiction either. It shows that the Law does not bind us, that we are free from it, that the works required by the Law are already fulfilled by Jesus thus we have zero work to do and we only have to accept Jesus sacrifice. The reason Jesus brought this up and saying the Law is still valid, is because the law was fulfilled by Jesus alone. If there was no law, there would be no foundation or system by which we could be judged and then forgiven.



Mat 5:18 "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.


Unless "heaven and earth have passed" not one jot of the law is nonbinding. Jesus actually made the "Law" harder, not easier, and certainly didn't abolish it.

I don't see how Paul could have gotten this:


Rom 7:4 Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God.
:5 For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were aroused by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death.
:6 But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.


unless Paul never knew what Jesus actually said while he was alive. It appears that he didn't have the slightest idea what Jesus actually taught.

Certainly, all isn't accomplished, otherwise Jesus would be here, sitting on the throne and ruling over the "New Heaven and the New Earth" and Christians wouldn't need to be "spreading the word" and converting sinners anymore.


It is like saying x equals freedom, but there would be no freedom if x was not still valid. X being Jesus in my illustration there.


That doesn't make any sense to me.


edit on 12-9-2013 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2013 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


I see how they can be confusing but they are inline with each other. For example the Bible tells us all kinds of people will not go to heaven, liars and so on. Well I am a liar, you are a liar, really were all liars, and that is just it though, when you are forgiven you are no longer a liar before the Lord, even though you are still one before the eyes of men.

Yes it is true that those who do not forgive will not be in heaven. That is because those who are in heaven are not seen as unforgiving people because they are made perfect to Christ, even though on earth they are unforgiving. It is to say there are two ways in which a person is viewed, by human standard, and by God's standard. If Jesus has forgiven a person of all their sins, then that person is seen as perfect and blameless in God's eyes. Even though that person may be everything in the Bible that says will not be in heaven.

The law was fulfilled through Christ, because the law was a strict set of rules which outlines how to be sinless, though these rules were impossible to achieve by human standard. So when Jesus paid that price, he fulfilled the law for all of us who accept. Sorry if my last illustration made no sense, maybe this one will make more sense; Suppose salvation was something you could buy, and you simply never could acquire the money to purchase it, but Jesus paid it for you.

Hope this helps.



posted on Sep, 14 2013 @ 11:13 PM
link   

gladtobehere



Is it just me or does this anybody else see a cool 3-D effect in this image?
The red lines appear to show up in "front" of the blue parts at the bottom.

Anyway, I am looking at the site now. Wonder how I missed this thread earlier.
edit on 14-9-2013 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)





top topics
 
22
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join