Contradictions in the Bible

In order to refresh the original topic
here another NT Clear contradiction:

IS JOHN THE BAPTIST ELIJAH ?!!!

YES:

Matthew 17:12-13
But I say unto you, That Elias is come already.... then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

Mark 9:13
But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed, as it is written of him.


NO:
with John 1:21 ("And they asked him (John the Baptist--Ed.), What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No").
In the former verses Jesus said John the Baptist was the Elijah who was prophesied to come, while in the latter verse John says he isn't.

I have deep respect for Christianity and Christians. Instead of attacking the Bible we should be defending each other (Christians and Muslims) against atheists.

format_quote Originally Posted by Tiger_Stripes

I have deep respect for Christianity and Christians. Instead of attacking the Bible we should be defending each other (Christians and Muslims) against atheists.

Why do you need to defend yourself from atheists?
Do atheists physically harm you?
Or are just intolerant of a contrary belief, or lack there of?

format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi

You leave out the rest.

John 1:19-23

They asked him, "Then who are you? Are you Elijah?"
He said, "I am not."
"Are you the Prophet?"
He answered, "No."




Finally they said, "Who are you? Give us an answer to take back to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?" John replied in the words of Isaiah the prophet, "I am the voice of one calling in the desert, 'Make straight the way for the Lord.' "

So why did he refuse to call himself Elijah, but instead give a verbal clue? Because John knew, like the Messiah, that his ministry would be rejected. You also take the verses out of order. The second passage was the one above...the third passage is this:

Matt 17:10-13
The disciples asked him, "Why then do the teachers of the law say that Elijah must come first?"
Jesus replied, "To be sure, Elijah comes and will restore all things. But I tell you, Elijah has already come, and they did not recognize him, but have done to him everything they wished. In the same way the Son of Man is going to suffer at their hands." Then the disciples understood that he was talking to them about John the Baptist.

You can't get with it my friend,even your shell game can't save you this time
1-
In order to understand the new testament passages under discussion we need to go back to the old testament original prophecy regarding Elijah:

According to the Old Testament book of II Kings, Elijah the Prophet had ascended "into heaven" in a "chariot of fire." (see: chapter 2) This spectacular event supposedly happened about 850 years before Christ. Later, in about 450 BC, Malachi prophesied that this same Elijah, who had ascended into heaven, was also going to return from heaven to herald the coming of the Messiah:

.... Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD" -Malachi 4:1-5

The Jewish religious leaders of Jesus' day were well aware of the 'return of Elijah' prophecy. At one time the rabbis had asked Jesus' disciples to explain how Jesus could possibly have been the Messiah when it was obvious that Elijah had not returned from heaven yet.

The Apostles couldn't answer this question, so they asked Jesus:

"Why do the Jewish leaders insist Elijah must return before the Messiah comes?"
Jesus answered by first affirming that this question was valid and that this prophecy indeed was true. He said:
"They are right. Elijah must come and set everything in order..."
But then, to everyone's surprise, Jesus explained:
"In fact, he [Elijah] already has come, but he wasn't recognized, and was badly mistreated by many... Then the disciples realized he was speaking of John the Baptist."-Matthew 17:10-13 (LIVING BIBLE-CATHOLIC EDITION) (this account can also be found in: Mark 9:11-13)
Clearly, Jesus taught that this was a true prophecy. Jesus agreed that Elijah indeed "must return before the Messiah comes." But then, to the surprise to everyone there, Jesus claimed that John the Baptist was the fulfillment of this prophecy.

How, could John possibly have been the return of Elijah? Malachi didn't say anything about Elijah's return being in some mysterious, unrecognizable way. Neither does he say that some other man is going to be born hundreds of years later and that this man somehow was going to be the return of Elijah. Instead, Malachi clearly says that Elijah himself was going to return. That's not a difficult concept to visualize. Elijah ascended into heaven in a chariot of fire. And he's going to come back. Visibly. Physically. In the flesh.

One of the strongest testimonies that John is not Elijah is on the Mount of Transfiguration (Matt. 17:3; Luke 9:30; Mark 9:4-5). Elijah and Moses appear and Jesus talks to Elijah. The disciples recognize him as Elijah in his original form, not as John the Baptist. One must either concede that they are 2 different people or that John the Baptist turned back into Elijah. To claim that Elijah is John the Baptist is to teach reincarnation. The premise is that a spirit in a former body comes back to be born in another body. At the very least, it is transmigration. The Bible has never taught this. In II Kings 2:1, we find Elijah taken bodily into Heaven. For one to enter Heaven they must be transformed (1 Cor. 15:50-54), changed to an immortal body, a body which is no longer subject to death since corruptible flesh cannot enter into Heaven. If Elijah came back as John the Baptist, and was killed, this would be impossible according to Scripture. For one who has had a changed body to be equipped for Heaven, does not turn back to mortality. If we look at it more carefully in II Kings 2:11 Elijah never experienced physical death so for him to come back in another body means he reincarnated not only in Spirit but in body too, and the Bible never teaches either one of these. Elijah did not die, so the Scripture is not talking about his reincarnation as John the Baptist (2 Kings 2:1,11).The Bible teaches resurrection, a totally different concept.

2-
OT Misquotations -- (1) MATT. 3:3 ("For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias (Isaiah--Ed.), saying, 'The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight") is an inaccurate translation of Isa. 40:3 RSV ("A voice cries: In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God"). Nothing is said in Isaiah about one crying in the wilderness.

3-

Malachi 4:5-6.Behold, I will asend you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
6 And he shall turn the heart of the of fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

it very interesting that John the Baptist, who apparently was standing in for a preoccupied Elijah, was supposed to have been trying to reconcile families as stipulated in Malachi 4:5-6. Yet, there is not one reference to John the Baptist ever attempting to perform that required function.
. To make matters worse, Jesus claimed in Luke 12:49-53 that his mission was to divide families.
So we have John the Baptist portrayed as Elijah by the New Testament writers who is supposed to have a mission to reconcile families and Jesus having a mission to divide them. A more absurd set of mission parameters for two men living at the same time, allegedly directed by the same God, I can't imagine. This is the type of nonsense that occurs when writers attempt to concoct and retrofit an agenda or storyline into an existing prophecy as the New Testament authors did.


4-

There is yet a final falsehood to notice in this wonderful NT passage

"But I say unto you, That Elias is indeed come, and they have done unto him whatsoever they listed], as it is written of him." Mark 9:13

first: the death of John is ascribed directly to Herod Antipas,Not the jews as Mark 9:13 claims
(Matthew 14:10). "He [Herod Antipas] sent and had John beheaded in the prison"

second: Mark 9:13 Bless us with imaginary prophecy :

they have done unto him(John the baptist or Elijah ,whatever you wish to call him) whatsoever they listed], as it is written of him."

Question: where is it written in the old testament that (John the baptist or Elijah) will be killed etc as Mark claims (mark 9:13 they have done unto him as it is written of him) ???????

Yet, despite this flaw and the many others noted, millions of people consider this Book a remarkable example of divine word. In reality, the only remarkable thing about it is that so many intelligent people could have been duped into believing that it was remarkable.

format_quote Originally Posted by Al Habeshi

Well, the reason I retracted my previous statement is because I felt I had made a fundamental mistake, in saying that the method would be exactly the same, it would mean that the scripture the method is being implimented on would be of the same background as the other. But thats not true.

The came to us from a man, in his life time, was dictated under his supervision, thus, if theres an apparent contradiction, then it would be logical that we are misunderstanding it since he would have been confronted with such a statement if there was a contradiction in his life.

This is also true with the individual biblical gospels, (thats if we hold that each of the Gospels had one author) for example, if theres an internal contradiction within the Gospel of Mark for example, and we believe the author of Mark was one person writing it, then it would be logical for us to try to harmonise the text.

The difference comes when we look at the 4 Gospels together, they were individual books, which went around individually. Unlike the individual Gospel or the Qu'ran. It is because of this fundamental differences that I dont think we can use one Gospel to harmonise the other, since in reality, the Gospels were not written as part of a greater book, but rather written for their own purpose. Harmonisation can take place, but not to extremes practiced like some.

That's in my view.



Well, if you have hebrew speaking people, who provide you with the explanation of a believer in the scripture who spends his whole life learnng about it, and their refutation is just illogical, can you really think theres hope for others?

Thank you Eesa for clarifying. I see this reasoning now.

Well, if you have hebrew speaking people, who provide you with the explanation of a believer in the scripture who spends his whole life learnng about it, and their refutation is just illogical, can you really think theres hope for others?

The only problem with your logic, is that your naive view that is because you do not understand Hebrew culture, or the language the response is "illogical" is the only illogical response.

That is why the Jewish sages compare the day the Torah was translated from Hebrew into another language to the day the golden calf was built. These guys thousands of years ago predicted naive people like you, who would not be able to grasp the difference of languages, and therefore, with no knowledge would attack their scriptures.

Not a bad predictions, but pretty obvious.

I guess I did learn a lot from my comparative religion classes.

format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi

In regards to back_to-faith,

I'm not sure what "shell game" you are referring to, but perhaps I should elaborate on my explanation as you obviously didn't get the point I was trying to convey.


John said he was not Elijah. And, as you pointed out, this seems odd because in Matt. 11:14 Jesus says of John, "And if you care to accept it, he himself is Elijah, who was to come." So what's going on here? According to most respected Biblical scholars, Jesus is saying that if the Jews had recieved Him, they would also have understood that John fulfilled the O.T. prediction of the coming of Elijah before the day of the Lord. But of course the Jews did not receive Jesus at His first coming. Afterward, Jesus began to veil His message in parables.

And later still, after the Transfiguration when the disciples ask Jesus why the scribes say that Elijah must come first, Jesus responds by saying, "Elijah is coming and will restore all things; but I say to you, that Elijah already came, and they did not recognize him, but did to him whatever they wished." Then the text goes on to say, "Then the disciples understood that He had spoken to them about John the Baptist" (Matt. 17:10-13).

In other words, John the Baptist would have served as the fulfillment of God's promise to send Elijah before the day of the Lord if the Jews had recieved Jesus as their Messiah. They did not, however, as so, as Jesus makes clear in Matt 17:11, Elijah is still to come.

Not only the gospel writers contradict themselves but you as well Keltoi !!

in your first try to answe me you said :

(John replied in the words of Isaiah the prophet, "I am the voice of one calling in the desert, 'Make straight the way for the Lord.' "So why did he refuse to call himself Elijah, but instead give a verbal clue? Because John knew, like the Messiah, that his ministry would be rejected. )

in other words John thought that he is the fulfillment of Malachi 4:5, but refused to call himself Elijah ,Because John knew, like the Messiah, that his ministry would be rejected,

in your second post you said Jesus makes clear in Matt 17:11, Elijah is still to come.)
Look How the contradiction got you confused !!!

You said: (According to most respected Biblical scholars, Jesus is saying that if the Jews had recieved Him, they would also have understood that John fulfilled the O.T. prediction of the coming of Elijah before the day of the Lord. But of course the Jews did not receive Jesus at His first coming.)

Again your muddle is exposed ,your most respected Biblical scholars ignored the fact that :
1-John the baptist can by no mean fulfill the OT (read my previous post well)
2-The original prophecy in Malachi is crystal clear that (Elijah the prophet will come back from heaven physically before the first appearance of the messiah)

3- The jews didn't recieve Jesus nor John the baptist as a fulfillment of both the prophecy of Elijah return and the promised messiah simply because
neither Jesus fulfilled the old messianic prophecies nor John the baptist was Elijah the prophet (read my previous post).

You said:
(In other words, John the Baptist would have served as the fulfillment of God's promise to send Elijah before the day of the Lord if the Jews had recieved Jesus as their Messiah. They did not)

In other words that means John the Baptist never fulfilled God's promise to send Elijah before the day of the Lord
Do you realize what that means?
not only gives the lie to the words of Jesus (claiming that the prophecy of Malachi regarding Elijah is fulfilled in John) but also destroy the claim of Jesus as being the promised messiah...If John the baptist was not Elijah logically Jesus is not the Messiah.
If you still waiting the real Elijah to be sent and turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers Malachi (4:5, 6), I will be waiting for the real Messiah too.
plainly put it If John the baptist was not the fulfillment of Malachi whatever reasons were ,Jesus couln't be the promised messiah.
as the arrival of the real Elijah and his supposed role as turning the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers is one of the most important textual requirements concerning the messiah.

This is the type of nonsense that occurs when writers attempt to concoct and retrofit an agenda or storyline into an existing prophecy as the New Testament authors did.

format_quote Originally Posted by back_to_faith

It seems that you have no idea about the problem under discussion...

But I do understand. I am trying to help you understand.

Every story about Christ has something important in it that you should remember because ultimately it will make you a better person.

format_quote Originally Posted by back_to_faith

..it doesn't relate to a contradiction in timing ....

If you look through this forum and read threads you learn that Muslims find numerous mistakes in the bible. But most relate to trivial things. Begin by reading the second post in this thread.