Contradictions in the Bible

[lavikor201]

Now let me ask you something. Since Muslims do not believe the entire Torah is corrupt, at what risk are you going to take that you ridicule something G-d has really said. Since there is no contradictions, just a naive understanding of hebrew and the language ueed in the Torah on your part, I must say that are you risking that you may actually be attacking the word of G-d that has not been corrupted?

Of course the Jewish sages have said that the day the Torah was translated out of hebrew was a day that would be compared to the golden calf sin, because of course they were predicting the ignorant and naive people who would come along and ave the audacity to make claims when they do not understand the first element of the text.

The jewish sages predicted people like you thousands of years ago, because they knew how obvious the unlearned and the naive would be when reading the text.

If I wrote in Hebrew:

"Shalom (name)! I love the way chicken tastes, because all who love chicken are smart."

and then wrote:

"Shalom?!?(means: hello), anyone there?!? you are an idiot!"

"Shalom, (means: peace) my friend! you are the wisest."

I could come up with much more complicated examples, that would represent the actual structure of the verses you have trouble understanding, but since you do not speak hebrew very well you wouldn;t get it.

 

[Grace Seeker]

Do you realize what you have done, lavikor?

To begin with, you haven't read the thread well...

1-You tried very hard to shift the focus from Why God is engaging in inconsistency , describing himself That he can never repent
Num. 23:19 and Do it in Ex. 32:14 etc ,to How God being perfect,knows the future Repents,and that is irrelevant to the topic

Are these honest questions? Because if they are, Lavikor actually address your "apparent" contradiction, and did so very directly. Were you listening? Or do you just like to hear your own voice?

In short, Lavikor's answered that the question does not apply. There is no contradiction because the word "repent" that you have focus on is not the best translation of the passage. It does not say that God does repent in one place and that he does not in another. The truth is that God does not repent in the under of repent that most people associate with that word. Yet, God does sometimes change how he relates to people. And that is the way the passages that speak of God repenting should be understood. Thus there is no contradiction in them


The other thing you have not listened to is that some of us have expressly said that we have no problem with some of the contradictions you have pointed to being labeled contradictions. You have adopted such a combative tone that you fail to realize that on some points we agree. The scripture do say one thing in one place and a different thing in another. Are these contradictions problems? I don't think so. Some of them can probably be harmonized. But some of them don't appear that they can be. Some of them are a result of misunderstanding of the author's intent, such as your references to God repenting and not repenting -- the authors were not making contradictory statements about God so much as talking about different aspects of God's relationship with human beings. And in some cases we may be dealing with copyist or scribal errors. But, alas, in other cases, I think the biblical writer may simply have got it wrong. There source was not correct, or they reported through their very human eyes what they thought was true, when it wasn't really the case at all. I know some will want to argue with that last statement, and if you want to argue with them, go right ahead, but I'm not hear to simply argue.

If you have an honest question, if you are seeking answers as to how I can see that and yet still find the Bible credible, I will gladly address those. But if you just want to go on endless rants, then I will elect to spend my time with those who are willing to listen.

 

[back_to_faith]

Now let me ask you something. Since Muslims do not believe the entire Torah is corrupt, at what risk are you going to take that you ridicule something G-d has really said. Since there is no contradictions, just a naive understanding of hebrew and the language ueed in the Torah on your part, I must say that are you risking that you may actually be attacking the word of G-d that has not been corrupted?

Of course the Jewish sages have said that the day the Torah was translated out of hebrew was a day that would be compared to the golden calf sin, because of course they were predicting the ignorant and naive people who would come along and ave the audacity to make claims when they do not understand the first element of the text.

The jewish sages predicted people like you thousands of years ago, because they knew how obvious the unlearned and the naive would be when reading the text.

If I wrote in Hebrew:

"Shalom (name)! I love the way chicken tastes, because all who love chicken are smart."

and then wrote:

"Shalom?!? anyone there?!?(means: hello), you are an idiot!"

"Shalom, (means: peace) my friend! you are the wisest."

I could come up with much more complicated examples, that would represent the actual structure of the verses you have trouble understanding, but since you do not speak hebrew very well you wouldn;t get it.

You started your monologue with defending the claim ,God is all omniscient (he knows everything because He is outside of time
and for your benefit I will repeat what I said before:

1-the topic is not (God's attributes in the Bible) It is (Bible contradictions)
and the space you wasted in the thread is again related to the topic (God's attributes in the Bible) you can post it in a thread named (defending God's shameful attributes in the Bible)


2-If a Hebrew word can have 20 different meanings again is irrelevant to the contradiction under discussion.
for example:
1 Samuel 15:35
The Lord repented that he had made Saul king over Israel.
Which words would you like to use instead of Repent? refrained,grieved,felt sorry

Let's try them:

1 Samuel 15:35
The Lord refrained that he had made Saul king over Israel.

Makes no sense at all.......


1 Samuel 15:35
The Lord grieved that he had made Saul king over Israel.

your laughable explanation is that Hashem Grieved at man's actions, not repentent. while the text is crystal clear is that :
1-God made Saul a king.
2- Saul disobeyed Gods orders.
3-God felt sorry and repented ever making him a king.

the Question is not man's action here ,It is God's action (making Saul a king),which he (grieved,repent,feel sorry etc) for.

If the word in such specific passage( repented ,grieved , felt sorry etc)means anything, it says, God somehow made a mistake, not that He merely regret the results making Saul a king. but wish He had done something else.

again in 15:29 Num. 23:19 says, "God is not a man that he should lie; neither the son of man that he should repent." There are no qualifiers, modifiers or restrictions applied to the word "repent." It simply says he won't repent. Why he later repents is irrelevant.

 

[lavikor201]

1 Samuel 15:35
The Lord grieved that he had made Saul king over Israel.

your laughable explanation is that Hashem Grieved at man's actions, not repentent. while the text is crystal clear is that :
1-God made Saul a king.
2- Saul disobeyed Gods orders.
3-God felt sorry and repented ever making him a king.

Again you have decided to use the english language when filling in meaning that come from Hebrew. Your first mistake.

But since you want to analyze it from an English language prospective let us do so:

The definition of repent can be:

Definition of repent on the web:[SIZE=-1]

• Acknowledge one's wrong and turn away from it.

[/SIZE]

• [SIZE=-1]www.godonthe.net/dictionary/r.html[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]"God is not a man that he should lie; neither the son of man that he should repent."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]Now the next verse you bring up in the "Christian translations you are using says:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]"Samuel didn't see Saul again before he died, though Samuel mourned over Saul. And the LORD regretted that he had made Saul king of Israel."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]definition of Regret on the web:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]To feel sorry, disappointed, or distressed about.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]http://www.thefreedictionary.com/regretted[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]So in Samuel G-d is saying he felt sorry and was dispaointed in Saul.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]In Numbers, G-d is saying, that G-d could never acknowledge one's wrong, necause he is a perfect being![/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]Not to hard.[/SIZE]

your laughable explanation is that Hashem Grieved at man's actions

Hashem does not grieve, we explain his actions as such because we have not accomplished what he wished us to do with our free will. But I will not get into free will because you cannot even understand the basic concepts of these verses.

 

[back_to_faith]

Again you have decided to use the english language when filling in meaning that come from Hebrew. Your first mistake.

But since you want to analyze it from an English language prospective let us do so:

The definition of repent can be:

Definition of repent on the web:[SIZE=-1]

• Acknowledge one's wrong and turn away from it.

[/SIZE]

• [SIZE=-1]www.godonthe.net/dictionary/r.html[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]"God is not a man that he should lie; neither the son of man that he should repent."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]Now the next verse you bring up in the "Christian translations you are using says:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]"Samuel didn't see Saul again before he died, though Samuel mourned over Saul. And the LORD regretted that he had made Saul king of Israel."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]definition of Regret on the web:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]To feel sorry, disappointed, or distressed about.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]http://www.thefreedictionary.com/regretted[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]So in Samuel G-d is saying he felt sorry and was dispaointed in Saul.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]In Numbers, G-d is saying, that G-d could never acknowledge one's wrong, necause he is a perfect being![/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]Not to hard.[/SIZE]




Hashem does not grieve, we explain his actions as such because we have not accomplished what he wished us to do with our free will. But I will not get into free will because you cannot even understand the basic concepts of these verses.

You just can't get with it my friend.even your shell game can't save you this time !


you claim:

(So in Samuel G-d is saying he felt sorry and was dispaointed in Saul)

correction:the text doesn't say God felt sorry for what Saul did, It says God felt sorry and disappointed by his own act of making Saul a king.
What Saul have done is irrelevant, what matters is what God feels regarding his own act (setting Saul as a king).

What matters is not what caused him feel sorry ,it is if he really felt sorry for a decision he made (making Saul a king) and that is plainly means repentance.


such as if you once let your child home alone with a box of matches ,got back home found it all burned ,so you feel sorry and repent ever letting the child alone as you did........

In Numbers affirms that God never has experience as it. so that is where the contradiction comes.


you finished the post with this interesting statement:

(Hashem does not grieve, we explain his actions as such because we have not accomplished what he wished us to do with our free will.)

In other words the following passage and the comment of Rashi (which i respect and appreciatehim lots ,just doesn't agree with him in this matter )is a cheap propaganda of Hashem about himself:

Genesis 6:6
And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.



well,regarding the questions you asked If i as a muslim believe that not all the torah is fabricated ,If so may be my language is offensive ? as a matter of fact as long as I find parts of the Torah with contradictions still not cleared up ,it will be treated as man's word till I find a clear up which makes sense.

lastly,one of my favorite things is to defend the text of the Torah when I find christians twist it for their own agenda,especially regarding the promised messiah.and their deformed concept about him being born of a virgin,God,savior etc....not only that ,also I think that parts of nowadays Torah contains jewels and words of wisdom(like proverbs etc)...that is also the Quranic point of view. and It pains me in my heart to find the only two religions of monotheism all over the world and the cousins whom their father Abraham in conflict !!!!
though we disagree in this thread but I'm sure I will find you once in my part in a topic related to the new testament.


peace

 

[lavikor201]

So in Samuel G-d is saying he felt sorry and was dispaointed in Saul)

correction:the text doesn't say God felt sorry for what Saul did, It says God felt sorry and disappointed by his own act of making Saul a king.
What Saul have done is irrelevant, what matters is what God feels regarding his own act (setting Saul as a king).

Untrue, you did not read my statement correctly.

"Samuel didn't see Saul again before he died, though Samuel mourned over Saul. And the LORD regretted that he had made Saul king of Israel."

Alright so let us see what this passage is speaking about. G-d "regretted" that he made Saul king of Israel. So now that we have established one of the definitions is "to be disappointed". G-d is disapointed because he made Saul the king. But we learn from seforim like the Zohar that you have to look into the text a bit deeper. We know that G-d does not have "regret", because he knows all, but at the same time he grants us free will which is a deep Kaballistic topic, which I will not get into. The Torah and Tanakh were written for man and not G-d, therefore, the way we understand G-d is by the way we understand anyonelse so he will make an example of what his actions are like so we can see, and say we better not get G-d angry etc.

Now to get deeper. G-d knows all, but at the same time gives Saul free choice. Saul used his free will and G-d was "disapointed" in him although this is another emotion to describe how G-d acts.

The attribute of omniscience, of knowing all things, must be clarified. Jewish belief holds that G-d is timeless. Past, present and future for G-d can be seen as a whole. This much is commonly asserted. What is sometimes not asserted as a corollary is that G-d also knows how things would turn out if differently had a different path been taken at every potential choice-making nexus. God knew you would turn left at Main Street this morning; but He also knows what would have happened had you turned right.

Gen. 6:6-7 -- This (along with another, 1 Sam 15:11, regarding G-d "repenting" over the choice of Saul) is the primary hinge point of the skeptical argument alleging contradiction. But let's look at that word "repent" more closely. Strong's gives this definition:

nacham, naw-kham'; a prim. root; prop. to sigh, i.e. breathe strongly; by impl. to be sorry, i.e. (in a favorable sense) to pity, console, or (reflex.) rue; or (unfavorably) to avenge (oneself): --comfort (self), ease [one's self], repent (-er, -ing, self).​

Now here is a question: Is it not possible to grieve and feel sorry over something -- even if we know that it is going to happen, even if we cause it to happen? Of course it is. And there is no reason why this cannot also apply to G-d, as we shall see.

So it could be "The L-rd sighed that he made Saul reign over Yisrael (because he had so much potential if he used his free will correctly, because G-d can forsee all that could have happend as well.)

It could be that the L-rd thought it was a pity that he made Saul king because if he had used his free will to do good, and not bad, the L-rd new it could have been different.

(Hashem does not grieve, we explain his actions as such because we have not accomplished what he wished us to do with our free will.)

In other words the following passage and the comment of Rashi (which i respect and appreciatehim lots ,just doesn't agree with him in this matter )is a cheap propaganda of Hashem about himself:

Genesis 6:6
And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

Again, when G-d says he grieves in his Torah, it is o we can understand G-d because our minds cannot compute the essence of G-d. A great explanation of this is:

"Angry" is not at all meant literally, not more than when it says "the hand of Hashem" etc. It is merely a moshol. Hashem has no emotions. He does not get angry. But just as "Yad Hashem" represents when Hashem acts in a way that we would associate with out hand, so too "af Hashem" does not mean hashem gets angry but rather His actions are similar to what we would normally associate with as coming from anger.
​

lastly,one of my favorite things is to defend the text of the Torah when I find christians twist it for their own agenda,especially regarding the promised messiah.and their deformed concept about him being born of a virgin,God,savior etc....

Oh, Christians will twist the Torah just as much to serve their needs of finding "proofs" that their idol/messiah is in the Tanakh.

Torah contains jewels and words of wisdom(like proverbs etc)...

The book of Proverbs or Mishlei is the Tanakh. Not written by G-d like the Torah was (5 books of Moshe).

 

[back_to_faith]

Now here is a question: Is it not possible to grieve and feel sorry over something -- even if we know that it is going to happen, even if we cause it to happen? Of course it is. And there is no reason why this cannot also apply to G-d, as we shall see.



Why don't we let the Bible answers better?

We as humans could feel sorry over something -- even if we know that it is going to happen, even if we cause it to happen ,but to apply that to God ,then we violate:

Numbers 3:19
God is not a man that he should lie; neither the son of a man that he should repent.

and

Ezekiel 24:14
I the LORD have spoken it: it shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent.

I think this issue took much of the thread and If you replay to me and me the same to you we will repeat ourselves....
anyway thanx for your answers and we just let the readers judge which comment makes sense more.

I will post soon a new point for discussion but this time from the New testament in order to make the discussion varied.

shalom

 

[back_to_faith]

The christian proof text from the tankah for the messiah is a real farce ,the reader doesn't even need to have a deep study of Hebrew in order to find out the hopless false deception made by Gospel writers especially Matthew ....
the distortion he made from the Tankah ,proved him untrustworthy and turned his gopel to be a landmark of religious deception

 

[lavikor201]

Why don't we let the Bible answers better?

We as humans could feel sorry over something -- even if we know that it is going to happen, even if we cause it to happen ,but to apply that to God ,then we violate

Well the only thing I have to say to that is that the emotions we give G-d in the Torah and Tanakh are so we can understand how G-d is reacting. As I told you G-d does not "love" or get "angry", but rather His actions are similar to what we would normally associate with as coming from anger, because the Torah is a book for humanity, so it is created so we can understand it using our logic.

I think this issue took much of the thread and If you replay to me and me the same to you we will repeat ourselves....

anyway thanx for your answers and we just let the readers judge which comment makes sense more.

It is basically a matter of language. If you read the Torah and Tanakh in hebrew, then the verses you state would not be viewed as contradictions, but since we have a difficult time comprehending how different the cultures are and the languages are, it will always be tough to explain it to an english reader, a reason the sages thought of the day the Torah was translated, comparable to the day the rogue Israelites built the golden calf.

It was nice discussing this with you.

 

[Grace Seeker]

quoting of lavikor
The christian proof text from the tankah for the messiah is a real farce ,the reader doesn't even need to have a deep study of Hebrew in order to find out the hopless false deception made by Gospel writers especially Matthew ....
the distortion he made from the Tankah ,proved him untrustworthy and turned his gopel to be a landmark of religious deception

So, Matthew is deceptive. That is your opinion and you are certainly entitled to it. Deception and contradiction are NOT the same thing. Though I've already granted you that there is certainly the appearance of contradictory statements on more than one occassion. I'm not sure that proves anything.

 

[Tiger_Stripes]

So, Matthew is deceptive. That is your opinion and you are certainly entitled to it. Deception and contradiction are NOT the same thing. Though I've already granted you that there is certainly the appearance of contradictory statements on more than one occassion. I'm not sure that proves anything.

So now you say Mathew is deceptive? What other "deceptions" has he made in the New Testament?

 

[back_to_faith]

So, Matthew is deceptive. That is your opinion and you are certainly entitled to it. Deception and contradiction are NOT the same thing. Though I've already granted you that there is certainly the appearance of contradictory statements on more than one occassion. I'm not sure that proves anything.

Greetings.

contradiction is one of the clues for deception.....
contradictions for me exist in the second level of reasons to believe the NT writers to be untrustworthy. the first level for me is their gross distortion of the OT text for purposes of indoctrination.
that is why I started a threat called(new testament prophecies) If you wish to join me there I will be happy.I just can't highlight the same topic in more than a thread.
Join me there and there is a question is waiting there to be answered.
peace

 

[Grace Seeker]

Greetings.

contradiction is one of the clues for deception.....
contradictions for me exist in the second level of reasons to believe the NT writers to be untrustworthy. the first level for me is their gross distortion of the OT text for purposes of indoctrination.
that is why I started a threat called(new testament prophecies) If you wish to join me there I will be happy.I just can't highlight the same topic in more than a thread.
Join me there and there is a question is waiting there to be answered.
peace

So which is it? You want to prove deception? You want to prove contradiction? You want to prove lack of trustworthiness?

Because while contradiction may be a form of deception in your mind, deception does not necessarily imply contradiction. Though, of course, deception might substantiate untrustworthiness. But you flitter from one thing to another and frankly I have yet to figure out what your overall point is -- except that you come across as just wanting to argue for arguments sake.

Or maybe you just love Islam and the Qur'an so much that you want to build them up, and the best way you can think of to do that is to tear everything else that might be out there down?

In this thead can we stick to contradictions that you see in the Bible? If you have any you see and would honestly like to learn how those who accept the Bible deal with them, I will be glad to engage you in that form of discussion. As for any of your other agendas, I leave that for others to entertain if they so desire. I figure eventually all of these things come up a second and a third time, so no doubt in time I'll get around to the other issues as well. But that is not how I choose to spend my time today.

 

[lavikor201]

Mordekhai Yehoshua ibn Yusef Halevi said: "The confident study, and speak of their beliefs, the insecure study and speak about the beliefs of others."

 

[Keltoi]

Mordekhai Yehoshua ibn Yusef Halevi said: "The confident study, and speak of their beliefs, the insecure study and speak about the beliefs of others."

Great quote!

 

[جوري]

Mordekhai Yehoshua ibn Yusef Halevi said: "The confident study, and speak of their beliefs, the insecure study and speak about the beliefs of others."

That is fresh... considering your words earlier today!-- this is comparative religion. what were you expecting?

Most likely not, however, you will find the studying the Torah and Talmud about 21 out of the 24 hours of the day. You wouldn't want to get into religious discussions because many of them have already memorized the majority of your holiest scriptures (christians, muslims, mormans) and know how to refute missionaries quickly and accuratly. And they may become very angry if your not modestly dressed.

 

[ManchesterFolk]

That is fresh... considering your words earlier today!-- this is comparative religion. what were you expecting?

I am pretty sure Jews do not learn others books to convert others, but to protect Jews from other missionaries, since the three religions that he named all have in common are the biggest "Dawah" or Missionizing religions.

 

[جوري]

^^ thanks for your two cents... he has a keyboard that he can write with to express his beliefs. Or are you his spokes person? “there is no compulsion in religion,” (Quran 2: 256) -- you can lead a horse into the water, but you can make him drink! ---- and I do believe no one has coerced either of you to become members of an Islamic forum? If you are secure in your beliefs you'll have no reason to want to learn of others... You'll exist as a monolithic religion, and you'll hang with your own crowd agreeing eternally with one another away from troubled waters!..... end of story!

peace!

 

[ManchesterFolk]

^^ thanks for your two cents... he has a keyboard that he can write with to express his beliefs. Or are you his spokes person? “there is no compulsion in religion,” (Quran 2: 256) -- you can lead a horse into the water, but you can make him drink! ---- and I do believe no one has coerced either of you to become members of an Islamic forum? If you are secure in your beliefs you'll have no reason to want to learn of others... You'll exist as a monolithic religion, and you'll hang with your own crowd agreeing eternally with one another away from troubled waters!..... end of story!

Just giving my opinion, you do so in every post you make as well.

 

[Grace Seeker]

If you are secure in your beliefs you'll have no reason to want to learn of others... You'll exist as a monolithic religion, and you'll hang with your own crowd agreeing eternally with one another away from troubled waters!..... end of story!

peace!

That doesn't even follow. I'm very secure in my own beliefs. But I also very much enjoy learning, challenging, and being challenged by others, and so it is I enjoy being here on this Muslim forum, even though I am not Muslim. And though I also believe in converting people to Christianity, you will not find one post of mine that has been an attempt at proselytizing, for I try to respect that this is not why others are on here even when they ask me questionas about Christianity. (Though of course, if anyone was interesting in learning more about and actually becoming a Christian, I would accommodate them as best I could and direct them to a local congregation.) So, it is that I am part of a Muslim online forum, because it provides me the opportunity to study many beliefs, and to speak about my own when asked.