Disclaimer: I am in know way claiming to be perfect, completely learned, a "theologian/apologist", or all understanding of the Word of God (the Bible). I do not successfully follow Christ daily; but, I do continue to follow Christ and am not a fanatic. I look to God with prayer and the Bible for answers and peace in all instances, hoping to be fully obedient to His will in all things. I also hope to always express in love my faith, so I am praying that I continue to "walk in love" as I talk and communicate what I believe is the absolute truth in Christ. More relative to anyone reading this post, if you really want to know something about Bible context, you are better off finding more than one study bible with notes and examining the notes on the text and visiting with teachers and groups who study the Bible daily. The following are merely my observations and logical reasoning.
This will also be a continuous work in progress as there are so many points to address and I don't think it's wise to try to post everything in one article and expect anyone to read it attentively.
This post was inspired by an email I received from a family member who I love and respect dearly. I am grateful he continues to include me on such topics of discussion and am thankful he is not judgmental like: some who may pass on such "information" as to what invoked this post; nor like those who would react with judgmental statements as I'm sure many have experienced.
The e-mail I received included the following:
"one of many sites regarding errors in the bible
http://atheism.about.com/od/biblecontradictionserror/Bible_Contradictions_Errors_Bible_is_Full_of_Contradictions_Errors.htm
A short list of humorous errors are at wikipedia, note under King James... there is a wife beaters bible, sinners bible. etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_errata"
I am always curious to what atheist arguments there are and am just now (while composing this) curious as to the percentage of pro-atheism websites/postings versus "truly biblical" response websites/postings. Maybe I would look that up some time, but that really isn't important, to look up numbers like that; after all, this should never be a numbers game that decides who is right or what is Truth. I know I am not going to have an answer for everything, nor is any other man [human for your political correctness ;)] and I don't need to defend the Bible; however, 1 Peter 3:15 states "15 But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect," and Habakkuk 1:5 "Look at the nations and watch--and be utterly amazed. For I am going to do something in your days that you would not believe, even if you were told."
The introduction to the "about.com" link states:
"The Bible is full of contradictions and inconsistencies, just as we would expect of a collection of books written by many people, edited by many others, and all over a span of many centuries. Biblical contradictions and inconsistencies are easy to find and explain, if you're willing to pay attention."
If we want to look at things logically and reason from this argument alone, we could easily say the same thing about this article and wikipedia: "is full of contradictions and inconsistencies, just as we would expect of a collection of "information" written by many people and edited by many others". This is not a jab at humanity or those that contribute opinions and facts; but. if one is to make this statement about a "collection of books" would it not apply to any collection of writings? - especially to the internet in which there is only trust among people to hold each other accountable to immediate statements and not always time-tested information.
The second statement in the "about.com" intro: "contradictions and inconsistencies are easy to find and explain, if you're willing to pay attention" could be turned into a contrasting argument in that, if you are willing, you will pay attention and can find explanations/reasonable/logical arguments to the so-called contradictions and inconsistencies. Again, it may simply come down to, are you willing to pay attention and what are you willing to believe? After all, it really comes down to belief; just as one could state a "fact" about a historical figure such as (for us U.S. Americans) George Washington had false teeth, but I myself cannot prove any artifacts are truly his false teeth and so I have to take some one else's word for it, whether that be scientific studies or historical documents. I know, it's kind of a lame example, but hopefully it gets my point across and you may be thinking, "No one is putting great faith in George Washington's false teeth," and rightly so.
There are approximately 67 (probably more posted, as the original composition of this blog is over a year old) "contradictions and arguments" in the "about.com" article and as I would like to address each one, I am sure I will eventually lose the desire to because of the statement above regarding a "will to believe", since even if one is presented with all evidence, one's choice to believe still comes down to belief. (this may not be a correct statement, but it makes sense to me) I may attempt in other posts to address each "contradiction", but I am being realistic about my own actions.
"I love my wife"
"I love my children/family"
"I love to play music"
"I love my friends"
"I love Jesus"
Love is a commonly used word in U.S. culture; however, each one of these have a different meaning. Love for my wife/kids/family is different than my desire (love) to play music. For more on "love", look up Greek definitions of the word "love" as used in the Bible.
This is just a small example as to differences of our own definitions for the same words, so we have to examine what did the original text (language) actually mean when we come across "conflicting" statements. Are you willing to spend the time it takes to investigate the language and the culture of the time of the text?
Take journalism, for instance (this is my humble opinion and observation): if we have one event take place, but 4 different journalists who witness, investigate, and compose their observations, we will more than likely get 4 different perspectives, possibly focusing on 4 different points, yet still able to communicate the same basic information about an event. Even with multiple reporters and witnesses, we are not going to get all the information regarding every detail, even if we were witnesses to the event. We have to observe what each writer reports and understand why each reported what was reported in that perspective (reason behind the presented information).
I'm sure there is more to be said about reasoning and logically deciding validity of information, but that is all I can think of at this moment. On to the article mentioned...
This will also be a continuous work in progress as there are so many points to address and I don't think it's wise to try to post everything in one article and expect anyone to read it attentively.
This post was inspired by an email I received from a family member who I love and respect dearly. I am grateful he continues to include me on such topics of discussion and am thankful he is not judgmental like: some who may pass on such "information" as to what invoked this post; nor like those who would react with judgmental statements as I'm sure many have experienced.
The e-mail I received included the following:
"one of many sites regarding errors in the bible
http://atheism.about.com/od/biblecontradictionserror/Bible_Contradictions_Errors_Bible_is_Full_of_Contradictions_Errors.htm
A short list of humorous errors are at wikipedia, note under King James... there is a wife beaters bible, sinners bible. etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible_errata"
I am always curious to what atheist arguments there are and am just now (while composing this) curious as to the percentage of pro-atheism websites/postings versus "truly biblical" response websites/postings. Maybe I would look that up some time, but that really isn't important, to look up numbers like that; after all, this should never be a numbers game that decides who is right or what is Truth. I know I am not going to have an answer for everything, nor is any other man [human for your political correctness ;)] and I don't need to defend the Bible; however, 1 Peter 3:15 states "15 But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect," and Habakkuk 1:5 "Look at the nations and watch--and be utterly amazed. For I am going to do something in your days that you would not believe, even if you were told."
The introduction to the "about.com" link states:
"The Bible is full of contradictions and inconsistencies, just as we would expect of a collection of books written by many people, edited by many others, and all over a span of many centuries. Biblical contradictions and inconsistencies are easy to find and explain, if you're willing to pay attention."
If we want to look at things logically and reason from this argument alone, we could easily say the same thing about this article and wikipedia: "is full of contradictions and inconsistencies, just as we would expect of a collection of "information" written by many people and edited by many others". This is not a jab at humanity or those that contribute opinions and facts; but. if one is to make this statement about a "collection of books" would it not apply to any collection of writings? - especially to the internet in which there is only trust among people to hold each other accountable to immediate statements and not always time-tested information.
The second statement in the "about.com" intro: "contradictions and inconsistencies are easy to find and explain, if you're willing to pay attention" could be turned into a contrasting argument in that, if you are willing, you will pay attention and can find explanations/reasonable/logical arguments to the so-called contradictions and inconsistencies. Again, it may simply come down to, are you willing to pay attention and what are you willing to believe? After all, it really comes down to belief; just as one could state a "fact" about a historical figure such as (for us U.S. Americans) George Washington had false teeth, but I myself cannot prove any artifacts are truly his false teeth and so I have to take some one else's word for it, whether that be scientific studies or historical documents. I know, it's kind of a lame example, but hopefully it gets my point across and you may be thinking, "No one is putting great faith in George Washington's false teeth," and rightly so.
There are approximately 67 (probably more posted, as the original composition of this blog is over a year old) "contradictions and arguments" in the "about.com" article and as I would like to address each one, I am sure I will eventually lose the desire to because of the statement above regarding a "will to believe", since even if one is presented with all evidence, one's choice to believe still comes down to belief. (this may not be a correct statement, but it makes sense to me) I may attempt in other posts to address each "contradiction", but I am being realistic about my own actions.
- Linguistics
As one who is willing to pay attention, you have to realize inconsistencies in vocabulary definitions and the understanding of cultural implications. If we look at our own U.S. American "English" we have multiple definitions and usages for single words, such as "love":"I love my wife"
"I love my children/family"
"I love to play music"
"I love my friends"
"I love Jesus"
Love is a commonly used word in U.S. culture; however, each one of these have a different meaning. Love for my wife/kids/family is different than my desire (love) to play music. For more on "love", look up Greek definitions of the word "love" as used in the Bible.
This is just a small example as to differences of our own definitions for the same words, so we have to examine what did the original text (language) actually mean when we come across "conflicting" statements. Are you willing to spend the time it takes to investigate the language and the culture of the time of the text?
- Authors (writers), Perspective, and Focus
From what I understand, we have over 40 "authors" in the Bible, not creators of content in the Bible (what did I say about definitions), but those that penned the text over a great length of time. There are going to be different perspectives of events and different points of focus; however, if they are gathered in one collection, they will all come together in agreement for the final point.Take journalism, for instance (this is my humble opinion and observation): if we have one event take place, but 4 different journalists who witness, investigate, and compose their observations, we will more than likely get 4 different perspectives, possibly focusing on 4 different points, yet still able to communicate the same basic information about an event. Even with multiple reporters and witnesses, we are not going to get all the information regarding every detail, even if we were witnesses to the event. We have to observe what each writer reports and understand why each reported what was reported in that perspective (reason behind the presented information).
I'm sure there is more to be said about reasoning and logically deciding validity of information, but that is all I can think of at this moment. On to the article mentioned...
1 comment:
This is exactly why context is important. I get stuff like this all the time from atheists and the like.
Post a Comment