New Testament Contradictions

actually, even that claim is based on biblical teaching- that's the source of the story that is cited. Therefore, the validity and truth of the bible is the underlying premise for accepting what it says

The contradictions you presented don't have any bearing on the underlying truth of the fundamental premise, however. The underlying story of Christ could be true even if a book written about it after his death, and altered over centuries, contains contradictions.

So while you might say you have 'raised questions' about the fundamental premise of Christianity, by pointing out errors in the manuscript, you haven't debunked it (and again, I think debunking it would be impossible).

If some sentences are contradictory, then what sentences can you believe? The Bible might even be wrong about Jesus.
 
If some sentences are contradictory, then what sentences can you believe? The Bible might even be wrong about Jesus.

"Might be," but that's not the same as debunking it. To debunk it you need to demonstrate that it is incorrect on that point. Can't be done.
 
If some sentences are contradictory, then what sentences can you believe? The Bible might even be wrong about Jesus.

"Might be," but that's not the same as debunking it. To debunk it you need to demonstrate that it is incorrect on that point. Can't be done.

I can prove that one of the 'disciples' is an incompetent liar who doesn't know his history, but the xtians have to decide which is the liar
 
If some sentences are contradictory, then what sentences can you believe? The Bible might even be wrong about Jesus.

"Might be," but that's not the same as debunking it. To debunk it you need to demonstrate that it is incorrect on that point. Can't be done.

I can prove that one of the 'disciples' is an incompetent liar who doesn't know his history, but the xtians have to decide which is the liar

who gives a fuck, really?

you're as fanatical to debunk the bible as any other religious zealot is to defend it. amusing in a boring, repetitious sort of way.

carry on.
 
It sure is confused about when he was born

Actually, it wasn't the authors of the Bible, it was the idiots in Rome called the Catholic church. Because they were looking to expand Rome's influence (which had a lot of pagans in it), they wanted to make it more "pagan friendly", so, Yeshua's birth was changed (by the Catholics), to coincide with the Winter Solstice, and His death was modified to coincide with the Spring Solstice (which also explains sunrise services on Easter).

Last year, Passover happened AFTER Easter, which brings a question.........

Was Yeshua a time traveler? Because (according to the Catholic church and Easter), He was resurrected BEFORE He died at Passover.

Go figure hunh?
 
Here is the 1st one:

Matthew 8:5-13 reflects common usage, whereas Luke 7:1-10 provides the more specific details. Although conveyed through others, the words were those of the centurion, and the narrative in Matthew portrays the interchange as taking place between Jesus and the centurion. The account in Luke, however, relates how the centurion communicated with Jesus. Therefore, the words Jesus spoke to those who represented the centurion are referred to in Matthew 8:5-13 as having been directed to him.

Healing the Centurion’s Servant (Matthew 8:5-13; Luke 7:1-10) | Werner Bible Commentary
 
I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about Herod dying ten years before the cenus

Well shit.......maybe he was a time traveler as well. I mean......the Catholics take EXTREME liberties with the Bible.

And......if the Pope named Rat Singer/Bent Dick is really as close to God as you claim, then why the fuck doesn't he fix some of this shit instead of blessing Lamborghinis?
 
And the second:

Please explain the apparent contradiction between Acts 9:7 and 22:9, concerning Paul's conversion.

Acts 9:7 states, “And the men which journeyed with him [Paul] stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.” Acts 22:9 reads, “And they that were with me [Paul] saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of Him [Christ] that spoke to me.” At first glance, there seems to be a contradiction in these scriptures. In Acts 7:9, the people traveling with Paul heard a voice, but in 22:9, it reads that they did not.

In the Greek language (in which the entire New Testament was originally written), the word “akouo” is used in both of these accounts. Like many other words, this word has different meanings that vary depending on the context in which it is used. It can mean to both understand and to hear.

This same word is used in I Corinthians 14:2, which clearly shows the intended meaning: “For he that speaks in an unknown tongue speaks not unto men, but unto God: for no man understands [Greek: akouo] him; howbeit in the spirit he speaks mysteries.” Although they heard a voice, they did not understand.

This is what happened to Paul and those with him while traveling to Damascus. While the men with him heard Christ’s voice—they did not understand what was said. However, Paul both heard and understood!

While it may seem to be a contradiction, God’s Word does not contradict itself (John 10:35). In fact, the only problem with these scriptures is one of translation. Acts 22:9 should read, “And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they understood not the voice of Him that spoke to me.”


http://www.thercg.org/questions/p178.a.html
 
Last edited:
And the third:

My daughter is even now dead. Luke says that this was his only daughter, and that she was twelve years of age. Mark and Luke say that she was at the point of death, and that information of her actual death was brought to him by one who was sent by the ruler of the synagogue, while Jesus was going. Matthew combined the two facts, and stated the representation which was made to Jesus, without stopping particularly to exhibit the manner in which it was done. In a summary way he says that the ruler communicated the information. Luke and Mark, dwelling more particularly on the circumstances, state at length the way in which it was done; that is, by himself stating, in a hurry, that she was about to die, or dying, and then in a few moments sending word that she was dead. The Greek word, rendered is even now dead, does not of necessity mean, as our translation would express, that she had actually expired, but only that she was dying or about to die. Compare Genesis 48:21. It is likely that a father, in these circumstances, would use a word as nearly expressing actual death as would be consistent with the fact that she was alive. The passage may be expressed thus: "My daughter was so sick that she must be, by this time, dead."

Matthew - Chapter 9 - Barnes' Notes on the New Testament on StudyLight.org
 
I started you off easy. You've many left to go


What do you mean, "you" started me off easy...don't you mean Bassam Zawadi started me off easy? Are you Bassam Zawadi?

Contradictions In The New Testament That Have No Good Answer.


MUSLIM: Bassam Zawadi has written more than two hundred articles on Islam and Christianity. He is currently studying in Dubai (United Arab Emirates), but he has also lived in Canada, the United States, and Saudi Arabia. He runs the website http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/ and works for one of the world’s leading marketing research companies.

Iron Sharpens Iron: MUSLIM vs CHRISTIAN DEBATE: BASSAM ZAWADI vs DAVID WOOD (PART 2)
 
Last edited:
actually, smart, it proves that it's not the word of an infallible deity

Smartt: Not so. God's Word is infalible in it's message. Men make mistakes due to perception, and available knowledge at any given time. You still listen to the weather man even though he says what time the sun will rise and set. His error is meaningless.

You can not find contradections anywhere on the Bible that will change God's message of love and salvation. His message is there, clearly for those who will see. When one chooses to look at punctuation, etc, one will fall off the cliff because he has put on blindfolds.

I need not prove that, just sayin'.

God bless you
 
I started you off easy. You've many left to go


What do you mean, "you" started me off easy...don't you mean Bassam Zawadi started me off easy? Are you Bassam Zawadi?

Contradictions In The New Testament That Have No Good Answer.


MUSLIM: Bassam Zawadi has written more than two hundred articles on Islam and Christianity. He is currently studying in Dubai (United Arab Emirates), but he has also lived in Canada, the United States, and Saudi Arabia. He runs the website http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/ and works for one of the world’s leading marketing research companies.

Iron Sharpens Iron: MUSLIM vs CHRISTIAN DEBATE: BASSAM ZAWADI vs DAVID WOOD (PART 2)

This kids, is why you don't plagiarize and pretend it was your own work. OP got owned.
 
If some sentences are contradictory, then what sentences can you believe? The Bible might even be wrong about Jesus.

"Might be," but that's not the same as debunking it. To debunk it you need to demonstrate that it is incorrect on that point. Can't be done.

Okay. So the story of Jesus might be true or it might be false. Still, you can’t say that it is true merely because the Bible says that it is true.
 
Smartt: Don't get all excited by thinking the Bible is messed up and not true. The thing is, you are only looking at the empty research of another person who is out to show the Bible to be wrong. However, there is far more to cause one to believe than just the stories. The Bible iks alive with truth that is eternal and final truth.

I suggest you do your own study and research, from both the positive and negative perspective. The sources you have used here are only negative. I dare you to take an honest and serious look on your own.

 
The Bible in no way contradicts itself, the only people who wish to spread that lie are non-believers who want to turn the righteous away from God and to prevent people from believing and being saved.
 

Forum List

Back
Top