Instigator / Pro
0
1469
rating
341
debates
40.91%
won
Topic
#4347

You cannot find a bonafide contradiction in the scriptures.

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Winner
0
2

After 2 votes and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...

Slainte
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
One week
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Winner selection
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
2
1511
rating
25
debates
68.0%
won
Description

Disclaimer : Regardless of the setup for voting win or lose, The aim of this interaction, Is for those that view it, Learn and or take away anything that will amount to any constructive value ultimately. So that counts as anything that'll cause one to reconsider an idea, Understand a subject better, Help build a greater wealth of knowledge getting closer to truth. When either of us has accomplished that with any individual here, That's who the victor of the debate becomes.

Biblical contradictions you find not. Any you think you can find or think you have found, I will attempt to debunk them as contradictions that are perceived to be.

Questions on the topic, leave them in the comments.

Round 1
Pro
#1
Please present what you think are biblical contradictions.
Con
#2
The  Instigator has set the debate, yet asks me to define.  A contradiction refers to a situation where two or more statements, ideas, or claims are inconsistent with each other and cannot all be true at the same time. The legal definition "a logical incompatibility between two or more propositions, where the truth of one or more of them is inconsistent with the truth of the other(s)" (Black's Law Dictionary)

bona fide" is defined as "in or with good faith; honestly, openly, and sincerely; without deceit or fraud." (Black's Law Dictionary)

The debate topic is "You cannot find a bonafide contradiction in the scriptures.", which the Instigator has left to me to define.  Scriptures I will define as the King James Version of the Holy Bible.

I take the topic to mean that  I, cannot find a contradiction in the scripture that I feel is genuine or sincere.  The BOP is therefore on me to show a contradiction, and for the Instigator to prove that my belief in that contradiction is not genuine or not sincere.  

Here are 5 examples of what I genuinely and sincerely feel are contradictions in the scriptures, based on the definitions above.


1.  Genesis 6:19-20 instructs Noah to take two of every kind of living creature onto the Ark, but in Genesis 7:2-3, he is told to take seven pairs of clean animals and only one pair of unclean animals. This inconsistency about the number of animals on the Ark is a contradiction.

2.  In John 19:14, Jesus is crucified on the day of preparation for the Passover, while in Mark 14:12, he is crucified the day after the Passover meal. Which is it?  If that  is not a contradiction, I do not know what is.

3. Matthew 27:5 states that Judas hanged himself, while Acts 1:18 says that he fell headlong, and his body burst open. These two descriptions contradict each other.

4. Genesis 1:25-27, animals are created before humans, but in Genesis 2:18-19, Adam is created before the animals.  Looks like even God does not know the chicken or egg answer.

5.  Exodus 33:11, it says that God spoke to Moses face to face, but in John 1:18, it claims that no one has ever seen God. You cant be there and not there.

My belief that the aforementioned represent contradictions in the scriptures is genuine, sincere and therefore bona fide. 
Round 2
Pro
#3
The first so called contradiction I don't see a conflict.

He takes animals on the ark.

Also I never asked the question will you define contradiction. There are words I just don't think we're ignorant to like "the", "bible", "debate". 

Either you guys don't give yourself enough credit or I give too much.

The second claim. I see " day of preparation for the Passover" and "after Passover meal". Again , these don't quite come into conflict as both can co-exist. Not to mention the timing and the order of chronological events can be out of order . A meal is different from preparing for a day. 

For instance, I spoke to the groom after my wedding meal which was the same day the banquet hall was prepared.

The one about Judas , you'll have to point out the word that can't co-exist with another.

This is what Genesis 2:18-19 actually says versus what you made up.

"18 The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.”

19 Now the Lord God had formed out of the ground all the wild animals and all the birds in the sky. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds in the sky and all the wild animals."

Here's what you said  :

"Adam is created before the animals. "

That statement of yours is not found in either of these two verses. Please don't make up things trying to conjure up false contradictions.

For the one in Exodus I'm just going to copy and paste from another debate so this will be detailed.

Now the John 1:18, one of the things if not the first thing that came to mind was another scripture in John 6.

John 6 and at verse 46 "Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father."

So no man has seen God . That is until the exception by the mercy of God.
Jacob in Genesis 32 saw God face to face and was preserved.

In Exodus 32:20 "And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live."

But back up to verse 11 "And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face". 

Now out of context, it appears to be contrary. But we see the exception in John 6 and God can say no man can see His face except where He shows mercy and those that found grace in His sight.

Exodus 32:17 "And the Lord said unto Moses, I will do this thing also that thou hast spoken: for thou hast found grace in my sight, and I know thee by name."

Down at verse 18 " And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy."

Now these debates are for edification purposes. I suggest that if you're open minded, take my responses to enable your understanding .

If you're indeed close minded, you're not looking to clear up what are perceived to be contradictions.

If you have any more you think are contradictions, present them next round.









Con
#4
Pro has accepted my definitions.  Pro  has not questioned the essence of the debate, and the BOP I have set.
I have shown 5 contradictions.  

First:

The first so called contradiction I don't see a conflict.

He takes animals on the ark.
PRO have not shown how it is not a contradiction,  nor shown that my belief is is a contradiction is not bona fide.

Second:
I accept that there could be a timing issue.  After further study on this I found a few other reasonable explanations.  However it does still appear to be a contradiction, and it has not been shown that my belief there is a contradiction was not bona fide.

Third:
The description of Judas describes two separate ways of his death.  It is an apparent contradiction.  My belief is bona fide.

Fourth:
The language of Genesis 2:18-19 clearly shows that the animals were created after man.  Cause God brought the animals to man to see what he would name them.
Yet in Genesis 1:25-27 it clearly states that god made the animals, and then man in his likeness.

A clear contradiction, and my belief is genuine and bona fide. 

Fifth:
With respect, I do not understand how this is not a contradiction.  My belief that it is a contradiction is bona fide.

I will give one final contradiction for you to address.

Sixth:
2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1 appear to present a discrepancy in the account of David's census of Israel. In 2 Samuel 24:1, it says that God incited David to take a census of Israel, while in 1 Chronicles 21:1, it says that Satan incited David to take the census.


For the record, I am not making things up.  There are many different lenses and ways to look at things.  I have now given 6 bona fide examples of contradictions. I would ask you to be civil, and positive.  

Round 3
Pro
#5
"The description of Judas describes two separate ways of his death.  It is an apparent contradiction.  My belief is bona fide."

How are they separate ways? Let's get a thorough elaboration. Do you know what I mean?

"The language of Genesis 2:18-19 clearly shows that the animals were created after man. Cause God brought the animals to man to see what he would name them.
Yet in Genesis 1:25-27 it clearly states that god made the animals, and then man in his likeness."

You guys continue to say "clearly shows". "Clearly shows" , "clearly shows". How about clearly WRITTEN? That's the point. Can we clearly read your statement in those verses?

You didn't refute that. People, we have to stop evading valid counter points and just concede.

"For the record, I am not making things up. There are many different lenses and ways to look at things. I have now given 6 bona fide examples of contradictions. I would ask you to be civil, and positive.  "

Let me respond to this first because I couldn't resist not to.
These "many different lenses " are the ways to fabricate (making things up) these non authentic contradictions . There's only one correct lense to look at this book called the Bible. Read it as written. Don't add or take away anything. Anything means anything.
There is to be no private personal interpretations.

Not my lense, your lense or multiple lenses. You and many others have not understood this about scripture which will probably be the next topic, is that you read the scriptures as written without presupposing private interpretation. I see this too often just worldwide.

This is another thing, how can these "contradictions" you think exist be bonafide if there are multiple lenses?

If there is no objective lense , then it's subjective so therefore the "contradictions" are just what you think, the way you see it, your view, your opinion, hence not fact, hence not genuine, hence not legitimate, hence not bonafide.

Just recognize the confusion here by saying there are many different lenses. So what ? There is only one correct way to interpret scripture.

Also the truth is the truth. If it's negative to you, it is what it is. Truth is not going to always be sugar coated. 
About being civil, I don't know what you mean.

This is the reaction to speakers and preachers today. These speakers have a sharp firm tongue. People misconstrue this and want a sugar coated message.

Unless you give an example, I won't be able to fulfill your request.

I don't know what you're looking for looks like to you.
All I know is I'm presenting correction. We don't have to spir the rod upon correction. Firm in the truth. Confident in the truth. It's not personal. It's just the business of edification for all.

Another thing I notice speaking to my point about reading things as written, you're not posting the verses, just the references. See what I mean. You're giving your words and not the scriptures.

See this is how and where the whole foundation falls apart. Take note of my explanations. The words don't really stray from what's written. I basically give the context that further explains. You get contradictions when things not surprisingly so, are taken out of context.

Continuing on with what you think(your subjective lense) the text is giving you, what we read in 1 Samuel 24 verse 1 is the following:

"Again the anger of the Lord burned against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, “Go and take a census of Israel and Judah.”

Now we're going to compare the WORDS OF THIS VERSE to the other verse you provided. We're not going to compare our interpretation of what we think and that way we'll stay out of trouble.

1 Chronicles 21:1

"Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel."

If one of these verses stated ONLY the LORD or ONLY 
Satan, then you have a case. 

The question would be why couldn't it be both? You don't ask those questions because they won't help your case .

Just ask and we can go in further. You didn't challenge the explanations I gave to go into them further. You didn't inquire further with them. It doesn't help your position so you take advantage of me offering you to try again with other passages conveniently evading the explanations that will clear up misunderstandings that have you to come to the faulty conclusions of false contradictions.

In short, just based off the text alone, these false contradictions come by way of reading the text assuming one can't come with the other. Why can't they ?
Con
#6
I have met the debate BOP criteria.  I have shown prima facia contradictions.  My belief is genuine and therefore bona fide.

I disagree with the inference that all written language should have a interpretationu unified, and the problem is with the reader. 

English is a terrible language clarity.  That is why Supreme Court judges can't agree on Interpretting language.    This is why there are differences of opinion.

It is claimed that... there are no discrepancies because the problem is with the reader not agreeing that the qualification of the perceived contradictions  is commensurate with the written language.

I have .wt my burden of proof and resent the categorization of "you guys".    I asked for civility, which alas has gone ignored.

I carry my arguments forward as the genuiness of my beliefs has not been questioned or proved non bona fide.
Round 4
Pro
#7
If one of these verses stated ONLY the LORD or ONLY 
Satan, then you have a case. 

The question would be why couldn't it be both?

If both passages are accepted as true and you don't call them a lie, there's no contradiction.

So please answer that question above.

Con
#8
That is a fair question, and goes to the heart of the concept of a contradiction.    

In 2 Samuel 24:1, it says, "Again the anger of the Lord burned against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, 'Go and take a census of Israel and Judah.'"
In 1 Chronicles 21:1, it says, "Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel."

The reason it cannot be both, is because the task is the same task.   The Census.  The person to perform the task is the same, David.  God gave instructions to David.   Satan incited David.

Now  you're claiming that:  David was incited by Satan, and asked by God.  No where does it say that.  You may claim that God was testing David and allowed Satan to be his agent, because God was mad at Israel.   Again there is not evidence to state that.  You may even say, well it is more esoteric, such as the texts are simply recounting the same event from different perspectives, with 2 Samuel emphasizing God's sovereignty and control over events, while 1 Chronicles emphasizes Satan's activity in the world.  No evidence for that, and infact that description would support the contradiction cannot be resolved b y the actual words, which as a biblical purist would not align with how you have presented yourself. 

Extend all arguments.  My contradictions are prima facia, and are bona fide.
Round 5
Pro
#9
"Now  you're claiming that:  David was incited by Satan, and asked by God.  No where does it say that."

2 Samuel 24 verse 1 it reads......

" The Lord’s anger again raged against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, “Go count Israel and Judah.”
.
1 Chronicles 21:1 it says ....

" Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel."

I don't have to claim anything except for a FACT that 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles say that.

See , it is very possible given that you don't believe the Bible, you would say the Bible don't make these two different statements . We just read them both. It is your reasoning, your thoughts that say "well two different entities can't request or charge the same thing to the same person ". But that says you. What does the bible say?

You don't dare to ask how could it be huh? 

Are you familiar with the illustration of a person's conscience with the good side speaking to the individual in one ear and evil speaking in the other?

"You may claim that God was testing David and allowed Satan to be his agent, because God was mad at Israel. Again there is not evidence to state that. "

When you understand and learn scripture line upon line, you would know God does allow things. The serpent in the garden was allowed to talk in one ear of Eve while the other ear heard what God had say.

It's the same thing here. Satan was present and sin was in place . You learn all of this reading these passages in context.

1 Chronicles 21:8

"Then David said to God, “I have sinned greatly".


"You may even say, well it is more esoteric, such as the texts are simply recounting the same event from different perspectives, with 2 Samuel emphasizing God's sovereignty and control over events, while 1 Chronicles emphasizes Satan's activity in the world."

Exactly, there you go. See you have to open your mind to these things. When you have a closed mind and want to disbelieve, it's easier to just close the book and call false contradictions.

"No evidence for that, and infact that description would support the contradiction cannot be resolved b y the actual words, which as a biblical purist would not align with how you have presented yourself. "

Everything you need to know to understand if you want to is in those passages. If you want to but you have to want to learn .

Those that want to learn go beyond those verses you read. You don't go beyond that, it's convenient to say contradiction.

2 Samuel 24:9...

" Joab reported the number of warriors[d] to the king. In Israel there were 800,000 sword-wielding warriors, and in Judah there were 500,000 soldiers."

Let's compare the context between the two passages.

1 Chronicles 21:5

"Joab reported to David the number of warriors.[j] In all Israel there were 1,100,000 sword-wielding[k] soldiers; Judah alone had 470,000 sword-wielding soldiers."

Oh somebody fudging the numbers. Looks like some deception going on . When we talk about  deception, we know Satan is involved in this and is known as the father of lies.

But Joab found the king's word abominable to him as we continue onto verse 6 and on.

"But Levi and Benjamin counted he not among them: for the king's word was abominable to Joab.

7 And God was displeased with this thing"

David, apparently gave a command that was of a different spirit than the Lord. Such as the evil spirit of Satan just like back with Adam and Eve. God says one thing, here comes the evil one influencing a spin on it.

See , line upon line, when you put these passages together, we have one account of God in one passage and the involvement of Satan's hand in the other. When you have sin being provoked, expect his hand to have a play in the mix of it.

2 Samuel 24:1 says what?

"And again the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah".

Ok, so this is what He moved on or in David to do.

Now what was David's command and what was wrong with it?

2 Samuel 24:2 " For the king said to Joab the captain of the host, which was with him, Go now through all the tribes of Israel, from Dan even to Beersheba, and number ye the people, that I may know the number of the people."

Go through all the tribes, no. That's abominable.

Now we're at 1 Chronicles 21:1 "And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel."

So this is why David's command went left  as we read the difference down below.

"2 And David said to Joab and to the rulers of the people, Go, number Israel from Beersheba even to Dan; and bring the number of them to me, that I may know it."

Line upon line. The scriptures go together going in more detail of David's wrongdoing.

Acts 5:3

"But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost"

Satan filled his heart to do wrong like Satan incited David.

















Con
#10
Extend all arguments.  My contradictions are evident and I believed them.  Pro did not address the Bone Fide nature of the contradictions.


All Pro has done is try to argue them away by saying context.  Pro continues to accuse of \false contradictions, and an unwillingness to learn. Because Pro can justify everything away, does not mean that the contradictions don't exist, or can all be resolved.