I am having some conflicting feelings lately that I need some advice on. I am starting to believe that the Bible contradicts itself but at the same time I love Jehovah and Jesus and have hope for some form of eternal life. That will never change but I have never believed in the bible 100% coming from God. I have always believed that the bible writers added their own thoughts and ideals in the bible and people just ran with it. Some things in the bible just don't add up. For example as christians whatever your denomination(catholic, born-again, jw, mormon, seven day adventist, etc;) we were taught that God is all knowing so when he created Adam and Eve he knew that they would sin. If this is so then God is responsible for all of the problems we have now past and present and Satan is not the blame. If God knowingly created potential evil then he is responsible. If I knowingly rent an apartment to a person I know sets fires to property and I rent the apartment to him with this knowlege and he burns down my apartment building and kills all of my tenants how in the world could I blame another person? This is what it seems Jehovah does passing the blame on Satan when Jehovah knew all along that Adam and Eve were going to fail and sin. And why would God be mad at Adam and Eve if he already knew the outcome? If I put my 3 year old son in a room with messy chocolate cake on my new rug and return an hour later to find chocolate cake all over the rug many people would think that I was crazy and how could I get mad at the 3 year old if I knew he would mess up my new rug? Jehovah specifically tells Adam and Eve that in the "day" that they eat the fruit they would surely die. They both lived on for many years Adam well into 900 plus years so did God change his mind? We are taught that Jesus is perfect but the bible says "all" men have fallen short of the glory of God. Did the bible writer forget about Jesus? Jesus told the woman that was about to be stoned to "sin no more" So did she become perfect at that very moment never to sin again or was Jesus exaggerating? The bible condemns "witchcraft" and all forms of sorcery and spiritism but Jehovah allowed his prophet Saul to go to the witch on Endor and she conjured up the spirit of Samuel(1 sam 28:15) was Jehovah condoning witchcraft for the moment and forgot about the old testament law? And what about David and Jonathan does this story not prove that David was a least a bisexual man and had an affair with Jonathan? I am a straight man and I would never undress in front of my best friend and kiss my best friend and tell my best friend that I love him more than a woman like David. Only a gay or bisexual man would do this so was David gay or bisexual? And if he was does Jehovah condone homosexualality when it is one of his prophets?
Can a person believe that the Bible contradicts itself and be a Christian?
by booker-t 26 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
DaCheech
If God condemned Adam/Eve to die when they sinned.... then why are Children born with
birth defects? Why are children drying in the womb? Why are mothers dying with their children?
Why are people dying as children?
Would not the curse put by God just affect the fact that we would just grow old and die? Or Die from sickness
at old age?
Why is it affecting the innocent in a way that does not make sense?
-
NewLight2
booker-t,
I hope the following helps you.
1. "Jehovah specifically tells Adam and Eve that in the "day" that they eat the fruit they would surely die. They both lived on for many years Adam well into 900 plus years so did God change his mind?"
No, God did not change his mind. When Adam and Eve ate the fruit, they died spiritually, not physically. Spiritual death means separation from God.
Most of the questions you have asked here reflect the doctrine that you were taught as a JW. Many doctrines taught by the Watchtower Society do not agree with the Bible?s true meaning. That is why the WT created their own version of the Bible. Buy yourself a good "Study Bible" like the NIV Study Bible published by Zondervan. This study bible has lots of notes that explain what appears to be a contradiction in meaning.
2. "We are taught that Jesus is perfect but the bible says "all" men have fallen short of the glory of God. Did the bible writer forget about Jesus?"
No, Jesus WAS born without original sin. He WAS different. This question is another one that stems from faulty WT doctrine. Jesus was MORE than just a mere human being.
3. "Jesus told the woman that was about to be stoned to "sin no more" So did she become perfect at that very moment never to sin again or was Jesus
exaggerating?"
No, she did not become perfect. Jesus just told the woman to change her ways and to stop living a life filled with sinful behavior.
Here is a very simple outline that will help you study the Bible chapter by chapter:
A Bible Study Outline -
NewLight2
Sorry about the messed up URL. Here is the correct one:
-
Preston
I don't think all of the questions you raised we will ever truly get the 100% picture on in terms of the social, cultural, and spiritual context. According to my understanding, being a Christian means being as the Christ. Christ's example, and even non-believers will say this, that his example is something we should learn and imitate from. I really believe that. I believe you can still be as the Christ no matter what you perceive regarding apparent contradictions in the Bible.
In the past couple of years my perceptions have been challenged regarding certain teachings in the Bible. You must kill witches in the Old Testament....welll...if you were to ask any number of witches what lies behind their skills they merely see it as harnassing what nature has provided and using it to benefit people. I think there was a lot of fear during that time period of the unknown and I think this is what lies behind the Bible's teachnings in some respects.
As for Jonathan and David, as a gay man I think I can bring some perspective to their relationship. I think homosexuality was a lot more common than people think it was in David's time, but gay people were viewed as outsiders in a way to the traditional relationships between men and women. In the account of Jonathan and David I think its obvious what was going on but I think even the Bible writers were apprehensive of stating explicitly what they were doing. It's like all the old movies from the 30's and 40's that made references to homosexual relationships but kept it under a thin veil. Read The Good Book by Peter Gomes and I think a lot of your questions will be answered.
- preston
-
MungoBaobab
Regarding the Adam & Eve account, God did indeed say that "in the day you eat from it you will positively die." Ask yourself, if God meant they would start to die, or they would die spiritually, then why didn't God say what he meant? Ask youself why Genesis 3:1 would refer to the serpent as "the most cautious of the wild beasts of the field" if the serpent itself was a dumb animal possessed by Satan. Ask yourself why Satan, or the devil, isn't mentioned at all. Ask youself why the serpent was punished in Genesis 3:14, when the devil is the one that caused trouble while in its body. Ask yourself if "the first prophecy" in the next verse really seems to be speaking about anything other than people stepping on snakes. Ask youself why a married couple would be ashamed to be naked around eachother when today married couples regularly see eachother nude with no shame at all.
Ask youself why in Genesis 3:22 God is afraid that man will eat from the Tree of Life and live forever. It's because this God is afraid his creation, man, will replace him. God, in the account, knew good and bad, and had eternal life. He was afraid man would become like him (and, since God always speaks of an "us," another group of gods), he lies about dying from eating from the Tree of Knowledge and forcefully restrains Adam from the Tree of Life, which I'm sure you hardly ever hear about.
There are far too many inconsistencies and lapses in common sense to take this account literally. Now, many people remain Christians while dismissing Adam & Eve, but then how do you justify the need for a ransom with Romans 5:12? Frankly, and although it is not always en vogue to do so, the Gospels can be decronstructed in the same way Genesis, and many accounts of Jesus can be seen to be fabrications.
It's a lonely feeling, when you realize the Bible isn't true, that there might not be a God watching out for you. But it can be exciting and liberating , too.
-
googlemagoogle
well said, mungo. when genesis falls, the new testament crumbles too.
that said, it's probably not bad to be a liberal christian, but it aint any better than being a taoist, buddhist or whatever... and it's simply not necessary. when you find out that either there is/are no god/s, or there is/are one/some, but he/she/they don't care to enlighten us, you can live life even more intensively. -
Narkissos
Can a person believe that the Bible contradicts itself and be a Christian?
Many do. For a number of years after leaving the JWs I thought I could. Eventually I realised that the very concept of "God" was a construct of Scripture, and that the liberal Christian position (meaning "the result is correct even though the calculation is wrong") is hard to maintain in the long run. But that's just me.
If I had to accept a label now, it would certainly be "post-Christian" rather than "Christian". I mean, I acknowledge how much I owe to the vast stream of ideas and stories which historically came to us through Christianity. I love Scripture, Biblical or not. I am not tired of watching the "spirit" moving the "letter" as the wind moves the leaves. Symbols are no less amazing to me than "real" life.
What I believe is that any of us is ultimately responsible for his/her beliefs or interpretations. No less if s/he chooses to submit to some pre-set form of organised religion. In that sense every Christian is a post-Christian as well: s/he has to relate her/his personal faith and experience to a pre-existing religion, or to interpret the latter in her/his own terms to make it her/his own. Nobody can escape interpretation.
-
LittleToe
Didier:
Nobody can escape interpretation.
So very true. We all interpret our environment in the way which makes most sense to each of us. The factors that are blended into that environment make each situation unique.
"post-Christian"
Do you mean post-Christianity?
Just as you want to claim back certain terms and concepts, I desire to too.
"Christian" is just such a word. What is a Christian? Is it merely someone who tries to follow and be like the biblical Jesus, as Preston suggests? Is it someone who is identified with a certain mode of living and evangelising, such as the Antiochan Christians of the first century?I would identify a Christian as being one who has a relationship with Christ. IMHO, to be a post-Christian in that sense would be to reject the person, after first of all having befriended him...
I hold all of this in stark contrast with a merely biblical Jesus, incidentally. They are not mutually exclusive, no more than being an evolutionist requires one to be an Atheist. Merely reading the scanty information about a biblical Jesus does not make a friendship, although it might lead to an interest that results in one. However, having a friend and then reading about them can be quite an eye-opener. You see facets of the individual, in those writings, and find yourself agreeing and disagreeing but nonetheless finding a broader perspective.
I view the bible as expressions of individuals' interaction with their environment and the "Divine". Without being irreverant; just as people will have a variety of opinions of who I am, from personal interaction and what I write, so too with peoples' interactions with God (who allegedly only wrote the ten commandments, which were then copied by a man who had the forseight to bring a hammer and chisel on a hill-walking expedition).
Are there's conflicts and contradictions? Surely no more than having several third-party perspectives on any individual - complete with their interpretations. And then we interpret the evidence they present afresh for ourselves. Chinese whispers, par excellence!
"the result is correct even though the calculation is wrong"
Not a very satisfying form of logic, eh?
-