Many months ago I offered the "eye for an eye" conflict as evidence that the Bible cannot be trusted to provide non-contradictory moral guidance. Since that time many new people have joined this forum, so I present this Bible "difficulty" once again:
Scripture teaches that one should destroy one's enemies, and take an eye for an eye: "Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot." (Deuteronomy 19:20-22) However, according to the author of the book of Matthew, not only did Jesus not believe in fighting back against one's enemies, he even wanted his disciples to do good to the ones who hurt them:
"Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also."(Matthew 5:38-39)
and
"Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you." (Matthew 5:38-44)
How can the teachings in Deuteronomy and Matthew each be true? On the one hand, one is supposed to show "no pity" in lashing out at those who harm you, but, on the other hand, one is supposed to "do good" to them. These teachings are utterly contradictory. For a those who would argue that the rules laid down by God in the Old Testament became invalid in New Testament times, let us not forget that Paul said that ALL scripture is useful for teaching:
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. (2 Timothy 3:16-17)
Evidently Matthew was unaware that Paul thought ALL of scripture (and that would include Deuteronomy) was "useful for teaching," for if he had known that Paul evidently believed that the Deuteronomy teaching that one should fight back against one's enemies, he never would have had Jesus say that one should turn the cheek when one is harmed, and do good to the one who harms you.
Thus, either Paul was wrong about all scripture being God-breathed and useful, or else Matthew was wrong about what Jesus said. Either way, the Bible is in error. Are there any forum members who will argue why this is not so?
Joseph F. Alward
"Skeptical Views of Christianity and the Bible"
http://members.aol.com/jalw/joseph_alward.html