Obviously FUNNY contradictions of the Bible

Came across the following on the net

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Is Jesus in danger of hellfire?

Whosoever shall say Thou fool, shall be in danger of hellfire.
- Matthew 5:22

[Jesus said] Ye fools and blind.
- Matthew 23:17 (Hey Lori, you talk a lot like Jesus does! LOL)

Interpreted: Whoops! We see the author of Matthew suffering from confusion. These are both attributed to Jesus by the author, and again the author makes Jesus look like a fool.

Did Jesus teach his followers to do their deeds openly or in secret?

Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works.
- Matthew 5:16

Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them.
- Matthew 6:1

Interpreted: This first verse is Jesus telling his disciples to let all see their good works that they may serve as an example to others.

The second verse is Jesus talking to his disciples, telling them to be careful not to do their charity in front of men for to do so is not meritting of entrance into Heaven.

Poor Jesus! Having to be written about by a man like this. That people are confused about Jesus is no wonder.

Is Jesus to be trusted? (my personal favorite)

If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.
- John 5:31

I am one that bear witness of myself...
- John 8:18
(Jesus speaking in both quotes)

Interpreted: Here we have another author making a fool of Jesus. The first verse is Jesus speaking to the Jews who would persecute him. He says that he does the will of his father. The second verse is Jesus saying that he bears witness of himself and his father.

Did Jesus think that he was God? (LOL)

I and my father are one.
- John 10:30

... I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
- John 14:28
(Jesus speaking in both quotes)

Interpreted: Poor Jesus. The first verse is John recording that Jesus equated himself with God, his father. The second verse is John recording that Jesus said that his father (God) is greater than he. Simple math proves that these two verses can not co-exist, and yet...here they do.

Did Paul's travelling companions see and hear correctly?

And the men which journyed with [Paul] stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
- Acts 9:7

And they that were with me [Paul] saw indeed the light and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.
- Acts 22:9

Interpreted: Again, the same author as the Gospel of Luke. This first verse is Luke relating the story of Paul's encounter with the spirit of Jesus that caused his conversion. The second is Paul relating this story to some men that had been beating him. The first says the men heard a voice but saw no man, while the second says that they saw a light but did not hear a voice.

Who has ascended to heaven?

"And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into Heaven"
-II Kings 2:11......and:
Also Enoch was taken bodily to Heaven at the age of 365.
-Genesis 5:24

"No man hath ascended up to Heaven, but he that came down from Heaven, even the Son of Man."
-John 3:13

Interpreted: Here we see that either the author of John had very little knowledge of early scripture or Jesus did. If it was the author of John, we can write it off to poor myth-making. If it was Jesus, then we can assume that Jesus is either not part of the all-knowing trinity or said trinity is not all-knowing.

Who slayed Goliath?

So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and smote the Philistine, and slew him; but there was no sword in the hand of David.
- I Samuel 17:50

And there was again war with the Philistines at Gob; and Elha'nan the son of Ja'areor'egim, the Bethlehemite, slew Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.
- II Samuel 21:19

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Flash,

Starting the new year off right, huh?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

What I like is when the contradiction exists within a single verse, such as in Deuteronomy 12:6 (KJV):

"And thither ye shall bring your burnt offerings, and your sacrifices, and your tithes, and heave offerings of your hand, and your vows, and your free-will offerings, and the firstlings of your herds and of your flocks:"

Hmmmm...is it saying here that "free-will offerings" are obligatory?

------------------
www.indigenousrocks.com

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Searcher,

Actually, all offerings are of free-will. If you choose to belong to a church which requires tithing, then you have done so of your own free-will.

If that doesn't sit well with you, there are other cases which might. For example, suppose your tithing called for $20 per week and you chose to give $25 instead. I am sure you will agree that the additional $5 was given of your own free-will...?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Flash,

Whose interpretations are these?

If they are yours, then I would like to emphasize something which I'm almost positive Lori has explained to you.

You cannot understand the divine message of the Bible if it is read with a malice of heart towards Jesus Christ/God.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Let's take your first example:

"But I say to you, whoever is angry with his brother will be liable to judgement, and whoever says to his brother, 'Raqa,' will be answerable to the Sanhedrin, and whoever says, 'You fool,' will be liable to fiery Gehenna."

Do you know what the divine message was here?

Well, here, Jesus was teaching about "anger."

The actual word, "Raqa!" could be interpreted as "imbecile!", "blockhead!" or any other such derogatory term said in an "abusive" way.

"Abusive" is emphasized here because Matthew 5:22 comes from Jesus' teaching about "anger," which is the "motive" behind "murder." The divine message was that insulting epithets, said in "anger", may lead one to "murder"... one would have to answer for and be punished for such wrongdoing.

Now, compare Matthew 5:22 with Matthew 23:17:

"Blind fools, which is greater, the gold, or the temple that made the gold sacred?"

Do you know what the divine message was here?

Well, here, Jesus was teaching about some of the inverted values which the Scribes and Pharisees had been teaching at the time.

Was Jesus speaking in "anger"...??? No.

Previously, the Scribes and Pharisees had been teaching that certain oaths, such as tithing, were more important than sacred oaths. Such teaching, which inverts the order of values, reveals the teachers to be foolish in such teachings... they are "blind guides" or "blind fools" if you will.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Flash,

If you truly want to understand, then you must invite and accept Jesus Christ into your heart, before beginning your Bible study.

If you just want to use it to try and get ammunition with which to verbally attack Jesus Christ/God, for whom you seem to hold such contempt, then, by all means, just keep doing what you're doing and Satan will keep doing the happy dance.



[This message has been edited by truestory (edited January 01, 2000).]

 

TS,

I am really very curious what church you go to, if you don't mind telling us? I have NEVER been to one that didn't talk about tithing, as well as free-will offerings. I remember one non-denominational church I attended only a few times, and on one Sunday, the minister devoted the entire service to the subject of tithing! But every church I've ever been to devoted at least a few minutes each Sunday talking about the importance of giving money to the church!

The thing that kills me about the Christian concept of "free-will" is the pretense that there is really a choice. The "choice" is this:

a) spend the rest of eternity worshipping a god you find it difficult to spend one day a week worshipping, or

b) spend eternity burning in a lake of fire.

Uh, did I forget to say "Thanks" for the choice?

------------------
www.indigenousrocks.com

 

Searcher,

I don't mind sharing at all. I have indicated many times that I don't belong to a "church" as it is thought of in the conventional sense. If one needs to associate me with a "church" then please allow it be the church of Jesus Christ which has no walls, no doors, no physical boundaries.

If you will look to the true meaning of Matthew 23:17, explained to Flash above, you will see that Jesus Christ taught that tithing was not what was really important. As a matter of fact, according to Matthew, the disciples who follow Jesus are forbidden from making such oaths. There are much weightier matters to be concerned with.

I have given my life to God, through my own free-will. Nobody is forcing me to give "X" amount of dollars to them. I use my "money" and my "time" to spread the Word of God and to help those less fortunate than myself out of my own free-will.

I have, of course, been in "churches" on ocassion with various family members and friends. Most take up collections. Whatever I have given during those times I have also given of my own free-will.

If an adult goes to a church and agrees to tithe, it has to be of their own free-will. If it is not... For example, if it is given with "resentment" or because they feel "coerced" then it means nothing. As far as I am concerned, such individuals should not be attending that church.

 

O.K., Flash...

Upward and onward to your second example:

Here, Flash, the divine message is to do good deeds... not "in order to be seen"... but, for the sake of doing good:

"Just so, your light must shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your heavenly Father."

In Matthew 5:16, Jesus is explaining to the disciples that they will be a great influence on the world... that the light they eminate must be good... that by virtue of their discipleship, they cannot escape notice. Therefore, they must always do good... not for the sake of "being seen" but, rather, for the sake of goodness in the world.

Compare the above to your second excerpt:

"[But] take care not to perform righteous deeds in order that people may see them; otherwise, you will have no recompense from your heavenly Father."

In Matthew 6:1, Jesus is warning the disciples against doing good "in order to be seen" because that would be hypocricy.

The two excerpts above differ in that Jesus was pointing out the meaning of Christianity as opposed to hypocricy.

If one does good only to give others the "impression" that they are good, but, in reality, they are not "truly" good in that they do not always strive to do good, whether they know someone is watching them or not, then it is a hypocricy.

Can you see the difference, Flash?

Can you now answer your own question:

???????????????????????????????????????????




[This message has been edited by truestory (edited January 01, 2000).]

 

Truestory,

My hangover has clearded up so I know it is not the ale I had last night that is making my head spin, but it is the twisted logic you are weaving. In the end you have made staments that are as clear as mud. Just as the original contradictions are.

------------------
My life could have been black and white, but I had to color it.

[This message has been edited by 666 (edited January 01, 2000).]

 

666,

What's not clear?

In Flash's FIRST example, Jesus was teaching against anger and murderous ways. Jesus taught that calling someone a "fool" because you are angry with them, want to abuse them and feel like killing them, is wrong. Such actions can lead to murder which is a punishable offense.

On the other hand, Jesus mildly rebuked the Scribes and Pharisees, saying, "Blind guides" or "Blind fools" because they were teaching a foolish concept... they were teaching that a promise of money was more important than a sacred promise. Jesus was not calling them "fools" because he was angry with them or because he wanted to kill them... Jesus was pointing out that they were foolish to teach that material things were more important than spiritual things.

Therefore, there was no contradiction between the two uses of the word "fool".

In Flash's SECOND example, Jesus was first informing the disciples that they would be lights in the world. That they should always do good for the sake of goodness in the world.

Jesus went on to caution them not to do good just becuase they wanted to be seen doing good... just so that people would "think" that they were good, because that would be hypocrisy. They actually had to "be" good.

Therefore, there was no contradiction in Jesus' instructions. What it comes down to is this... strive to do good... always... regardless of who is watching. (If you only do good because someone is watching, it is hypocrisy).

Hopefully, this has cleared the mud up at least a little bit on this foggy day.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

P.S.... H A P P Y N E W Y E A R ! ! !



[This message has been edited by truestory (edited January 01, 2000).]

 

Here we go, Flash... The truth behind door # three... Your personal favorite... So, I hope you listen carefully!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The message here was pretty simple, Flash:

"If I testify on my own behalf, my testimony cannot be verified."

Thank goodness there were witnesses to Jesus!
Yes, John the Baptist for example. However, Jesus went on to say that he understood why we would not accept testimony from a human being and went on to tell us that there was testimony greater than John's.. Testimony from God the Father.

Now, let's compare that to the following:

Hmmm... It seems your source cut John 8:18 a littler short, maybe:

"I testify on my behalf and so does the Father who sent me."

Sooo, Flash...

Drumroll, please....#_#_#_#_#_#_#!!!!!!!!!!

WHY... CERTAINLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

TS,
Well..I have run out of time. Trust me though..I WILL get back to you on this!

No, these are not my interpretations ..and yes, Lori has told me that a 100 million times. But ya know...one doesn't have to climb into the dump to know that it stinks

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Who said I had malice of heart towards Jesus or God?????

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Flash!!!

You have expressed this many, many, many, many, many, many, many, many... well, you get the point... you have expressed this many times.

Your actions and words here do not indicate a willingness to share positively in what you call the truth... They indicate the intent to attack Jesus Christ in a negative way.

Sorry... That's the Spirit of the Truth speaking, Flash.

P.S.

Here is a revelation for you or anyone else who is confused as to what that means... It means that you are doing the work of the anti-Christ.


[This message has been edited by truestory (edited January 01, 2000).]

 

Flash,

Number four, comin' up:

"Think?" "Think?" Try thinking for yourself... Jesus "knew" who He was. Yes, Flash, He is greater and smarter than you, but He loves you just the same.

Flash, John 10:30 is part of Jesus' response to the Jews when they asked Him if He was the Messiah. In this excerpt, He asserts unity of power and reveals that the words and deeds of Jesus Christ are the words and deeds of God.

Now, let's compare this to:

Flash, in this excerpt from John 14:28, Jesus is clarifying that God, the power which was manifested in the "form" of Jesus Christ, the man, is far greater than the "form" of man, which man was able to see.

Once again, no contradictions. If you want a math lesson, go get a math book. Math does not explain spiritual truths.

On to number five....

 

Number five...

Probably, Flash. But as I'm sure you know, Luke wrote three accounts of Paul's conversion from three different sources.

This first account occurs when the word of Paul's conversion is first spread to the Gentiles:

This second account occurs during Paul's defense speech to the Jerusalem crowds after he had already been arrested. Before conversion, Paul was a zealous persecutor of the Christian community. It is quite possible that, at this point, Paul was protecting his companions:

Paul's final defense speech was made before a king. In that account, there is no mention of what the companions saw or heard when God appeared to Paul.

So, although two of Luke's sources contradict each other with respect to the light and the voice which the companions saw/heard, Luke still found Paul's conversion to be so important, that he shared all three accounts with us.

If you read all three of Luke's accounts, the words "Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?" (the divine question) was related by Luke with no variation in all three accounts. What is most important here, Flash, is the consistency of the message of Paul's divine conversion (which would probably be a good topic of discussion).

Moving right along...

 

TS,
Ok..here is my reply to number 1.

In starting this I wanted to touch on something... I may be misunderstanding what you are saying regarding Jesus and anger.
To me..it seems as though you are saying that Jesus is teaching against anger. Reason
being is because this can lead to murder?

Perhaps he wasn't?? Regardless, if you feel as though Jesus wouldn't say or do ANYTHING in ANGER...please note the following scripture in John 2:15...
So he made a whip out of cords, and drove all from the temple area, both sheep and cattle; he scattered the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables.

Now I am sorry..but Jesus was sooooo angry that he MADE a whip. That had to of taken him some time to do..don't ya think? He made a weapon to PROVE HIS point. His ANGER didn't stop there..no, no, no... he threw a
fit in the temple... I would say that Jesus is GUILTY of having anger here..wouldn't you??

Ok, now you may try to say ..but..but..but..he wasn't trying to harm or kill...ok so he wasn't...However, you stated that Jesus KNEW he was God..Am I right? Yes, I believe I am...

With that in mind..shall we focus on God's
anger? Yes, we shall.

Please note that in Exodus 20:1 it states...
And God spoke all these words. Which these words that he spoke in Exodus 22:24 reads as follows:
My anger will be aroused, and I will KILL you with the sword; your wives will become widows and your children fatherless.
Hmmmmmmmmmmm...did God say kill?????? Yes,
he DID.
This of course is just one of many examples where God killed &/or tried to harm people.

So then....

Are you saying then that God and Jesus does not practice what they preach??? Sure sounds
like it to me. Also, then who will punish
God and Jesus..since these actions should be
punishable?????

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

[This message has been edited by Flash (edited January 02, 2000).]

 

Hello again, Flash.

In answer to your question, who punishes God (for ending someone's mortal life)? The answer is noone. Whether you like it or not, Flash, whether you understand the reasons why God does things or not, Flash, the fact is that God alone decided to give you life when God did and only God can decide when it is time for you to move on into your eternal life everafter.

Therefore, Jesus taught us that the taking of human life, by another human being in anger, is a punishable offense.

[This message has been edited by truestory (edited January 02, 2000).]

 

Flash,

Actually, Flash, I was responding to the difference in the various uses of the word "fool" which you believed pointed to contradictions.

In teaching about anger, in Matthew 5:21-26, Jesus was not teaching against the use of specific words, such as "fool," Jesus was teaching against using epithets, in general, which are motivated by an angry and murderous heart.

Conversely, in Matthew 23:1-36, Jesus was teaching against the "foolishness" being taught by the Scribes and Pharisees. (By the way, this was one of the main reason why Jesus and Christians were persecuted. Because the Word of God which was explained in the flesh corrected and perfected some of the teachings of the Old Testament).

At this point, I would like to know if you still believe that there was a "contradiction" by virtue of the use of the word "fool" in the two different contexts which you pointed to, or, do you now understand there was a difference in the respective divine messages of the two excerpts?

Searcher, anyone else... feel free to respond. Thanks.


[This message has been edited by truestory (edited January 02, 2000).]

 

Flash,
I'm in your corner, I think you've made some valid points which begin to show where you get your cause for reasonable doubt.

I'm afraid that your antagonists will only carry on chucking the predictable Christian sand in yo' face but don't let it intimidate you, just give us a few more of your reasons.
At least then, Truestory will know where you're coming from and we'll all have a better idea of what Lori is continually hinting at, about you.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

tab'

Do you understand the difference between the use of the word "fool" in Matthew 5:21-26 vs Matthew 23:1-36 and the respective messages of those passages?

 

Truestory,
very quickly, the first example of fool refers to 'verbal abuse' between 'brothers', or believers, which obviously is been discredited here.

The second example refers to the foolishness of hypocricy and greed as exemplified by the Rabbis and Priests of the time.
Gotta go.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!