We have all heard people say that they do not believe the bible to be the word of God, but the words of imperfect men, because is full of contradiction. When these same folks are asked to point to one, many have trouble coming up with one. Others point to passages that do indeed appear as genuine contradictions, but are they?
I remember finding many apparent contradictions during my studies, but studying the text and context closer led me to find sound explanations for them.
To start: what is a contradiction? We must first establish what constitutes a contradiction because way too many people call something a contradiction, when there is no contradiction there.
Contradiction (NOUN) 1.something illogical: something that has aspects that are illogical or inconsistent with each other.
From:http://carm.org/dictionary-law-of-non-contradiction
Law of non-contradiction
The Law of non-contradiction is one of the basic laws in classical logic. It states that something cannot be both true and not true at the same time when dealing with the same context. For example, the chair in my living room, right now, cannot be made of wood and not made of wood at the same time. In the law of non-contradiction, where we have a set of statements about a subject, we cannot have any of the statements in that set negate the truth of any other statement in that same set. For example, we have a set of two statements about Judas. 1) Judas hung himself. 2) Judas fell down and his bowels spilled out. Neither statement about Judas contradicts the other. That is, neither statement makes the other impossible because neither excludes the possibility of the other. The statements can be harmonized by stating: Judas hung himself and then his body fell down and his bowels spilled out.
Share an apparent contradiction you have found and are having trouble reconciling or share an apparent contradiction and the reason why the passages do not constitute a legitimate contradiction. A discussion dealing with apparent contradictions can quickly become hard to follow, so let’s do our best to try to keep an order. Let’s try not to move on from an apparent contradiction until we have solved it.
Tags:
V,
Literal and face value are not exactly the same thing.
Lord Bless,
LT
Literal takes the text and reads the whole of Scripture in a strict literal sense, word for word. Face value reads the Scripture in the context of the literary style. Face value reads poems as poems, historical as historical, prophecy as prophecy and allegoric as allegoric to name a few. (Note: There are two camps and there are people who fall in-between which often blurs the line or differences)
Regardng the four gospels we know that each one was written with a different purpose and different focus. They are not just four different renderings of the same event, but each have a specific purpose. Matthew presents Jesus as the King, Mark as the Servant, Luke as the Son of Man and John as the Son of God. The four gospels were written to convey God's message including only what was necessary to convey that message. All true, but not all included in every sentence or passage. We can go a step further. Matthew is writting primarily to the Jew and Mark and Luke primarily to the Gentiles. They use slightly different terms to convey the same basic truth.
Lord Bless,
LT
I simply hold to the Spirit of The Word, not the letter. Keeps things untangled for me.
what about in the book of Acts when Saul/Paul hears and sees Jesus, what about those who were with him?
ACT 9:7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
ACT 22:9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.
I don't know how to reconcile this contradiction, other than as Chris says, to take the Spirit of the Word and not the letter in this case
Any thoughts?
Jenny,
The word translated in the KJV as "heard" in 22:9 has other possible meanings which I will post the Strong's definition below. The NIV and NASB both translate the word as "understand." Thus the text states that they did not understand the voice.
G191
ἀκούω
akouō
ak-oo'-o
A primary verb; to hear (in various senses): - give (in the) audience (of), come (to the ears), ([shall]) hear (-er, -ken), be noised, be reported, understand.
Jenny,
Truth be told, the list of seeming contradictions in the Bible could fill many pages. How can this be if the Bible is accurate and reliable; indeed, truly the inspired word of God?
As both Char and LT have pointed out, the apparent contradiction between these two verses arises because of the difficulty inherent in translating the text from the original language (Greek) into the receptor language (English).
The Greek word ἀκούω (akouō) can have two meanings in English: hear and understand.[1] As we all know, hearing and understanding aren't the same thing.
The apparent contradiction in the KJV is resolved in modern English translations that take these two different meanings/uses into consideration. [1] Take a look at the NET and NIV 1984 Bible translations below. If you follow my NIV link, you'll see that the ESV and NASB (among others) follow suite.
[1] Strong's Concordance [ 191. akouó | Definition: I hear, listen, comprehend by hearing; pass: is heard, reported].
thanks so much, goes to show the importance of looking deeper into the original languages especially when something doesn't make sense
Jenny, Indeed! This is an important point for us to always keep in mind. The Holy Scriptures were not originally written in contemporary English, but in the ancient Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic languages.
This is why many seminary students study these languages in order to better understand and more fully appreciate the Bible and why learned Bible scholars are sought out to serve on committees charged with producing modern English translations.
As anyone who is fluent in two or more languages knows already, some things can be difficult to render when translating from the original language into the receptor language (in this case English). Sometimes, despite the best efforts at translation, the full meaning doesn't come through or some of the nuance is lost although the gist of the meaning is conveyed.
This isn't a reflection on God's Word, which is eternal and unchanging truth, but rather on the inherent limitations of human language. As you are aware, words often have more than one meaning, and the intended meaning depends on the context in which it's used. Sometimes it's virtually impossible to find a word in English that completely captures the meaning it has in the original language. At best, in some instances, the best the translator can find is a close approximation.
Keep in mind also that another factor that sometimes makes translation challenging is grammar. The structure of sentences and the tenses of words varies across languages. A strict word-for-word or literal translation, for example, may be technically correct, but not easily understood and difficult to read.
For these reasons, I like to consult several different English language translations of the Holy Scriptures side-by-side, especially when reading passages that aren't clear to me. I recommend using (and often link verses that I post in AAG's Forum to) the Online Parallel Bible at Biblos.com for this very reason.
Welcome to
All About GOD
© 2024 Created by AllAboutGOD.com. Powered by