ARE THERE CONTRADICTIONS IN THE BIBLE?

[Evangelist Joyce Murray Alim]

I would like your well thought out opinion on the subject of contradicitons in the bible.  If you do not think there are then you can feel free to participate in the many other forums where you have something to offer.  If you think that there are contradicitons I would love to discuss them with you.

[Jonathan Anthony]

"Contrary to popular belief, it is not okay to wrestle against God, although we often do; but we do it because our jelly-back preachers tell us we can."

 

This comment that you made bothered me, not because I resemble the remark because my worth and esteem comes from the One who considered me of  enough value to die for me. I would have to disagree with the comment for two reasons, first it was God who initiated the wrestling match with Jacob. Two in any relationship there are wrestling matches, disagreements and static. The thing is that if you are in covenant with the other person the matches are often hard, but when concluded they tend to make the relationship stronger. Once again as I stated in an earlier post wrestling involves being raw, open, honest, the dropping of the religious overtones, and simply getting down and dirty with God about how you feel about an issue in your life. If you cannot be that  raw, that real with God who can you be that way with. He says over and over again in scripture that it is something that He wants. There is ignorance of history, there is ignorance of theology, but calling a preacher jelly back because he invites people into an intimate relationship with the Savior is uncalled for. If anything a jelly back preacher is one who like the pharisees is blind to the things of God and determines to be a wall between people and God as opposed to being a doorway.

[Joseph Gill]

Yes Jacob wrestled with someone alright, but it was never proven to be God. It is only implied. Jacob said he wrestled with God and prevailed, not God, nor did the narrator say it. We only say it because Jacob said so.

 

Jacob seemingly adjusted his identification of who wrestled with him that day. In Gen. 48:16, he referred to the "angel who has redeemed me from all evil." Yet other bible personages believed there was an equivalence between meeting angels and meeting God. Samson's father realized that he and his wife had spoken to an angel, and then feared "we shall surely die, because we have seen God" [Jud. 13:22]. Maybe Jacob always knew he'd struggled with an angel, but subscribed to this belief that angels were equated with divinity.

[Jonathan Anthony]

A couple things askew in your supposition (my opinion only) to agree with you i would have to ignore previous precident in the text. 1. God came and spoke, ate and conviened with Jacob's grandfather Abraham. (Gen 18).  2.Angels never in scripture made covenant agreements between God and man, the person who wrestled Jacob had the authority to do so. Also since we have another example of God not allowing Himself to be recognized until after His departure, it can be supposed that tis could be the first of those encounters.  Also the text itself blows the angel theory out of the water because the word for angel is NEVER USED IN THE TEXT the evidence for Jacob having wrestled with an angel does not exist in the text, and since it only exists in tradition only, and not in the actual text, why grasp so hard at something that has no real evidence upon which to base a suposition on?

Here is the evidence that Jacob wrestled with God, 1. This is not the first time that the author of Genesis refers to God using the word iysh (man) even in the text where God appears to Abraham, the word is used, and Abraham recogizes God and calls him Adonai. In the text at that time the two men with him are called angels (malak) If they are called out in one passage and not in the other, one cannot logically deem the other passage as having had an angel attached to it, when they are not diposed by name.  And you are correct sir that there are times when angels appeared to men and men thought they were seeing God, here is the thing, check the original text, at each encounter angels were called angels, and in some encounters an example would be Daniel's encounter with Gabriel, the angel corrected the behavior immediately. Your supposition my brother is not based in the facts as presented in evidence, it is a traditional view that has existed for a long time but now needs to be put away in light of the truth.

[Jonathan Anthony]

Also one major hole in your supposition, Where has an angel ever renamed anyone, only God does that. Remember in this passage, Jacob's name is changed from Jacob, to Israel. So with no precident your supposition does not have legs upon which to stand.

[Joseph Gill]

We know it is God coming to speak with Abraham from the first verse of Genesis 18. If only there had been such a declarative statement about the identity of the "man" in Genesis 32.

I think you are mistaken in assuming that a covenant with Jacob is being cut in chapter 32; that had already happened in chapter 28. As for the renaming of Jacob, I can only recall two other individuals (grandparents Abram and Sarai) who were similarly renamed. Three people is too small a sample size to say definitively that only God Himself announces new names. Besides, didn't Gabriel announce the names of John the Baptist and Jesus to their respective parents? How is that significantly different?

Interestingly, God and the two angels were described as "men" in Genesis 18, but the Hebrew word used wasn't iysh but enowsh. I couldn't find another instance when iysh was used to describe God, but I don't know if that is meaningful or not. And as far as the word malak not appearing in this passage: Did you know that in Daniel 10, a largely undisputed angelophany in the bible, malak also doesn't appear? (Instead, Michael and the demon that hindered him are euphemistically called "princes.") And sometimes malak is used when we know the personage we are dealing with is God (as we see in Exodus 3:2). So it is hard to speak definitively about this. You have your conviction, Pastor King has his, and I have mine.

 

 

 

 

[Jonathan Anthony]

Joseph using the examples of John the Bapt. and Jesus are strawmen arguments and here is why, the announcment of a name is singlularly different from CHANGING a person's name. And actually precident is precident, doing it only once is a precident, if only God does a thing, then it can be safely reasoned that only He has the authority to do so because if you search the scriptures, Jesus, also changed names so here we have God changing names to establish the old covenant and changing name in the ushering in of the new, But in the end, you are correct we all have our differing convictions.

[MINISTER LAWRENCE VICTOR]

Amen. That is so true Pastor King. Be blessed in our Lord Jesus Christ.

[Pastor Melvin King]

But is not an angel a messenger? How can we judge the scope of the authority given him except he be our own servant? If the Father so grants him, He can name a name. Did not the angel of God tell Mary what the Holy child would be named? Also, while I readily agree that God wants relationship, I do not believe that this relationship he wants is based on our thoughts, our concepts and ways. I believe that He want's us to adjust to His ways, for His ways are not like our ways,neither are His thoughts like ours. It's not about as you say, being "raw" with God, but about being broken and obedient, faithful and believing. He wants us to communicate to him our problems so that we might come to find His solution. It is not He who needs to adjust to us, but we need to adjust to Him. Have we become His teachers that he should learn anything about us from us whom He have made? He don't want a wrestling match. He wants relationship. The whole history of the God-man relationship God has hardly gotten much more from man than a wrestling match. Is He asking for more of the same? I think not. But for your ego's sake Rev. Anthony, What you said sounds real pretty. It is doubtful that I shall convince you, and I assure you I am steadfast in what I perceive to be true. Soon we'll know the whole truth in perfectness. I can conceive God wrestling with a man, Why he wrestled with the whole world in the body of Christ. But did He wrestle with Jacob? That still remains very very very very very very questionable. I am pleased that you believe that God wants relationship, but He wants it based on His concept of a HOLY relationship not ours.

[Jonathan Anthony]

Tell me Brother Pastor where is your sciptural basis for making the statement "It's not about as you say, being "raw" with God, but about being broken and obedient, faithful and believing"?

. It is not He who needs to adjust to us, but we need to adjust to Him. Have we become His teachers that he should learn anything about us from us whom He have made I have never made a statement saying that He needs to adjust to us, on the contrary, I have made the statement and continue to make the statement that He desires a relationship that is built on trust in Him yes, but free of the religious overtones that we tend to give it. Have you not read where Paul said that we are no more servants but rather sons (Gal 4:7) Can you tell me where in scripture, under the new covenant, we are told that we are bow and scrape? How can we do so, and yet come BOLDLY before Him? Perhaps you can, And please, stroking my ego is not necessary, I know who I am, and whose I am, and where I get my esteem is from the One who deemed me valuable enough to die for me. I have presented evidence from the text, I have also presented precident, and as far as your first supposition, yes an angel is a messenger, BUT, there is NO WHERE in scripture, where an angel changes a  person's name, that authority is reserved for God ALONE.  But you are correct I am firmly grounded in my belief what gives me pause is the seemingly unwillingness of my brothers who serve the african american community to be intellectually honest in their examination of the scriptures and its original texts.  And also keep in mind a holy relationship like a marriage which by the way our relationship to Christ is supposed to mirror, is frought with wrestling matches, after all we are all HUMAN.  And while He is not, there are still things and questions that we must wrestle with like why is it that over 4000 children die every day in this country due to hunger and poverty. Yes it can be argued that its because of sin, but that answer is too simplistic and does not get at the heart of the matter, after all sin is rampant, and those who practice it are efficient, some moreso than others. But what is the reason that the church does not do more to assist those kids? (That is a question that if those of us in the ministry are intellectually honest, we cannot come up with definative answers, all we can do is move and work to help those who suffer. ) Kinda like preaching a message on giving making the statement that people who do not give do not get, and leaving it there, not teaching on budgets, insurance, and retirement planning. Yes we do have faith, but we do have a part to play after all didn't James say that "faith without works is...."?

[Pastor Melvin King]

Maybe if we come out of the wrestling match with God, the Church can do something about the "sin condition" that leaves our children hungry, and our innocents laying dead in the streets. Maybe we wrestle the wrong warfare. Maybe it is true that we should be wrestling against principalities and powers, spiritual wickedness in high places, rulers of the darkness of this world...but ah, tis easier to wrestle against God? Brother, I am one of the most least religious people you may ever know in life. I simply seek the truth. Sometimes the simplistic answer is the answer. The way is so simple, so plain even a fool need not err. You say,"there are still things and questions that we must wrestle with". WHY MUST WE? Why must we wrestle? Tis easier to yield. Your logic dictates that I should struggle with God before ultimately accepting His will, while I say skip the struggle and just accept Him, seeing that in the end this is what He wants. I choose not to waver, but to believe God and to trust Him unquestioningly without the struggle. This is what works for me. I am marveled continually at the power of His hand towards me when I make applicable this one thought. One moment believing God is more than One day wrestling against Him. I believe that the man who believes is the man who prevails. And if there be any unbelief in me, then I pray, Lord help my unbelief. Hows that for religious overtone, Preacher? I am glad you said our marriage relationship is "SUPPOSED" to mirror our Christ relationship. But just because our marriages are fraught (love that word you used, FRAUGHT) with wrestling matches, doesn't mean they're supposed to be. The wife is SUPPOSED to be OBEDIENT, and the husband is SUPPOSED to love and give himself. Now we both know that Christ has fulfilled the husbandly duty, but are we the obedient bride when we wrestle against Him? Jesus is our ensample. Never has he disobeyed the Father, nor has he shown doubt on any occasion. Yes we do have faith. True James said faith without works is dead. But what pat do we have to play? The part we play is APPLICATION. Jesus said be doers of the word and not hearers only. You must hear His words and do them. This is the formula for living faith. For by His words all things consist. And without it was not anything made that was made. But let this mind be in you, that was also in Christ Jesus...Selah

[Jonathan Anthony]

LOL Pastor what I find interesting is this,

We wrestle because we are Human and as such there are times when things happen that make us question God, to say that we do not is patently dishonest. We wrestle with Him when we have issues, questions, or things happen that have us questioning Him. And there is nothing wrong with that. As I have said before, automatons are not what we were created for.

As far as your dissertation on marriage, wives are to submit, there is only one passage where they are told to be obey, and even then keep in mind, submisssion is something that we are to to for EACH OTHER. And there is another prerequisite, if the man does not deal with his wife in terms of  dealing with her as being a partner in the marriage, the words used are joint heirs, the man's prayers are hindered (I Pet 3:7) Its all about honestly Pastor, and if we cannot be honest about the wrestling we do, we are nothing but religious men who do not walk in relationship with Godm but rather as men who are bound not by love, but by religious obligation.

[Pastor Melvin King]

Brother Anthony, I would just as soon cut my tongue out than to question God. I DO NOT QUESTION GOD. There I said it. Because you do, you think all men do. That is absurd. It is all the same as when my friends thought that I was not abstinent because they weren't. But because they did not believe me did not make me a liar, it only made them unbelievers. I never knew a woman in the biblical sense until I knew my wife. I was 27 years old. I know what you're thinking. But I am not an ugly man. I was voted the sexiest guy in my high school. I went out with girls (any one of my choosing), People thought that because I was so popular with girls that I was having sex. But I did not because I chose not to. My father was a preacher and he taught me be chaste, to respect myself and the female in my company. I am now going on 49 years old, and most people say that I look to be around 32. You probably don't believe that, but still, your unbelief do not make it so. I have experienced some real storms in my life, but I have yet dared not to question God. I cling to Him the more and know that He is working things out. All things work together for good to them that love the Lord, to those that are the called according to His purpose. If I believe this, why would I question? I have lost loved ones, friends, a wife, a father, two houses in fires, jobs, a thriving business, and so on, and not once have I questioned Him. All things work together...the good and the bad, the successes and the failures. The things are temporal, but He is eternal. He is yet making me. So what if you think that I am dishonest. Paul said, "compare not yourselves against yourselves; this is not wise". I do not compare you to me. Do not compare me to you. But let us each work out our own soul salvation with fear and trembling. 

So what if there is only ONE passage where women are told to obey their husbands, does it's singularity exempt one from abiding by it? If God's word says a thing one time. It is just as well as if it was said a thousand times. And yes there is a prerequisite as you put it, that the man must accomplish. Did you not hear me say that Christ being likened unto the husband has fulfilled His husbandly duty? Did He not love the church, His bride, and give himself for her?  If he then have fulfilled his obligation as husband, should we not fulfill ours also as wife, and SUBMIT, and OBEY? My dear Brother Anthony, You are troubled over many things. You do not understand because you are an intellectual. You want to rationalize everything and to see it's logic. There are some things that are possible, and some impossible.Some things are illogical but are not improbable. But to the man of faith, the impossible do not exist. You can hardly see past what is logical and what is illogical because you will not see with your faith. Faith are the eyes that see the invisible, impossible, illogical. You are a man of great knowledge, but when your eyes are completely open, you shall have great understanding. And when your great knowledge and understanding come together, Wisdom is going to make you a ruler. Selah