Archive

Donations

wait
wait

 

(used version: NASB, unless differently mentioned)

 

376. Does God respect anyone?
Yes, God has respect for some people. (Genesis 4:4 and many more)
Wrong. God has respect for all people, however those who disrespect God are ready to lose God’s respect. E.g. “And the Lord had regard for Abel and for his offering;” (Genesis 4:4)

No, God respects no one. (Deuteronomy 10:17 and many more instances)
Wrong. E.g. “For there is no partiality with God.” (Romans 2:11) In all the instances the KJV has the older expression: there is no respect of persons with God. All modern translations have left the old translation of the KJV. The meaning is of course very clear. We should honor the Bible for it: the oldest statement against partiality in court (Deuteronomy 10:17-19). “… God who does not show partiality nor take a bribe. He executes justice for the orphan and the widow, and shows His love for the alien by giving him food and clothing. So show your love for the alien, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt.” It is certainly the oldest Declaration of Human Rights in the entire world. It is a brutal mutilation of this old Biblical standard by the critic.
No Contradiction

 

377. Did both thieves revile Jesus?
Yes, both thieves reviled Jesus. (Mark 15:32, Matthew 27:44)
Right. In the beginning both thieves, who were crucified at Jesus right and left, reviled Jesus at the cross.

No, only one thief reviled Jesus. (Luke 23:39-42)
Wrong. Later one thief changed and rebuked the other thief for reviling Jesus.
No Contradiction

 

378. Is wealth a sign of righteousness or of wickedness?
Wealth is a sign of righteousness. (Psalm 37:25, 112:1, 3)
Wrong. Wealth is neither a sign of righteousness nor of wickedness. There are many rich people who are not righteous. (Compare Jesus’ parable of the rich man and the poor Lazarus.)

Wealth is a sign of wickedness. (Matthew 19:23-24, Luke 6:24, James 5:1)
Wrong. Wealth is neither a sign of righteousness nor of wickedness. There are many rich men in the Bible that were righteous. (Compare Abraham who was rich.)
No Contradiction

 

379. Has there ever been a righteous person?
No (Job 15:14, Isaiah 41:26, 64:6, Romans 3:10)
Yes (Genesis 7:1 and a mass of instances)
Nonsense. The critic supposes that the Bible is contradicting itself in saying that people are righteous and at the same time that they are sinners. Yes that is the message of the Bible that sinners become righteous by the blood of Jesus Christ unto God and it is not necessary to explain that any further as everyone in the world knows that this is the message of the Bible. It is just child’s prattle of the critic to come with this so called Bible Contradiction.
No Contradiction

 

280. Does righteousness come from following the Law?
Yes (Luke 1:6)
Wrong. Already Abraham lived many years before the Law of Moses was revealed and still Abraham was righteous. Righteousness is a result of faith and works (fruit) in accordance with that faith. Let’s read his reference which is a clear rejection of the critic’s position: "They [the elders of  John the Baptist] were both righteous in the sight of God, walking blamelessly in all the commandments and requirements of the Lord." It is first said that they were righteous (i.e. they had a personal relation with God and trusted in God) and then the fruit that they were walking in the Law.

No (Galatians 2:21)
Right. The Law is perfect but doesn't gain perfection for man as there is no forgiveness without shedding of blood (Hebrews 9:22, the blood of Christ).
No Contradiction

 

381. Is it necessary to keep the Sabbath?
Yes (many Old Testament references)
Right. Indeed it was a commandment for the Israelites to keep the Sabbath: “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.” Exodus 20:8

No (Isaiah 1:13, Matthew 12:2, John 5:16, Romans 14:5, Colossians 2:16)
Wrong. There is no statement among the references saying the Sabbath is not to be kept. All instances give a nuance how it should not be kept. Isaiah: without doing away all sorts of collective sins; Matthew: not in a deadly perfect way as if it was forbidden to take corn grains and eat them; John: Jesus had the opinion that it was OK to heal on the Sabbath; Romans: there is nothing said here about the Sabbath; Colossians: one should deal with the Sabbath in a way that honors Christ and not people. It seems that the early non-Jewish Christians were free in keeping the sabbath (Colossians 2:16-17 "Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day—17 things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.").
No Contradiction

 

382. How should Sabbath-breakers be punished?
They should be exiled. (Exodus 31:14)
Wrong. Nothing is said about exile, but “shall surely be put to death” and “shall be cut off from among his people”. So it was defined among capital crimes, and the way it should be kept was to not work. Reading the Old Testament in general paid work was meant and there were exceptions, e.g. to save a person’s or animal’s life, to lead animals to water, to work in the temple etc.

They should be killed. (Exodus 31:14-15, 35:2, Numbers 15:32-36)
Partly right. Firstly it had to be brought for court. That could only be if someone was injured. No accuser, no case. Secondly it had to be proven that the law was transgressed intentionally. If not the transgressor could get off with a sacrifice (Leviticus 4:1-2, 7). Intention could be proved by a personal confession, or by the refusal to bring the offering. This happened once in the desert. A man had worked on the Sabbath by gathering wood. He stood four times before a higher judge (over ten, over fifty, over hundred, over thousand). Four times he was sentenced to bring his sacrifice and warned that if he refused he would come before the highest judge Moses, who as lawgiver could not set him free, but follow the law: capital punishment. This indeed happened and it is the only example of someone who lost his life for transgressing the law of the sabbath. The guilty one couldn't say "I did it for my living," with six days of the week the provision of manna in the desert. In later times without manna it became extremely difficult for judges to discrimate the intentions of transgressors, if there were accusations.
No Contradiction   

 

383. Who may offer sacrifices to God?
Only Levites before the tabernacle (Leviticus 17:1-5, Numbers 18:6-8)
Very wrong. (1) It is not correct that all the Levites may approach the altar to do the offerings. Only the sons of Aaron, the priests were permitted (Numbers 18:7). (2) It is also not correct that all the sacrifices had to be brought on the altar of the tabernacle (or later temple). This is only true for the category of private offerings (Leviticus 17:3).

Non-Levites may offer sacrifices away from the tabernacle. (1 Samuel 1:1-2, 20; 7:7-9)
Very wrong. First occasion (1:1-2, 20): the inclusive meaning of sacrifice is used as every intelligent reader will see. Elkanah went to Silo to sacrifice, i.e. the priests on duty had actually to sacrifice Elkanah’s offering. In Silo was the tabernacle, so the critic has no point.  
Second occasion (7:7-9): I’m sorry to say, but Samuel was a Levite (1 Chronicles 6:16, 22-28) and the place of offering was before the gathered army and not the tabernacle. This was according to the Law (Deuteronomy 20:2-4). Moreover it was not a private but a national sacrifice. Also Levites as Samuel who were permitted to bring a war sacrifice as it was not brought on the altar of the tabernacle (compare 1 Samuel 13:8-13). Only a priest had to announce the war (Deuteronomy 20:2).
No Contradiction

 

384. Who was the father of Salah?
Salah’s father was Arpaxad. (Genesis 10:24, 11:12)
Right. Genesis is clear about that.

Salah’s father was Cainan. (Luke 3:35-36)
Also right. Luke is clear about that. How is this possible? Through a construction later called a levirate marriage. If someone in the family died early without an heir, it was the duty of one near in the family to accept the widow as a second wife to bring forth a child on the name of the husband passed away. So Cainan died early and Arpaxad (biological father) begot a son for Cainan (father in name).
See the article.
No Contradiction  

 

385. Did the Samaritans receive Jesus?
Take note: As two different occasions are at stake a contradiction is out of order.
No, they didn’t receive Jesus. (Luke 9:52-53)
On his journey to Jerusalem disciples of Jesus had tried to prepare accommodation for Jesus in a Samaritan village, but the people were not willing to help them.
Right. This occasion was after the feeding of the Five Thousand (Luke 9:10-17).

Yes, they received Jesus. (John 4:39-40)
After Jesus’ talk with the woman at the well, she went to the people in her village saying that Jesus was the Messiah. They invited Jesus and his disciples and He remained two days with them (John 4:40).
Right. This was before the feeding of the Five Thousand (John 6:1-13).
No Contradiction

 

386. Should the Gospel be preached to everyone?
No, the Gospel is not to be preached to the Gentiles and Samaritans. (Matthew 10:5-6, 15:24, Acts 16:6)
Right. In his earthly ministry Jesus and his disciples focused on the Galileans and Judeans to preach the Kingdom and not to pagans. However, pagans who addressed Jesus were not excluded from his blessings.
Acts 16:6 is an exception. They didn’t preach there the Gospel, probably the time was not yet ripe for it. In Acts 19:10 is told that right there the Gospel had a great breakthrough.

Yes, the Gospel is to be preached to everyone, including the Gentiles and Samaritans. (Matthew 28:19, Mark 16:15, many references in Acts and Galatians 2:2.)
Right. After Jesus’ Ascension and the day of Pentecost the disciples of Jesus went out to preach the Gospel to the entire world. We may speak of a progressive strategy.
No Contradiction

 

387. When was the last time that Samuel saw Saul?
After he hacked Agag in pieces. (1 Samuel 15:35)
Wrong. In 15:35 we read “And Samuel came no more to see Saul until the day of his death,” (KJV). So the prophet Samuel didn’t go anymore to Saul, but later Saul came to Samuel (see further).

When Saul prophesied naked. (1 Samuel 19:24)
Right. In 19:22-23 (24) we read “and he [Saul] asked and said, Where are Samuel and David? And one said, Behold, they be at Naioth in Ramah. And he went thither to Naioth in Ramah:” Indeed Saul went to Samuel and this was their last contact. It’s all a matter of reading, isn’t it?
See the article.
No Contradiction

 

388. Who was Samuel’s firstborn son?
Joel (1 Samuel 8:2)
Right.

Vashni (1 Chronicles 6:28)
Wrong. The KJV translation (King James) has: “And the sons of Samuel; the firstborn Vashni, and Abiah.” It seems that Vashni is the name of the firstborn. However this is an old mistranslation (already in the Vulgate) and is not found in any modern version of the Bible anymore. Why? Vashni means: (the) second, which makes clear that this word is not related with the firstborn but with the second son: Abiah. A correct word by word translation is: And the sons of Samuel; the firstborn and the second, i.e. Abiah. So Joel was also called: the first(born).
No Contradiction

 

389. Did Sarah have faith that she would conceive?
Yes (Hebrews 11:11)
Right. “By faith even Sarah herself received ability to conceive, even beyond the proper time of life, since she considered Him faithful who had promised.” We read that by faith she was blessed with a child. However we know that faith is from hearing the word of God (Romans 10:17). When did she hear the promise of God that she would conceive? (see further)

No, she laughed at God. (Genesis 18:10-15)
Wrong. At first she laughed when she heard the promise that she would conceive, but then she was rebuked: “13 And the Lord said to Abraham, “Why did Sarah laugh, saying, ‘Shall I indeed bear a child, when I am so old?’ 14 Is anything too difficult for the Lord? At the appointed time I will return to you, at this time next year, and Sarah will have a son.” After the laughter she was forced by the Lord to believe and she did, just as Hebrew 11:11 states.
No Contradiction

 

390. When did Satan enter Judas?
Before the last supper. (Luke 22:3, 7)
Right. The first time that the Satan forced Judas to act against Jesus (to kill Him) was when he went to the “the chief priests and officers how he might betray Him to them”.

After the last supper. (John 13:27)
Wrong. The second time that Satan entered into Judas: “After the morsel, Satan then entered into him. Therefore Jesus said to him, “What you do, do quickly.”
We learn from the above that human nature is not totally delivered unto Satan. After the first time Satan had touched Judas in his deepest self to kill, he could leave Judas and see how Judas worked out this feeling. For the final act of betrayal a second touch (entering) occurred.  (John 13:27)
No Contradiction

 

391. How did Saul die?
1. Suicide (1 Samuel 31:4-6, 1 Chronicles 10:4)
Right. He fell in his sword when he saw his opponents approaching him.

2. Killed by an Amalakite (2 Samuel 1:8-10)
Wrong. The critic is not aware of the fact that 1 and 2 Samuel originally formed one book, that was split in two with the Greek version (Septuagint), about 2 BC. So the original readers (hearers) of 2 Samuel 1 about the story of the Amalakite who testified that he killed Saul knew very well that the Amalakite faked.

3. Killed by Philistines (2 Samuel 21:12)
Wrong. The same argument is applicable as in option 2. The reader knows already that Saul committed suicide and the clause “on the day the Philistines struck down Saul in Gilboa,” has the general meaning that the army of Israel under Saul was beaten all ends up in Gilboa.

4. God killed him. (1 Chronicles 10:14)
Wrong. The hiphil of the verb Mut (to die) is used, meaning: cause to die, let/make someone die. How is it possible to say that God "kills" someone? This meaning is a result of two principles: a. God has decided that doing good will result in life and doing bad will bring negative results (e.g. death). b. If someone has chosen an evil way it will bring him evil things, even death. These are divine rules for all mankind. And so it is not improper to say that God made/let Saul die who sadly choose a wrong way. In a certain way this text refers to Saul’s suicide.
No Contradiction

 

392. Did all of Saul’s family die with him?
1. Yes (1 Chronicles 10:6)
Wrong. Unfortunately KJV and most versions translate in agreement with the KJV: “So Saul died, and his three sons, and all his house died together.” However the word together stands for iagda-w, meaning: united with him. “So Saul died, and his three sons, that is all of his house who were united with him, died.”
Conclusions: Only his three sons (Jonathan, Abinadab and Malchishua, 10:2) who were with him on the battle field died. Other sons of Saul remained alive.
No Contradiction

2. No, his son Ishbosheth became king after Saul died.
Right.

3. No, David sacrificed two sons of Saul and five grandsons (to stop God from starving people to death, as the critic mistakenly states).
Right.

 

393. When did Saul meet David? (for the first time)
Before David slew Goliath. (1 Samuel 16:21-23)
Right. (a) As a musician for Saul and (b) before he slew Goliath David had a personal interview with Saul (1 Samuel 17:32-39).

After David slew Goliath. (1 Samuel 17:55-58)
Wrong. After the interview between David and Saul and David went to Goliath to fight, we read (17:55): “Now when Saul saw David going out against the Philistine, he said to Abner the commander of the army, “Abner, whose son is this young man?” And Abner said, “By your life, O king, I do not know.” It is very instructive as during the interview with David Saul didn’t ask for the name of David or where he was from. It makes very clear that Saul liked David as a musician, but he was to him only one of his nameless servants. After the encounter between David and Goliath the picture changed completely.
No Contradiction

 

394. When did “Is Saul among the prophets?” became a proverb?
When Saul prophesied among the prophets. (1 Samuel 10:11-12)
Right. The first time that Saul came in ecstasy as a prophet was short before he became king. The people were surprised to see Saul prophesying and said “Is Saul among the prophets?”  

After Saul prophesied naked for a day and night. (1 Samuel 19:24)
Wrong. Later when Saul persecuted David, he came to the prophet Samuel and again he began to prophesy with the other prophets. However in the description of this occurrence we have a serious mistranslation. It is not (present time) “Wherefore they say, …”, but it should be (past time in Hebrew) “Wherefore they said, Is Saul also among the prophets?” NASB
The last occasion makes clear that the people only repeated the old saying and it was not invented then.
See the article.
No Contradiction

  

395. Who were Saul’s sons?
Jonathan, Ishvi, Malchi-shua (1 Samuel 14:49)
Right. “Now the sons of Saul were Jonathan and Ishvi and Malchi-shua;”
In 1 Samuel 14:49 the beginning of Saul’s kingship is described: then he  three sons.

Jonathan, Malchi-shua, Abinadab and Eshbaal (1 Chronicles 8:33, 9:39)
Right. “Saul became the father of Jonathan, Malchi-shua, Abinadab and Eshbaal.”
In 1 Chron. 8 and 9 a list is given including the sons of Jonathan and even grandchildren of Saul, which means that this list gives a complete overview of Saul’s biological sons. Conclusion Abinandab and Eshbaal were born after Malchishua. If a child, here Ishui, died early it was not remembered anymore in the later lists, which was not against the presented information.
No Contradiction

 

396. What must you do to be saved?
Wrong. The critic gives 189 Biblical prescripts generally related to a good Christian life. That is 189 sort of good works. However it is clear that the critic has not studied his materials.
Right. We all know that we are saved by the personal acceptance of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. This is taught in the New Testament in many ways e.g. Colossians 2:6-8
“6 Therefore as you have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him,
7 having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith, just as you were instructed, and overflowing with gratitude.
8 See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ.”

In verse 6 a personal relation with Jesus Christ is mentioned. In verse 7 we are reminded that we have to learn to do good. This is a step by step process of growth. In verse 8 we are told to not listen to all sort of empty philosophies of people who think know better. They are only as the old Christian proverb says like old shoes, worn out except their tongues.
No Contradiction

 

397. Were the Israelites to spare the trees in the countries they invaded?
Yes (Deuteronomy 20:19)
Right. “When you besiege a city a long time, to make war against it in order to capture it, you shall not destroy its trees by swinging an axe against them; for you may eat from them …” It was not permitted to destroy trees in the Land of Canaan as that was the region for the Israelites to live. This commandment was from interested motives.

No (2 Kings 3:19)
Right. “Then you shall strike every fortified city and every choice city, and fell every good tree and stop all springs of water, and mar every good piece of land with stones.” This was said to the Israelites when they were at war with the Moabites, neighbors who lived south-east from Israel. It was no self-interest to keep the trees in good condition; so it was permitted to deviate from the current mode and bring the enemy to poverty.
No Contradiction  

 

398. Did Jesus had secret teachings?
Yes, parables so that no one else would understand what he was saying. (Matthew 13:10-11,  Mark 4:10-11,  Luke 8:9-10)
Wrong. It was not Jesus' goal to not inform everyone, anly his adepts. Jesus brought a new revelation. For an important part Jesus relied on the scriptures of old, but also on parables. They were the book of life that ordinary people easily understood. However the scribes and scholars of his time underestimated the importance of this teaching method and by that they could not grasp the power and the rules of the kingdom of God that were exposed in the book of the parables of life.

No, he spoke openly to everyone about everything. (John 18:19-20)
Right. Also the parables were spoken openly and every one who took the time to think about them could come to the divine meaning of the content of them.

No Contradiction

 

399. Was Sisera asleep when he was murdered?
Yes, he was fast asleep when he was murdered. (Judges 4:21)
Right. Jael, gave Sisera a place to sleep. When he slept she drove a tent pen through his head by which he died.

No, he was awake and standing up. (Judges 5:26-27)
Wrong. It is described as follows: "
Between her feet he bowed, he fell, he lay;" (NASB) That is: when he was killed in his sleep, he curved, fell back and laid down. There is no indication in this description that he was awake between her feet. The only correct view is that Sisera was asleep at her feet.
See the
article.
No Contradiction

 

400. Is all scripture inspired by God?
Yes (2 Timothy 3:16)
Right. "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching," And 2 Peter 1:20-21 says: "no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation,  21 for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

No, sometimes biblical writers were wrong or just expressing their own opinions. (1 Corinthians 7:12, 7:25, 2 Machabees 15:39)
Wrong. For the claim of wrong sayings in the Holy Scriptures the critic quotes only one instance from the book of 2 Macchabees. Has it become known to the critic that this book does not belong to the Holy Bible at all?
For the accusation that writers gave their own opinions, the critic gives two examples of the apostle Paul. Did it escape the critic that half of the New Testament was filled with letters of apostles who all wrote through the Holy Spirit, even when they said that they gave their opinion or teachings in cases where they could not fall back on sayings of Jesus or the Old Testament? For the interested reader: also compare Peter's judgement about the letters of Paul (2 Peter 3:16).
See the article.
No Contradiction

 

No Bible Contradictions