The Evangelical Universalist Forum

Contradictions: OT V NT

Theology
#266

Thanks for the info.

Yes, i did notice this. Still trying to see it through - I emailed Rabbi Singer. If he gives me a terrible answer then I’ll be up and out of there.

Well I believe he gives the explanation that Literally Melchizedek means ‘high priest’ and so is not as the same person as Shem in a different form. I personally think this is important since in general we attribute many beliefs to Jews that they do not actually hold. Not too sure of the implications of this yet, if correct.

Not sure what you mean by ordinary Jew. If you try to follow the 613 or are born Jewish, then you are a Jew (I believe). Thats what God wanted of them, or else he wouldn’t have done it in the first place.

I think people don’t realize how varied the NT history is. To say that they had everyone’s best interest in mind is just not correct. People like Origen, Marcion, Saint Peter of Antioch, and Augustine were very anti-semitic and had a massive influence on what we believe today. You don’t hear stuff like that in the modern day church. Now Im not saying its just the early Christians, it’s a two way street - but this is still part of church history.

I will give that video a watch in a bit.

1 Like
#267

@pilgrim I’ve been reading a lot into the MT, LXX and other texts recently. I’ve attached a more MT/Original Hebrew based site below as I think they make good points. Would like to get your thoughts if you have the time - they are really long, in-depth articles. Also is helpful to read the comment section.

https://creation.com/lxx-mt-response
https://creation.com/smith-response
https://creation.com/6000-years-masoretic-vs-lxx
https://creation.com/biblical-chronogenealogies

1 Like
#268
#270

The key is to consult other “expert” articles. Perhaps these?

Or this one:

#271

In my reading on this, “eye for an eye” in the OT is in relation to repaying someone the proper amount (as @DrinkFanta74 referenced in the article). If there is a car accident in which someone loses their arm - the OT isn’t saying that in order to be fair, one should cut off the others arm. Instead, it is saying that the person who caused the accident should pay the necessary amount of money. Taking into account aspects like time taken off work, humiliation, damage to property, etc. No one in the Jewish world is saying that if someone cuts off your arm, you should then cut off theirs. There is absolutely no purpose for that to happen and is quite a ridiculous notion.

Matt 5: 38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.

If someone cuts my wrist, in the process severing my radial artery which in turn spews out blood. I ain’t giving them my other wrist to cut up so I can die quicker - sorry but not sorry.

Also what am I to do if I get stabbed in the heart - give the person my other heart? :face_with_monocle: :slightly_smiling_face:

#273

Hi mik
Thank you for those articles - much appreciated. They DO add to the debate and are worth the read. Like you, I think it is wise to consider multiple sources and to weigh the evidence. Those articles are well written and quite persuasive but I reserve final judgement.
They all come from ‘creation.com’ and so will only put one side of the argument (understandably). When I look at what their organisation believes it says:
"The 66 books of the Bible are the written Word of God. The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. "
I think one of the problems with that is that they are very unlikely to tolerate the idea that God allowed the text which was used for centuries in the English speaking world (based on the Masoretic text) to have errors in it or to not even be the most accurate and reliable source, No problem, but like you or I or anyone else, they ARE inclined to be biased.

My own position, at the age of 62, is that the Western protestant church has idolised scripture beyond what God intends. After all, if God had intended a perfect written word He would have had Jesus write or dictate copious writings to be revered and maintained in perfect order. He didn’t because, as the writings tell us, it is the Spirit that leads us into truth.
William Blake recognised the problem with total reliance on the written word when he penned:
“Both read Bible day and night, But you read black whilst I read white”
ie even a perfect written word (should it have existed) would still be of limited value because humankind would interpret it differently.

I do not believe that humanity has perfect written source material for any of its major religions and that even applies to the quran despite what many muslims believe.

2 Likes
#274

It took me quite a few more years than you, John, before arriving at similar conclusions regarding scripture. I appreciate your candour.

That is probably why I have no real interest in addressing or debating any real or perceived contradictions within the OT or between the OT and the NT. There is more than enough instruction given in scripture about how we are to live before our God and our fellow man to keep me reading, studying, and hopefully practising my faith.

3 Likes
#275
2 Likes
#276

Just for the record Jesus probably didn’t refer to a non existent verse but a Rabbinical teaching as he prefaced what he said by “You have heard it said.”

1 Like
#277

@pilgrim I really appreciate you taking the time to look at the articles. I agree with what you’re saying - it is extremely difficult to assess all the texts and translations while trying to not be biased. I will still look for the truth of this matter and hope you do the same :slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like
#279

…and this has to be the most logical and natural outcome for doing just that, IMO, and not taking into account other possible angles.