Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Society & CultureReligion & Spirituality · 1 decade ago

If bible is 'word of God ' it wouldnt have had any contradictions, right?

Mark 14:29-30: “Peter said to him, though all else should lose courage this night, before the second rooster-crow, thou wilt thrice disown me.”

Many paragraphs down, Mark writes a bit by bit account of how Peter denied Jesus three times to compatriots.

“Meanwhile, Peter was in the court without, and one of the maid-servants of the high priest came by; she saw Peter warming himself, and said, looking closely at him, thou too wast with Jesus the Nazarene. Thereupon he denied it; I know nothing of it, I do not understand what thou meanest. Then he went out into the porch; and th rooster crew. Again the maid looked at him and said to the bystanders, This is one of them. And again he denied it. Then, a little while afterwards, the bystanders said to Peter, It is certain that thou art one of them; why, thou art a Galilean. And he fell to calling down curses on himself and swearing, I do not know the man you speak of. Then came the second rooster-crow; and Peter remembered the word

Update:

Before the second rooster-crow, thou wilt thrice deny me”(14:66-72).

But here is how Jesus says the same thing in Luke: “A roosterwill not crow today until you have three times denied knowing me” (22:34).

In Mark, Jesus tells Peter that before the rooster crows twice that night, he, Peter, will have denied Jesus thrice. But in quoting the same words of Jesus, Luke plainly contradicts with what Mark quotes. Luke says the rooster will crow for the first time only after Peter has denied him thrice. The rooster in Luke’s book does crow at the specified juncture!

Mark’s assertion is suppressed by Luke. The latter writes instead that the rooster will not crow at all before Peter had denied Jesus thrice. Similarly, Mark avoids Luke’s assertion that the rooster will begin crowing that night only after Peter had thrice denied Jesus.

So, each one knew what the other had written. Even then, their accounts are mutually contradictory.

http://www.identitypublishers.org

11 Answers

Relevance
  • TBaT
    Lv 4
    1 decade ago
    Best Answer

    Heres a question I asked just yesterday. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AlXFN...

    Kind of to do with contradictions. But you are right they are all throughout the Bible, just another reason it can not be trusted.

  • 1 decade ago

    I have found things even more unconvincing than those you have found, thing is that space and time

    is open to external influences of the mind and social reality. That is the contrast of the OT and the NT

    it is not that it is the complete word of God, because then God would be a magician not a God that allows

    for human interaction. That was one of the reasons for abolishing the Law, because it does not allow for

    reasoning or interaction.

    The way I see things an inspiration is not exactly a dictation, I said to you that death and chaos started

    with the scriptures, and with the Law, So Jesus inspired a different Gospel, now we need to understand

    that God would not violate man's free will and man's free thinking, therefore people spoke and wrote the

    parts with a bit of deviation and personal touch, specially historical aspects. The evil forces on the other hand they do not respect

    men's free will, and therefore can take people in a trance to write things that look perfect as it is the

    Quran, In the Bible this is compensated by the same expression: The writer is told to eat a small scroll

    that is sweet at first but them in the stomack is bitter, that represents a new tale is needed to compensate

    for human influence and intentional changes.

    That is the result of living in a real World, with a real God. In the OT everything is made in the form of magic.

    Not presenting any form of logical approach, Everything dictated and written according to the Scribes

    and they were of one voice and one sentiment. In Jesus it is denoted that the man is actually a normal

    human being and that God is actually a God that allows man to learn correction and reasoning. Bad for

    the same man is that then he decides to listen to his own personal opinon more than others. Causing

    all the problem and divisions we have today. It was easy for the people of that time to follow because of

    that, they had to follow and obey the Scribes and Law makers, Jesus even according to Jewish writters

    is said to have been a wise man who everybody just wanted to hear and follow, he invited people to follow,

    he told on the consequences of not looking for God, But at the same time, same as today, there were

    those who did not want to live the wrong social path because it was bringing them pleasures and wealth.

    God has even allow for us to develope Sciences that would help us understand how and under what physical

    laws he created the universe, not as before with a magical story. There are also those who do not want that

    the total story comes into the light. I have in my 360 Blog a poem by Ovid, in which you will find much of the

    story of Genesis, all the way to current time of 1 AD, but you will not find any clear mention of Jesus, only

    in a part where is speaks about a man taking all the punishment can you find some resemblance to Jesus story.

    That was the political world of the time, as it is today.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    A. THE FORMATION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT CANON (A.D. 100-220)

    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03274a.htm

    The idea of a complete and clear-cut canon of the New Testament existing from the beginning, that is from Apostolic times, has no foundation in history. The Canon of the New Testament, like that of the Old, is the result of a development, of a process at once stimulated by disputes with doubters, both within and without the Church, and retarded by certain obscurities and natural hesitations, and which did not reach its final term until the dogmatic definition of the Tridentine Council. ("Canon of the New Testament")

    There is a lot of confusion about the earliest existing texts of the Bible. The oldest extant manuscript of the Bible is believed to be the Codex Vaticanus, (preserved in the Vatican Library), which is slightly older than the Codex Sinaiticus (preserved in the British Library), both of which were transcribed in the fourth century.

    As for the story of Jesus, there were at least 50 gospels written in the first and second century CE. Four of them (Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John) were included in the official canon during the fourth century CE and are found today in every Bible. All of the original copies of the gospels were lost. What we have now are handwritten copies, which are an unknown number of replications removed from the originals.

    Rudolf Bultmann, a prominent 20th-century professor of New Testament studies writes about the life of Jesus:

    We can now know almost nothing concerning the life and personality of Jesus, since the early Christian sources show no interest in either, are moreover fragmentary and often legendary; and other sources about Jesus do not exist. (Bultmann 8)

  • 4 years ago

    The "exact" and "perfect" word of God is Jesus the Messiah. I believe that God (the Judeo-Christian God) inspired the writers of the Bible. "All scripture is God breathed (ie inspired)" [2 Timothy 3:16] & the prophets spoke as the Spirit inspired them [1 Peter 1:12]. There are no contradictions in the Bible only misunderstandings or misinterpretations. Anyone's "exact thoughts" on this would hardly be succinct enough for those who would malign we "Christians." :D Instead of "concentrating" on the front cover, how about reading the Bible? I would recommend starting with the Gospel of John in a modern translation followed by Romans.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • deacon
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    If bible is 'word of God ' it wouldnt have had any contradictions, right?

    Mark 14:29-30: “Peter said to him, though all else should lose courage this night, before the second rooster-crow, thou wilt thrice disown me.”

    Answer: You have eather misquoted the Holy Scriptures by error or you are a liar and the Truth is not in you.

    Mark 14:29-30 (King James Version)

    29But Peter said unto him, Although all shall be offended, yet will not I.

    30And Jesus saith unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this day, even in this night, before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice.

    Many paragraphs down, Mark writes a bit by bit account of how Peter denied Jesus three times to compatriots.

    “Meanwhile, Peter was in the court without, and one of the maid-servants of the high priest came by; she saw Peter warming himself, and said, looking closely at him, thou too wast with Jesus the Nazarene. Thereupon he denied it; I know nothing of it, I do not understand what thou meanest. Then he went out into the porch; and th rooster crew.

    Again the maid looked at him and said to the bystanders, This is one of them. And again he denied it. Then, a little while afterwards, the bystanders said to Peter, It is certain that thou art one of them; why, thou art a Galilean. And he fell to calling down curses on himself and swearing, I do not know the man you speak of. Then came the second rooster-crow; and Peter remembered the word.

    Before the second rooster-crow, thou wilt thrice deny me”(14:66-72).

    Answer: Again Here is the Holy Scriptures accurately presented.

    Mark 14: 66And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest:

    67And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth.

    68But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew.

    69And a maid saw him again, and began to say to them that stood by, This is one of them.

    70And he denied it again. And a little after, they that stood by said again to Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilaean, and thy speech agreeth thereto.

    71But he began to curse and to swear, saying, I know not this man of whom ye speak.

    72And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.

    But here is how Jesus says the same thing in Luke: “A roosterwill not crow today until you have three times denied knowing me” (22:34).

    Answer:

    Luke 22:34 (King James Version)

    34And he said, I tell thee, Peter, the cock shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me.

    In Mark, Jesus tells Peter that before the rooster crows twice that night, he, Peter, will have denied Jesus thrice. But in quoting the same words of Jesus, Luke plainly contradicts with what Mark quotes. Luke says the rooster will crow for the first time only after Peter has denied him thrice. The rooster in Luke’s book does crow at the specified juncture!

    Mark’s assertion is suppressed by Luke. The latter writes instead that the rooster will not crow at all before Peter had denied Jesus thrice. Similarly, Mark avoids Luke’s assertion that the rooster will begin crowing that night only after Peter had thrice denied Jesus.

    So, each one knew what the other had written. Even then, their accounts are mutually contradictory.

    Source(s): KJV
  • zahid
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Yes , it wouldn't have had any contradictions , absolutely right ,

    in fact Bible contains "word of God" and "word of Humans,mostly Jews",

    And here I'll quote a saying of Prophet Muhammad(PB UH) , which says ,

    "The worst of the lies are those which contain half fact also"

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Right. Which only leads to the conclusion that many parts of the Bible are not, indeed, the true words of God.

  • 1 decade ago

    Wait around and you'll get some christians saying that there aren't any contradictions in the bible - it's incredible!

  • za
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    Wrong. Life is full of contradictions, so should the book of life be if it's any good.

    'Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own conceit.

    Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him'.

    JOKE! Best advice: avoid fools!

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Where are the originals?

    If you mean to refer to the Injeel (the book revealed to Jesus /Eesaa, may Allaah exalt his mention) by the term (original bible), then we do not know the location of the copy you are asking about. But what we can say surely and without any doubt is that the Injeel has been altered and changed by human beings throughout history and the original copy no longer exists.

    Therefore, a Muslim has no need to search for its original copy after Allaah has sent the great Quran. Allaah Says (which means): {And is it not sufficient for them that We revealed to you the Book [i.e. the Quran] which is recited to them? Indeed in that is a mercy and reminder for a people who believe.}[Quran 29:51].

    He also Says (which means): {And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam], the Book [i.e. the Quran] in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it.}[Quran 5:48].

    On the other hand, if by the term (original bible) you are referring to the book used by the Christians, then we say the following:

    In the Quran Allaah informs us that He revealed a number of books, including the pages of Prophet Abraham, the Psalms of Prophet David, the Torah of Prophet Moses, the Injeel (Gospel) of Prophet Jesus, and finally, the Quran of Prophet Muhammad. Of these revealed texts only the Quran remains intact in its original form. All of the others (as complete books) have been lost, their remains have survived only as fragments or tampered with in some way so as to make their authenticity doubtful. No where in the Quran is the Bible even mentioned, to say nothing of its being among the revealed texts of Allaah, or as Christian claim "The Word of God." Further, we know from respected scholars that although some fragments of the Psalms, the Torah, and the Injeel (the teachings of Prophet Jesus) may be found in the Bible, comprised of the Old and New Testaments, the Bible can not rightfully be called "The Word of God." Why is this so?

    As one publisher (Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Wheaton, Illinois) stated: 'The Bible may look like one book, but it is actually sixty-six books in one. Thirty-nine books make up what we call the Old Testament, and twenty-seven make up the New Testament. It is possible that more than forty writers were used by God to write all sixty-six books.' (Quoted from the "Holy Bible" – New Living Translation, Gift & Award Edition, l997, p. vii)

    So if the Bible is neither narrated by God nor written by Him, and, as such, is not ‘the word of God,' then what is it? By any objective criteria, the Bible is a book containing a compilation of stories, legends, folk tales, folk lore, myths, sagas, narratives, poetry, fragments of scriptures (fragments from the Psalms, the Torah, and the Injeel as already mentioned), letters (esp. in New Testament), visions, dreams, accounts of events from doubtful sources (not eye witnesses), editors’ or scribes’ notes, as well as human errors.

    For those who believe in it, it is a book that has historical, cultural, moral and ethical values, and a source of spiritual teaching and guidance. It is a book held in high esteem, primarily by Christians who see it as a divine book and the source of their religious beliefs. But, in the final analysis it is only a book with many limitations and imperfections which disqualify it from being called "The Word of God." Whoever makes such a claim then the burden of proof rests with him. On the contrary, the Glorious Quran is the Speech of Allaah and, through the Angel Gabriel, was revealed to Prophet Muhammad, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam; later compiled into a book more than 14 centuries ago it remains in its original form until today.

    Some common misunderstandings about the Bible include the following:

    * The Bible is one book, the Old Testament. The Bible contains sixty-six books (or more depending upon the denomination one belongs to).

    * The Old Testament (OT) is the Torah followed by the Jews. The OT contains some fragments of the Torah which was lost and the Psalms, but the Talmud is the book followed by the Jews and is totally unrelated to the Bible.

    * The New Testament (NT) is the Gospel of Prophet Jesus, or the Injeel. It is neither. It is made up of twenty-seven books, none of which was narrated or written by Prophet Jesus although the NT may contain fragments of the Injeel (sayings and teachings of Prophet Jesus). The Injeel as revealed through Prophet Jesus has been lost. The fragments which may be cited in the NT may not be authentic or in their proper context. So it is erroneous to equate the NT with the Injeel mentioned in the Quran.

    * The Bible is a holy book, narrated, dictated by God and is infallible. While this is a claim, this misconception has already been addressed. Since the Bible is 'only' a book, there is no need to call it a forgery, a corrupted text, etc. The Quran is the only authentic "Word of God," His Speech, and Allaah has promised to protect it from distortion of any kind until the Day of Judgment and He has kept His promise. Not one letter or syllable has been changed over the past l4 centuries.

    What are the difference between Torah and Qur'an?

    The common ground between the Noble Qur'an and the Torah is that both are Books revealed by Allah the Exalted through the Archangel Jibreel (Gabriel), peace be upon him. Yet, the essential differences between these two Books are the following: 1) The Holy Qur'an is preserved by Allah Almighty against interpolation and adulteration, as Allah Says (interpretation of meaning): Verily We: It is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. the Qur'ân) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption)[15:9]. As for the Torah, it did not escape such interpolation and adulteration. 2) The Holy Qur'an was sent down on Allah's Messenger, Muhammad, sporadically (in steps) according to separate occasions and events, while the Torah was revealed all at once. 3) The Qur'an constitutes a commanding law whose validity is continuous till Doomsday, whereas the Torah was abrogated by the Qur'an being the last revealed Book and being supremely predominant over all of the previous Scriptures. Allah Almighty Says: And We have sent down to you (O Muhammad SAW) the Book (this Qur'ân) in truth, confirming the Scripture that came before it and Mohayminan (trustworthy in highness and a witness) over it (old Scriptures)[5:48]

    Do the Words 'Torat' and 'Injeel' in the Qur'an refer to the Original Uncorrupted Scriptures?

    Question:

    In the recent article "If the Bible is corrupted... I feel it is also worth mentioning that the verses in question, (10,64) and (5,68) and other related verses obviously do not, and cannot refer to the "mainstream" scriptures that were/are corrupted in possession at the time of the Prophet (pbuh) and those that we have now.

    I think, from my general understanding of these verses, the Qur'an obviously refers to the true, original, uncorrupted scriptures that were given to the people aforetime (i.e. Jews and Christians). This is especially apparent in Surah 5, verse 68.

    So the Torah and the Injil mentioned in the Qur'an most certainly cannot be the "Old Testament", the "Pentateuch" or the "New Testament" as we have today, but the original Torah and Gospel as was revealed to both Moses (pbuh) and Jesus (pbuh).

    Therefore is it not better understood logically that these verses in fact refer to the scriptures that were revealed in a pure state and not the corrupted versions?

    Answer:

    The Qur'an, by the names 'Torah' and 'Injeel' refers to what was called 'Torah' and 'Injeel' in the environment in which the Qur'an was revealed. It is obvious that had the Qur'an implied something else by these words, it was then necessary to clarify that the words were being used to imply something different from what they were commonly used in the environment. It should be kept in mind that the implication of words in a good piece of literature cannot be against the common usage of such words. If such is the case, it can only be considered a flaw of that piece of literature. For example, in the contemporary English language, the phrase "the prophet" (in singular form) is used only for Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)[1]. If any contemporary English writer uses the phrase to imply any other person, it would only be considered a serious mistake and flaw in his writing, unless he/she explicitly or implicitly[2] clarifies in his writing that the phrase has been used in a meaning different from its generally understood connotation.

    It may, however, be noted that the 'Torah' and the 'Injeel' (especially the Injeel) that we have in our hands today are not necessarily the ones which were referred to as the Torah and the Injeel by the first addressees of the Qur'an. This is substantiated by a few references of the Qur'an to the Jews and Christians living in the environment of the revelation of the Qur'an. For instance, the Qur'an has referred to a particular sect of Jews, who hold "`uzair" to be the son of God. This obviously is a reference to a particular sect of Jews, who held `uzair to be the Son of God (as the mainstream Jews do not, generally, ascribe to this belief). Furthermore, it should be interesting to note that the Qur'an has referred to the Christians in its environment, by the name of "Nasaara", while, it is known that the general (mainstream) Christians had come to be known as "Christians" or "Maseehee" from a very early period of Christianity (as is mentioned in the Biblical book "Acts of the Prophets"). In view of this fact, it seems quite plausible that the Christians living in the Arabian Peninsula at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an were generally those who ascribed to the Nazarene creed. The Nazarenes were a Syrian Judeo-Christian sect that came to be recognized in the fourth century AD. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica:

    Although they [the Nazarenes] accepted the divinity of Christ and his supernatural birth, the Nazarenes also maintained strict observance of Jewish laws and customs, a practice that had been dropped by the majority of Jewish Christians. They used a version of the Gospel in Aramaic called the Gospel According to the Hebrews, or the Gospel of the Nazarenes.

    However, it is extremely unfortunate that the Injeel according to the Hebrews or the Gospel of the Nazarenes (which was probably the book referred to as 'Injeel' in the environment in which the Qur'an was revealed) is nowhere to be found anymore, as has been mentioned in the quote of the Encyclopedia.

    This is my opinion regarding the references of the Qur'an to the two books. However, do let me know if I have failed to fully clarify my point of view.

    [1] Refer to the word 'Prophet' in the Oxford Advanced Learner's Encyclopedic Dictionary, third impression, 1995.

    [2] Implicit clarification may be through the context in which the word is being used.

    The Qur'ân came to humanity after all the previous revealed scriptures had either been lost or, like the Torah and the Gospel , corrupted. Allah speaks about how people had corrupted the scriptures, saying: “Woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say: ‘This is from Allah' to gain from it a paltry price. So woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they gain from it.” [ Sûrah al-Baqarah : 79]

    http://understanding-islam.org/related/t...

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.