Visual representation of Bible contradictions.

[UtahDan]

I offer this mostly because it is visually interesting. No idea about the methodology behind it apart from what it says on the pic itself. Sorry the imagine is so big but you can't read it if it isn't.

[falafel]

I didn't read all of the supposed contradictions, but I did skim quite a few. There didn't seem to be any contradictions of any "important" issues.

For example, I don't really care whether the bible contradicts itself about whether Haman was an Agagite.

[DapperDan]

Here's the pdf of that: http://www.project-reason.org/bibleContra_big.pdf

and this is why it's wrong
http://theresurgence.com/2010/11/12/...their-homework

Summary of the 5 main points of the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy

1. God, who is Himself Truth and speaks truth only, has inspired Holy Scripture in order thereby to reveal Himself to lost mankind through Jesus Christ as Creator and Lord, Redeemer and Judge. Holy Scripture is God's witness to Himself.
2. Holy Scripture, being God's own Word, written by men prepared and superintended by His Spirit, is of infallible divine authority in all matters upon which it touches: it is to be believed, as God's instruction, in all that it affirms: obeyed, as God's command, in all that it requires; embraced, as God's pledge, in all that it promises.
3. The Holy Spirit, Scripture's divine Author, both authenticates it to us by His inward witness and opens our minds to understand its meaning.
4. Being wholly and verbally God-given, Scripture is without error or fault in all its teaching, no less in what it states about God's acts in creation, about the events of world history, and about its own literary origins under God, than in its witness to God's saving grace in individual lives.
5. The authority of Scripture is inescapably impaired if this total divine inerrancy is in any way limited or disregarded, or made relative to a view of truth contrary to the Bible's own; and such lapses bring serious loss to both the individual and the Church.

I found point #1 to be completely convincing.

[UtahDan]

I didn't read all of the supposed contradictions, but I did skim quite a few. There didn't seem to be any contradictions of any "important" issues.

For example, I don't really care whether the bible contradicts itself about whether Haman was an Agagite.

I was a little worried that this might damage your testimony. I'm sincerely relieved that is didn't. There are a couple others I am hoping will chime in to confirm they are still good in that department.

[Babs]

what is the point of the visual?

[TripletDaddy]

I see your period of detente is officially over!

[UtahDan]

I see your period of detente is officially over!

Not hardly! If this is a problem for anyone it is bible literalists. Not Mormons.

[TripletDaddy]

Not hardly! If this is a problem for anyone it is bible literalists. Not Mormons.

Agreed. They have a hell of a lot of explaining to do and they can start with #190.

[falafel]

I was a little worried that this might damage your testimony. I'm sincerely relieved that is didn't. There are a couple others I am hoping will chime in to confirm they are still good in that department.

It just seems like a bunch of wasted time. I wouldn't consider any of those to be serious contradictions. But again, I haven't looked through them all. Have you found any?

[UtahDan]

Agreed. They have a hell of a lot of explaining to do and they can start with #190.

This is what I am looking for. Other people to mine this for humor.

[Babs]

This is what I am looking for. Other people to mine this for humor.

Hence your concerns about "methodology."

[UtahDan]

It just seems like a bunch of wasted time. I wouldn't consider any of those to be serious contradictions. But again, I haven't looked through them all. Have you found any?

No I haven't read more than a couple. D³ seemed pretty upset about one though.

[falafel]

No I haven't read more than a couple. D³ seemed pretty upset about one though.

I'm concerned about No. 131, because I've long been struggling with how to treat a specific Edomite in my office.

[UtahDan]

Hence your concerns about "methodology."

I'm not sure what you are saying. That was just my disclaimer to say I have no idea whether these represent authentic contradictions form any particular point of view. I sort of think that most LDS people would say that the Bible has lots of problems though. This visual just suggests how many. From someone's perspective anyway. And it is cool looking.

[UtahDan]

I'm concerned about No. 131, because I've long been struggling with how to treat a specific Edomite in my office.

I have also been getting treatment for an Edomite. Those suckers are like barnacles.