Brainwash: A Glimpse on Bible Verses’ Alleged Contradictions (Part 7)

Alleged Contradiction No. 158
It is better that widows should not wed again. (1 Corinthians 7:8)	It is better that young widows should wed again. (1 Timothy 5:11-14)
Interpretation:
St. Paul says it is better for old widows not to marry again but better for young widows to get married again.

Alleged Contradiction No. 159
The god of this world blinds people to the gospel. (2 Corinthians 4:4)	There is only one God. (1 Corinthians 8:4)
Interpretation:
There is only one God. The phrase "god of this world" in the first passage is a euphemism for the devil.

Alleged Contradiction No. 160
The powers of this world are evil, so fight against them. (Ephesians 6:11-13)	All powers are ordained of God and damned are they who resist. (Romans 13:1-2)
Interpretation:
The powers referred to in the first passage are evil spirits while the powers in the next passage are legitimately constituted political authorities, so they are two different ideas.

Alleged Contradiction No. 161
Bear one another’s burdens. (Galatians 6:2)	Bear your own burdens. (Galatians 6:5)
Interpretation:
One of the things that human has to answer for is how well he helps his neighbor, as demanded in the first passage.  On the other hand, it says that every human will have to individually answer for his/her behavior to God.

Alleged Contradiction No. 162
Anybody who even greets an unbeliever shares his evil work. (2 John 1:10-11)	At all times be ready to answer any man about your faith. (1 Peter 3:15)
Interpretation:
First of all, there’s a general admission that those whom John is speaking of in the first passage are heretics than unbelievers. Whether a heretic is given an access to one's home or greeted is immaterial to whether or not one gives answers regarding his faith. Anyone may respond to a heretic’s argument even without greeting him or inviting him/her into one's house.

Alleged Contradiction No. 163
All of the grass on the earth is burned up. (Revelations 8:7)	The army of locusts is instructed not to harm the grass. (Revelations 9:4)
Interpretation:
Symbols of Revelation are not taken in a strictly literal sense. Nevertheless, if these are taken literally, they are not stated how much time passes by between the events of the two passages. Burned grasslands starts to re-grow rapidly as these are not uprooted but burned. Perhaps the grass is protected as stated in the last passage because it is recovering from the first destruction as stipulated in the first passage. The whole point is this is nowhere near to a disagreement of narration.

Alleged Contradiction No. 164
Only “The Father” knows. (Mark13:32)	“Jesus” and “The Father” are one. (John 10:30; 17:11,21,22)
Interpretation:
Jesus is God, the Second Person of the Trinity. By His nature in itself, He possesses all knowledge of everything that is, was, or could be. But when the Second Person of the Trinity descended into the earth and became incarnate, He voluntarily stripped Himself of many of the prerogatives of divinity, like His glory, Omnipresence, among others. This is what Philippians 2:7 calls Jesus’ "emptying" of Himself. One of the things He unloads from Himself was all knowledge irrelevant to His mission. For example, in His manhood He did not know Facebook, net surfing, as these were insignificant to His mission. One of the pieces of knowledge that was equally unnecessary was the time of His return, which the Lord professes as ignorance of according to His human nature.

       

Alleged Contradiction No. 165
Jesus says that He would judge. (John 5:22,27-30; John 9:39)	Jesus says that He would not judge. (John 8:15)	Jesus says that the Father judges. (John 12:48-49)
Jesus says that His disciples would judge. (Luke 22:30)		Jesus says that the Father does not judge. (John 5:22)
Interpretation:
John 12:48-49 never says that the Father judges, but that "the word that I have spoken shall judge him on the last day", which is tantamount to saying that Jesus will judge.  But note that the time of judgment will be “on the last day” so Jesus’ appearance in flesh on earth is not to judge the world (John 12:47) but is reserved for the end (otherwise humanity has not gone this far if judgment had occurred because that would mean a second chance that was not generously given).  This is the sense in which Jesus will judge as discussed in John 5:22 and 9:39, known in Christian eschatology as the "Last Judgment" and spoken of in the Apostles Creed: "I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ...who will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead." In John 8:15, Jesus is engaging the Pharisees over the woman caught in adultery, saying that the Pharisees "judge according to the flesh" (verse 15), that is, they judge in a purely external, worldly manner while He judges no one, that is to say, Jesus does not judge anyone in this manner but in a spiritual sense by discerning the heart, which is why he instantly says in verse 16, "And if I do judge, my judgment is true: because I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me." Jesus is the instrument through which the judgments of God the Father are dispensed to humanity, and since Jesus and the Father are one so their judgment is one. The judgment Jesus speaks of in Luke 22:30, where the disciples will "sit on thrones" judging the twelve tribes of Israel, is an intercession of Jesus’ judgment, something all believers will participate in.  Thus, St. Paul says that the faithful will participate in the judgment of the fallen angels (1 Corinthians 6:3-4). Since the Father is one with the Son, the Son's judgment is united with His; since the Church is the Body of Christ, so the Body partakes in the judgment committed to the Son. This is a classic ecclesiology than contradictions.

Alleged Contradiction No. 166
He who does not believe is damned. (Mark 16:16)	Thomas does not believe but not damned. (John 20:27-29)
Interpretation:
Thomas' disbelief was fleeting, for after he saw the risen Lord he cried out, "My Lord and my God!" (John 20:28). Those who remain in disbelief are the ones who will be damned.

Alleged Contradiction No. 167
“When his branch is yet tender”. (Matthew 24:32)	“When her branch is yet tender.” (Mark 13:28)
Interpretation:
This is simply a translation issue associated only to those texts which trace themselves back to the King James Bible. Most Bibles render both the passages from Mark and Matthew as "it". Greek, like Latin and many other languages, is a gendered language, and sometimes there is ambiguity as to what gender a particular word should be taken. Since such gender designations do not literally mean the branch is feminine or masculine, this is really a question of linguistics and translation than asserting anything contradictory. Both Matthew and Mark speak of a tender branch. As to what gender designation the Greek delegates to each phrase is immaterial to the meaning.

Alleged Contradiction No. 168
Jesus is God. (John 10:30)	Jesus is the “image” of God. (2 Corinthians 4:4)	Jesus is a man approved by God. (Acts 2:22)
Jesus and God are one in the same. (John1:1)	Jesus sits down beside Himself. (Mark 16:19; Acts 2:32-33; 7:55; Romans 8:34; etc.)
Interpretation:
This is a manifestation of oblivion about incarnation, Hypostatic Union, and Trinitarian theology. The Second Person of the Trinity, the Son, is co-equal and co-eternal with God. The Son is God, just as the Father and the Holy Spirit are God, yet, He is also a distinct Person. That Person came to the earth, incarnated in the womb of the Virgin Mary and born Jesus Christ. Since the invisible God appeared in human likeness, Jesus is said to be the very image of God (2 Corinthians  4:4; Colossians 1:15). Jesus Christ is true God but also true man. He was man because He was truly a man (though without sin); He was God insofar as the Second Person of the Trinity was joined to human flesh; He is the Son of God because the Second Person of the Trinity proceeds from the First as a Son from a Father or as an idea from the mind. The union of the divine and human natures is not disengaged after the Resurrection; Jesus forever remains God and man, and as a glorified man, He is able to ascend into heaven to "sit down at the right hand of the Father." Jesus is one with the Father; He is God with the Father and the Spirit, but He is a distinct Person.

Jesus is the Son of God. (John 6:69; John 20:31)	Jesus is the Son of Man. (Matthew 18:11; Luke 21:27)
Interpretation:
The "Son of Man" is an Old Testament title for the Messiah taken from the Book of Daniel (Daniel 7:13). Apocryphal Jewish works, such as the Similitudes of Enoch, also interpret Daniel 7 in a Messianic sense (1 Enoch 37-71). The Pharisees figured it out as a claim to divinity, thus, the Chief Priests were so scandalized when Jesus referred to Himself as the Son of Man in their presence (Mark 14:62-63).

Alleged Contradiction No. 170
Paul states that he does not lie. (Romans 9:1; 2 Corinthians 11:31; Galatians1:20; 1 Timothy 2:7)	Paul states that he does lie. (Romans 3:7)
Interpretation:
St. Paul speaks rhetorically in Romans 3:7, as he states in verse 6 "I speak according to man", or literally, "I speak in a human manner."

Alleged Contradiction No. 171
Paul says that he does not use trickery. (1 Thessalonians 2:3)	Paul admits to using trickery. (2 Corinthians12:16)
Interpretation:
In the last verse, St. Paul does not say he is practicing trickery but says that others accuse him of practicing trickery.

Alleged Contradiction No. 172
Paul says that circumcision is nothing. (1 Corinthians 7:19)	Paul says that circumcision is profitable. (Romans 2:25; Romans 3:1-2)
Interpretation:
Circumcision has no value for a Christian and profits nothing. The only sense that it is profitable is if one is under the Law, as St. Paul says in Romans 2:25. Circumcision is profitable if one is a Jew under the Law (Romans 2:25, 3:1-2) but has no value for a Christian who has been released from the Jewish law.

Alleged Contradiction No. 173
Do not covet. (Romans 7:7; Romans13:9)	Paul says covet. (1 Coritnhians12:31; 1 Corinthians14:39)
Interpretation:
1 Corinthians 12:31 says: "Earnestly desire the greater gifts" and 1 Corinthians 14:39 says: "Be eager to prophesy." Not all desire is coveting, much less merely being "eager." Desire becomes the sin of coveting when the desire leads to serve sin. Hence, if the desire does not lead to sin (either to jealousy or envy), then it is not covetousness. This is especially true when what humans desire is charity, grace, or other supernatural goods.

Alleged Contradiction No. 174
Paul teaches not to steal. (Ephesians 4:28)	Paul admits to stealing. (2 Corinthians11:8)
Interpretation:
Paul is using hyperbole when he says he "robbed" other churches in 1 Corinthians 11:8; this is just an exaggerated way for him to say he accepted voluntary donations, as narrated in the second half of 1 Corinthians 11:8: "I robbed other churches by accepting support from them in order to serve you."

Alleged Contradiction No. 175
Paul is assured not be hurt. (Acts 18:9-10)	Paul is often physically abused. (2 Corinthians11:23-27)
Interpretation:
In the first verse, while St. Paul is preaching in Corinth, God says to him: “And the Lord said to Paul one night in a vision, ‘Do not be afraid, but speak and do not be silent; for I am with you, and no man shall attack you to harm you; for I have many people in this city.’” Note the last clause, “for I have many people in this city.” God's promise to St. Paul was that he would not be harmed in Corinth, which took place. He preached there peacefully for a year and a half (Acts 18:11), and he was not harmed although the Jews attempted to silence him.

Alleged Contradiction No. 176
Paul says that the law is necessary. (Romans 3:31)	Paul says that the law is not necessary. (Romans 6:14)
Interpretation:
Both verses speak of the Levitical law but neither says what they are asserted to imply. Romans 3:31 never says the Law  is "necessary" but rather “by our faith we uphold the divine origin of the law because, by faith in grace, we fulfill the heart of the law.” Romans 6:14 never says the Law is not "necessary" but only that Christians are not bound by it.

Alleged Contradiction No. 177
Jesus says “go and baptize.” (Matthew 28:19)	Paul says he was not sent to baptize. (1 Corinthians 1:17)
Interpretation:
When Paul says he was not sent to baptize does not mean he “never” baptized. Obviously, even in the passage taken above, Paul mentions he baptized several in Corinth. Paul simply means that the essence of his mission was preaching than baptism. Baptism follows faith, which in turn comes by hearing the word of God preached (Romans 10:17); but the special mission that Paul received from Jesus was not to baptize but to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles and their kings (Acts 9:15).

Alleged Contradiction No. 178
Jesus says that He did not come to abolish the law. (Matthew 5:17-19)	Paul says otherwise. (Ephesians 2:15)
Interpretation:
Jesus did not come to eradicate the Levitical law but to fulfill it. When He fulfilled it by His death on the cross, its demands upon believers ceased, hence Paul says that the Lord's death "abolished" the law with its ordinances. Paul speaks from the point of view of a believer who is no longer duty-bound to keep the law. It is important to note that the fact that Jesus did not "abolish" the law does not mean it did not vanish; it vanished because it was fulfilled, not abolished, but it still vanished, and hence its demands are no longer binding.  A simple analogy can be taken up here.  For example, there are two ways to make a debt leaves. The debtor can either disclaim it and disappear, or settle it to the last cent. Both schemes are radically different, but whose ends are the same (no longer paying on the debt). One can say that he comes not to disclaim his debt but to pay it. However the end result is the same AS IF one would have disclaim it; the balance of the debt is no longer paid that is, but in one instance it is because the debt is disclaimed, while the other is because one has settled it to the last cent. Similarly, Jesus did not abolish the lawt as if the New Covenant were a renunciation of the Old or in fundamental opposition to it; rather He fulfilled it by living its commands perfectly (as in He allowed Himself to be murdered though the Mosaic law prohibits murder but He lives after as a Sacrificial Lamb, as in Moses offered His son Isaac as a sacrificial lamb but lives after knowing later that asking his son as a sacrifice is merely a test of his loyalty towards God), offering Himself for a perfect sacrifice, and hence bringing an end to the demands of the law upon believers. The relationship between the Old and New Testaments is one of the trickiest parts of New Testament theology, hence it is complex but it is not a contradiction in any sense.

Alleged Contradiction No. 179
Jesus says that God does not condemn the world. (John 3:17.	Paul says that God condemns the world. (Romans 5:18)
Interpretation:
This is a misquotation. Jesus never says God did not or does not condemn the world, only that it was not the mission of the Son to condemn the world: "God did not send His Son into the world to condemn it". God always judges sin, and even Jesus judges the world at the Last Judgment. (Compare with number 165)

Alleged Contradiction No. 180
Those present at Paul’s conversion stand. (Acts 9:7)	They fall to the ground. (Acts 26:14)
Interpretation:
Most probably they stood speechless at first and then fell to the ground. Everybody who "falls to the ground" was by definition standing before they fell. J

Alleged Contradiction No. 181
Those present at Paul’s conversion hear a voice but see nothing. (Acts 9:7)	Those present at Paul’s conversion see a light but hear nothing. (Acts 22:9)
Interpretation:
Acts 9:7 says, “Now the men who went in company with him, stood amazed, hearing indeed a voice, but seeing no man,” while Acts 22:9 says, “And they that were with me, saw indeed the light, but they heard not the voice of him that spoke with me.” Acts 9:7 does not deny that the men see “something.” They very well could have seen a light, but they did not see a man. So at least in this respect, these verses are not contradictory. Regarding whether the men heard the voice, the word “voice” in both passages can mean “voice” but has an equally primary meaning as “tone” or “sound.” Similarly, “hear” and “hearing”, can mean to hear, but can also mean to understand what is heard; some Bible translations will thus render Acts 22:9 as “They understood not the voice of him that spoke with me.” This leaves two possibilities (a) That, the men who were with Paul certainly heard some sort of voice; Paul perceived it as a clear voice, but the rest of the men only heard some kind of noise. There is a pattern for this in the Scripture, where Jesus and the disciples audibly hear God’s voice speaking from heaven but those standing nearby only hear the noise as thunder (John 12:28-30). Or, (b) that the experience is not uniform among all the men with Paul. Some hear the voice and understand it, some hear a mere noise with no voice, and others hear nothing. In the same account quoted above with Jesus in John 12, it states that "The crowd that was there and heard it said it had thundered; others said an angel had spoken to him" (John 12:29). Some perceived a heavenly voice while others thought they had heard thunder.

Alleged Contradiction No. 182
Shortly after his conversion, Paul goes to Damascus where he spent some time with the apostles. (Acts 9:19)	Paul goes to Damascus three years later and sees only Peter and James. (Galatians1:18-19)
Interpretation:
Galatians 1:18-19 says Paul went up to Jerusalem than Damascus.

Alleged Contradiction No. 183
Shortly after his conversion, Paul went to Damascus and then to Jerusalem. (Acts 9:18-26)	Shortly after his conversion, Paul went to Arabia, then to Damascus, and then, 3 years later, to Jerusalem. (Galatians1:17-18)
Interpretation:
Acts 9:26 never says Paul goes to Jerusalem right after leaving Damascus: "When he came to Jerusalem." Paul's journey to Arabia takes place between verse 25 and 26. Since St. Luke composes the Book of Acts to provide an account of the Christian Church growth, Paul's three year solitary, contemplative sojourn in Arabia does not fit in his narrative and was omitted. Book of Acts is not Paul’s biography but an account of the Christian Church growth. Consequently other details about St. Paul's life can be found in his letters not mentioned on Acts, like his intention to travel to Spain accounted in Romans 15:24.

Alleged Contradiction No. 184
The Holy Spirit forbids preaching in Asia. (Acts 16:6)	Paul preaches in Asia anyway. (Acts 19:8-10)
Interpretation:
The Holy Spirit forbids Paul to go into the province of Asia at that instance; it was not a universal command to never go to Asia ever. It’s known from Acts 18:11 that a minimum of one year and six months elapses between Acts 16 and Acts 19; perhaps much longer, given all the stops Paul made. God wills Paul to travel through the cities of Greece before going to Asia.

Alleged Contradiction No. 185
Paul says he would not be a servant of Christ if he tries to please men. (Galatians1:10)	Paul says that he tries to please men. (1 Corinthians10:33)
Interpretation:
In the first passage, St. Paul warns the Galatians not to allow the praise of men be the ultimate end of their religious observance. To do so is to be a "man pleaser" who cares more for human esteem than the Gospel. But just because the approval of men is not to be the end of humanity’s religion does not mean it cannot be used as a means to an end. In the last passage, 1 Corinthians 10:33, Paul famously says that he tries to "please all men in all things" for the sake of the Gospel. This refers not to being a "man pleaser" in the sense of subordinating religion to human respect, but in the sense of not pointlessly putting stumbling blocks in front of the Gospel by upsetting people groundlessly. This is why although Paul sternly argues that circumcision is needless - and those who suggest otherwise are merely attempting to please men (Galatians 1:10) - he has the disciple Timothy circumcised with the aim of removing a stumbling block to the Jews, who would not listen to uncircumcised men preach (Acts 16:1-3). There is a difference between being a "man pleaser" and merely attempting to not pointlessly upset people.

Alleged Contradiction No. 186
Paul says that he was the chief of all sinners. (1 Timothy1:15)	He who commits sin is of the devil. Children of God cannot sin. (1 John 3:8-10)
Interpretation:
Paul was a grave sinner before his transformation to become a child of God.

Alleged Contradiction No. 187
Paul says that Jesus is the Judge. (2 Timothy 4:1)	Paul says that God is the Judge. (Hebrews 12:23)	Paul says that the saints would judge. (1 Corinthians 6:2)
Interpretation:
Compare with No. 165

Alleged Contradiction No. 188
Paul says that Jesus is the Son of God. (Romans1:3-4)	Paul says that Jesus is just a Man. (Hebrews 7:24)
Interpretation:
Hebrews 7:24 says Jesus is a man, but never says He is just a man. Jesus is both fully God and fully man. (Compare with No. 168.

Alleged Contradiction No. 189
Do not boast. (Luke18:14)	Do not be proud. Romans11:20; 1 Peter 5:5)	Paul proudly boasts. (2 Corinthians11:16-18; Galatians 2:9-11)
Interpretation:
The Lord condemns boasting in the sense of proudly attributing one's blessings to oneself. When Paul uses the word "boast", he makes it very clear that he is boasting in the work of the Lord (1 Corinthians 1:30-31). He is proud of the work that God has done through him and makes his boast in Christ. This is why St. Paul says, "Not that we are sufficient to think anything of ourselves, as of ourselves: but our sufficiency is from God" (2 Corinthians 3:5). One may never boast in her/his own sufficiency, which would be pride, but one may definitely boast and glory in God’s victories.

Alleged Contradiction No. 190
Jesus commends the church at Ephesus for discerning the lying apostles. (Revelations 2:1-2)	Paul is the apostle to Ephesus. (Ephesians1:1)
Interpretation:
The fact that there are apostles at Ephesus whom Jesus charges to be liars does not incriminate anyone in particular. This is especially true since Paul is a true apostle of Ephesus and Jesus denounces false apostles. This alone places them in different categories. For example, if one hears on TV that the mayor commends local law enforcement for capturing those illegal weapons traffickers in a particular city, it would be understood that the legitimate dealers in that particular city are not the ones referred to in the statement. In the same way, Paul and the true apostles are excluded in Jesus' condemnation of false apostles.

Alleged Contradiction No. 191
Paul says he is not sent to baptize but to preach. (1 Corinthians1:17)	Paul baptizes. (1 Corinthians1:16)
Interpretation:
Again, Paul in no way says, "I never baptize anyone," but "I was not sent to baptize" (as indicated in no.177). For example, an individual person who goes to a business luncheon can rightly say that he does not come there to eat, because the lunch is merely an occasion for business talk; but this does not mean that he did not eat while he is there, only that the primary purpose of going there is not merely to eat.

  

Alleged Contradiction No. 192
In Damascus, the governor attempts to seize Paul. (2 Corinthians11:32)	In Damascus, the Jews attempt to seize Paul. (Acts 9:22-23)
Interpretation:
The Jews of Damascus are the ones who stir up the governor to go after Paul, just like it is the Jews of Jerusalem who instigate the Romans against Jesus.

As parting words, these one hundred ninety-two alleged Bible verses contradictions that are refuted is not to prove anything against anyone but simply to share and educate everybody without any tortured logic or wordplay but a knowledge of Christian theology, an unbiased application of linguistics, and pure common sense. Everything that it asserts as true is in fact true than contradictions.

The Scriptures are the word of God that should be taken by heart, mind and conscience as something that edifies, purifies, intensifies life’s disposition towards maturity to love of oneself and neighbors.

Once noticed why it’s 192 instead of 194 alleged contradictions it’s because of repeated premises which have already been addressed in subsequent refutations.

pages
1	2	3	4	5	6	7