Part I
I will freely admit that there are numerous instances where, on the surface, critics have a plausible case. These situations can make readers do a double-take. As usual, however, there are explanations. When it comes to doctrine, factors such as context, subject, and audience are key. When it comes to numbers (such as in the books of Samuel and Kings), the answer often lies in chronology (hypothetical example: one number was recorded early in a king’s reign, and the contradictory number was recorded later in the same king’s reign. The simple answer to the “contradiction” is that the number, whatever it represents, changed as the years went by).
This issue is different than other “problems” with Christianity in that Christians have to explain every little potential contradiction instead of having a blanket answer for an issue. This can get tedious, for there are few jack-of-all-situations answers that you can apply across the board. Christians have to cover each contradiction individually and conclude, “See, no contradictions after all.” This can be a pain, but 1 Peter 3:15 states:
“But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear” (NKJV).
I’ll quickly go through the words I italicized. Always means that Christians have to defend the Bible no matter the time or how unattractive the subject is. Defense doesn’t mean “plug your ears and tell the person to shut up”, but to logically give an answer to arguments (to the best of your ability). Everyone includes smart-alecks who really don’t care for an answer. Reason means arguments, and the more well-thought out the better. Meekness and fear excludes Bible-bashing, an unfortunate but favorite tactic used by prideful Christians (which means me sometimes).
Now let’s get to the specific contradictions given in the article.
Part II: Contradiction I
Okay, so what do we know? Based on context (surrounding verses), James is talking about trials and tribulations. When someone is enduring trials and is tempted to sin, she shouldn’t blame God for being enticed to sin in her situation. God isn’t dangling sin in front of her and saying, “Give in.” No, that’s the flesh (our nature that desires to sin). Don’t blame God for the flesh working inside of you. Now for the alleged contradiction:
Genesis 22:1 states: “And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him…” (KJV). The story goes on to tell of how God asks Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, Abraham goes to obey God, and God makes it all work out in the end by saving Isaac and providing Abraham a ram to sacrifice instead.
How can the contradiction be explained? One way is to simply point out that the word “tempt” means two different meanings here. When I tempt someone (James 1:13), I want them to fail. But tempt can also mean “test” (Genesis 22:1). God was tempting/testing Abraham’s obedience, not enticing him to sin.
Put simply, God cannot tempt you to sin. He will never hold sin in front of your face, daring you to mess up. However, that doesn’t mean He won’t tempt your faith and obedience. The only way to see if something is real is to put it through tests. This can also be called “tempting”, but sin/failure is not the goal, but growth. God can tempt, but only the flesh tempts you to sin. God encourages obedience.
Put even more simply, there is sinful tempting (where the goal is to get the victim to sin), and non-sinful tempting (where the goal is to get the “victim” to grow).
Contradiction II
For the sake of understanding the contradiction forthcoming, I will include verse 13: “Only acknowledge thine iniquity (sin), that thou hast transgressed (disobeyed) against the LORD thy God…” (KJV).
The context is God talking to Israel (earlier in verse 12). By this time Israel and Judah were two separate nations, and they both rebelled against God. God, being merciful and just, was angry with Israel, but told them His anger would subside if they acknowledged their sin. Remember two things: 1) God is talking to Israel. 2) There was a condition that Israel had to meet before His anger would subside. Now for the contradiction.
Jeremiah 17:4 states: “…for ye have kindled a fire in my anger, which shall burn forever.”
The context is God talking to Judah (17:1). Also, if you read the context, there is a finality to His words. There is no condition of forgiveness in this section of scripture. Judah is cooked; God’s punishment will stand forever. Judah is at the point of no return, at least at the moment Jeremiah is speaking.
The two examples, on the surface, are contradictions. But they aren’t because of two reasons: 1) the audience changes from Israel to Judah, 2) in one instance, there is hope for Israel if they repent. In the other, there is no hope for Judah, and God lets that be known.
Before I move on to the next “contradiction”, let me say something on God’s judgement. Jeremiah 17:4 is completely accurate for those who don’t repent. God’s anger will burn forever, and there is an eternal punishment. But if we repent as God asks in Jeremiah 3:13, His anger won’t burn forever. There will be mercy.
Contradiction III
In context, Jesus was talking about obeying the Father and not Himself (5:30). Also, He is basically saying that it isn’t His job to say, “Look everyone, I am here!” That was the job of John the Baptist and Jesus’ disciples (5:33). Basically, Jesus wasn’t here to toot His own horn, but to obey His Father. Now for the contradiction.
In John 8:18, Jesus says, “I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me beareth witness of me.”
In context, Jesus wasn’t talking about obedience (obeying the Father), nor fame, but truth. In every respectable culture, when someone makes a claim, there has to be witnesses. Jesus witnesses Himself, but that isn’t enough. He is saying that the Father also is bearing witness to His life and ministry.
The difference is that Jesus is talking about importance and fame in John 5:31. He is of secondary importance to the Father. Also, His disciples, not Himself, are spreading His name. John 8:18 is talking about truth, and how God the Father is witnessing everything that Jesus is doing on earth.
In John 5:31, “bearing witness” is talking about importance. 1) The Father, 2) the Son. Jesus was letting everyone else know that. In John 8:18, “bearing witness” is purely legal. Jesus isn’t closing Himself in and seen by no one. His Father is with Him every step of the way.
Contradiction IV
There are varying opinions on this matter. I hold that the Father has never been seen by His creation directly and in full glory. We wouldn’t be able to take it. However, the Son has been seen (Jesus, duh).
I believe that the Father, if He has been seen, has held back His full form. He’s never been seen as He is. However, the Son can and has been seen.
Some say that the Father has never been seen. Every time God has been seen, it’s been Jesus, not the Father. The Father, if He chooses to, speaks thru things. Such as burning bushes and angels and whatnot. But in His actual form, He’s never been seen.
God’s been seen, but at the same time He (the Father) hasn’t been. Pretty nifty and completely true. The glory of the Father would kill us, which is why He doesn’t show us all of it.
Part III
No comments:
Post a Comment