Todd: Getting back to the original post, I love all the verbal tap-dancing these Biblical scholars do on the many contradictions found in Scripture. There must be no such thing as a contradiction, in fact.
No matter what passages are shown, there's always some "explanation" to make them reconcile.
SH: Well, I must confess that Todd has leveled a pretty devastating blow to the Christian faith. By his own admission, we have an answer for everything.
Now if that doesn’t disprove Christianity, I don’t know what would.
You see, if only we were without an explanation, Todd would be a devout Christian.
But the fact that we have an answer for every objection is proof positive that Christianity can’t be true.
Todd: Was Ahaziah 42 or 22 when his rule started? It was both! Why? Because God can do anything, including making a man 42 and 22 simultaneously.
SH: Apparent or actual numerical discrepancies in the text of Scripture can be due to a variety of factors, viz. mistranscription, round numbers, symbolic numbers, different calendrical systems.
In this instance, the original reading for 2 Chron 22:2 is preserved in the Syriac and Septuagintal text traditions.
Todd: "... I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." -- Genesis 32:30
"No man hath seen God at any time..."-- John 1:18
SH: In context, “God” in Jn 1:18, has reference to God the Father, in contrast to the Incarnate Son, who is the visible revelation of the Father.
All Todd does is to pluck an isolated verse from one part of Scripture, then pluck an isolated verse from another part of Scripture, then proclaim a “contradiction.”
This is for people who can’t do exegesis.
Todd: "And if a man shall take his sister, his father's daughter, or his mother's daughter...it is a wicked thing...." Leviticus 20:17
But what was god's reaction to Abraham, who married his sister -- his father's daughter? See Genesis 20:11-12
SH: Several problems here:
i) This is not a contradiction within the same law code. Rather, it’s a difference between pre-Mosaic patriarchal customs and the Law of Moses.
Remember that Abraham was originally a pagan idolater before God summoned him to leave Ur of the Chaldees. Abraham was already 75 years old at that time. Clearly a married man.
He was married to his “sister” long before he received his divine vocation.
ii) It’s not as if God commanded in Genesis what he forbad in Leviticus.
iii) There’s also an elementary difference between precept and practice. Even if there were a discrepancy here, it would be a discrepancy between God’s command and Abraham’s behavior.
That does nothing to disprove the inspiration of Scripture.
iv) Finally, not every injunction in Scripture is a moral absolute.
Todd: So, these aren't contradictions. Okay. Name something that you WOULD consider a contradiction.
SH: When I find one, you’ll be the first to know.
Todd: Maybe something like "God tempts people" and then seeing something like "God DOESN'T tempt people".
Oh wait ..
"And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham." (Gen 22:1)
"Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man." (James 1:13)
Now, I know what you're going to say ... "Well, the Genesis passage means that God ALLOWS men to be tempted."
SH: No, that’s not what I’m going to say. Unlike you, I don’t quote Scripture out of context. I pay attention to the actual wording of Scripture as well as the surrounding context.
Jas 1:13 says that God tempts no one to commit evil. The hypothetical (or more properly, counterfactual) sacrifice of Isaac (Gen 22) was not an inducement to sin.
To the contrary, it afforded an opportunity for Abraham to demonstrate his faith rather than lapsing into infidelity.
Todd: So, if someone asks me if I went to the store, and I say "Yes, I did go to the store" when really, I had someone else go for me, this wouldn't be a lie?
SH: Sorry, but I didn’t find that in my concordance.