The contradiction with the Christology

John Piper on "contradictions"-

"It is impossible to respect the Bible too highly, but it is possible to respect it wrongly. If we do not ask seriously how differing texts fit together, then we are either superhuman (and see all truth at a glance) or indifferent ( and don't care about seeing the coherence of truth). But I don't see how anyone who is indifferent or superhuman can have a proper respect for the Bible. Therefore reverence for God's Word demands that we ask questions and pose problems and believe that there are answers and solutions which will reward our labor with treasures new and old (Matthew 13:52)."

"There are hundreds and hundreds of (such) apparent disparities in the Holy Scripture, and we dishonor the text not to see them an to think them through to the root of unity."

(Brothers, We Are Not Professionals, pages 76,77)

 

John 5:31-33 (NIV, crosswalk.com edition):
"If I testify about myself, my testimony is not valid. 32 There is another who testifies in my favor, and I know that his testimony about me is valid. 33 "You have sent to John and he has testified to the truth.

What contradiction? I do not see a contradiction here. in the NIV.

 

John 5:31-33 (nKJV, crosswalk.com editon):
"If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true. 32 There is another who bears witness of Me, and I know that the witness which He witnesses of Me is true. 33 You have sent to John, and he has borne witness to the truth.

Says the same think as the NIV What is the contradiction?

John 5:31-33 (KJV1769-ish edition, e-sword.com edition):
If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.
Joh 5:32 There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true.Joh 5:33 Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the truth

 

Sorry, I just do not see a contridiciton in the NIV BIBLE, in the nKJV BIBLE nor in the KJV1769 BIBLE nor among the three Bibles.

 

The verses Askjo is using come from verses in John chapter 5 and John chapter 8. Askjo offers these as examples of contradiction when he doesn['t even completely quote them, give the reference... (so you either have to read his mind or look 'em up yourself) nor does he take them in context.... but concludes that God must contradict himself.....

It also looks like he's abandoned this issue rather than address any of our postings.

 

Askjo is good at that, when being badly defeated on some silly point. For example, he sez he's NOT KJVO, but when I askJo what other versions he recomments, he won't answer.

 

No, but he used the same word in both places. If it is a contradiction to use the same word in English, then it is also in Greek. You see, in the Greek, we see that the context keeps it from the contradiction even though the same word is used. Same thing with English, context shows there is no contradiction even with the same word being used.

The words mean exactly the same thing. Record, witness and testimony are all referring to the same thing.

how is it a mistranslation to translate the SAME word the SAME way both times? You don't even make sense.

YES


These two verses have ONE word in one modern version, but they already contradicted themselves there. Therefore they show that Jesus Christ contradicted Himself. See NIV and NKJV. [/quote]Did the Greek contradict when it used ONE word. Your logic is lacking severely.

No, the KJV used to different words with the same meaning. That doesn't stop the contradiction, context does though.

phileo means brotherly love. The problem is your example is backwards. The passage has the same Greek word in both places. I showed you from the dictionary that the two English words that the KJV used have the SAME MEANING. Using a synonym doens't stop a contradiction. Context, in this case, shows it isn't a contradiction. I would love to be in a room when you tried to defend the lack of contradiction by showing two synonyms. that would be laughable.

So God can use the same word and it is ok, but in English it is wrong? Are you a troll just making up stuff because nobody can be that bad at basic logic.

 

That logic in no way indicates that the KJV is the right one.

Maybe what is perceived "dishonesty" is actually either new scholarship using new sources or a correction of a translation mistake.

 

RECORD', v.t. [L. recorder, to call to mind, to remember, from re and cor, cordis, the heart or mind.]

1. To register; to enroll; to write or enter in a book or on parchment, for the purpose of preserving authentic or correct evidence of a thing; as, to record the proceedings of a court; to record a deed or lease; to record historical events.
2. To imprint deeply on the mind or memory; as, to record the sayings of another in the heart.
3. To cause to be remembered.
So ev'n and morn recorded the third day.
4. To recite; to repeat. [Not in use.]
5. To call to mind. [Not in use.] ​

I'm glad to be of service.

 

In the passages you quoted, they mean the same thing.

 

In the context of the OP, which, btw let me remind you that YOU authored, it wasn't a word you were contesting..... it was two phrases (a group of words with meaning) taken out of the context of two different stories, which, when compared together, give a superficial appearance of a contradiction of meaning. After framing them as a contradiction, you then assert that both cannot be true .......... and if only one can be true then the Bible is not all true and if the Bible is the Word of God does God lie?

What is the problem?
Is it that the words are translated the same in the KJV?
Is it that both sentences say different things?
Is it the version of the Bible, which you've later introduced in the thread?

I gave you in my first post in this thread, the breakdown of the context which is EVERYTHING to seeing there is no contradiction.

Could it be that either you are enjoying an argument over nothing and trying to make an issue of it for the 'joy' of arguing
OR
you have a mental (and probably a spiritual) block to receiving the truth?

When reading the Bible, realize that in the orignal autographs there were no paragraphs and limited punctuation, no verses, no chapters. These are 'inventions' of modern reference to help us find specific passages, and, in most cases, keep the order of one subject together.

It was as if Jesus was saying, and I'm paraphrasing which means this is not a Bible quote " You people ask for a witness to my authority. [you people have a saying] If I give testimony of my self my testimony is not true. [I know your traditions] I'll give you three, which is more than you require of each other when you receive and take confidence in each other of your countrymen: I have the witness of the scriptures which tell of me, the testimony of John, whom you believed, and the power of the Father in the works which I do, which you see are good. Now what is your problem that you still will not believe?" John 5 with the unspoken inference (of thought content) presented as brackets taken in the context. (Which I don't recommend but am taking a liberty to do. Another way of saying it is that it is a smiggen of sarcasm by which Jesus addressed by mirroring in his speech the very thoughts they [the people] carried in their heads while answering in reply.)

In John 8, it was the pharisees who declared Jesus had no authority and that he was testifying of himself. As his works and miracles and prophesy had the power of the Father's authority and blessing, and WAS a testimony which could not be honestly denied, he acknowledged that even IF he gives testimony of himself, yet his testimony IS TRUE. [This was in contradiction to their 'tradition' that they should not trust the testimony of one. They were blind to the evidence and determined to prove him a liar....regardless of the evidence.... just like people do today..... trying to find fault in God's Word. While there may be differences and problems in translating from one language to the next.... and the interpretation we later give to words as they change in common usage.... the ultimate and bottom line is that GOD is TRUE and NEVER LIES and that He has promised to preserve his word: We can depend that His word is true....... and if we have problems with it then it is due to human error: And given the scholarly discipline of so many who've involved themselves in the critique and inspection of the various translations, in most or all cases, the problem is within the reader.]

In cruising through the various English versions of the Bible, it helps to keep in mind that without a different phrasing of words, or using different words, there would be no different versions or copy-write protections for the scholars or publishers. In considering the variance of versions, it is helpful to realize also that to those who depend on the Bible for their spiritual growth, knowledge and faith in God the Savior and Lord, a version which did not stick to truth would not sell...... which is the bottom line for most publishers. The KJV of the Bible has the most limited vocabulary...... so the same word is often translated the same. More recent versions use synonyms as seemingly more appropriate to passage or context (which increases the vocabulary used) and more modern or customary phrasing.

While I have a preference for the poetic and reverent beauty, simplicity, consistency of meaning, stability, and the scholarly intensity with which the KJV was translated, I think it is serious offense and discouragement to the confidence we have in God's Word, if, without some very obvious errors specific to a translation, we start casting a generalized doubt upon the authority and infallibility of God's Word.

The most important calling we have as Christians is to live the life and bear the witness. Few of us are called to that area of specialty whereby by scholarship and intensity we are properly refined to expose errors, critique, and lower confidence in a particular translation, knowing that this charge may also contribute to the barriers and resistance the natural man already has in his heart to resist the truth. This does not mean that errors (if present) shouldn't be pointed out..... but that one who does so should first have a good understanding and find collaboration of other scholars and trustworthy believers that a charge of 'error' is valid

 

One nice thing about Ukraine. They only have ONE Bible translation- and it ain't the KJV. :smilewinkgrin:

 

First, tell us which of the several meanings of "record" you believe is being used by Jesus in this passage. Personally, I think the KJV translators intended the archaic Definition 4. "To recite; to repeat".