1

With various, claimed, contradictions within biblical text,

Jeremiah 17:4 - ...it [anger] will burn forever. Jeremiah 3:12 - ...And I will not remain angry forever.

I have seen many that have broken down the text, but we seem, as a society, and many of those that I know that claim much the same, accept things like black holes, or holes in space-time, and other very real seeming intuitive contradictions that have a very real impact on the nature of reality. People seem content to believe that the nature of reality is not what we thought it was, and find logical contradictions in the truth of the nature of reality, but find it easy to tear down religiously philosophical views. What possible justification can be found in taking these seeming opposing view points?

NationWidePants
  • 129
  • 8
  • Welcome! Unfortunately, I'm having difficulty understanding your question. Are you referring specifically to the discrepancy between these two verses? Or are you asking generally? If the latter, then this question is much too broad for this site. When you get a chance, I hope you'll take a minute to take the [tour] and learn how this site is different from others. – Nathaniel is protesting Jun 02 '16 at 13:47
  • It's less about the quotes (which were meant as examples) and more about the rationale and response to an atheist. – NationWidePants Jun 02 '16 at 14:20
  • If you take a look at the textual-discrepancies tag, you'll see that there are many different approaches to handling discrepancies based on the passages themselves. But even more importantly, different people associated with Christianity take different approaches. Some will be more likely to interpret texts as allegory or poetry than others, while others will not hesitate to admit that the Bible contains errors. That's why your question is too broad. – Nathaniel is protesting Jun 02 '16 at 14:26
  • @Nathaniel But my comment has nothing to do with defense of the Bible, the question is "How is acceptance of science different than accepting the Bible?" or, perhaps, "Why does science and religion seem to be at odds?" Both cases seem to take faith, in the general sense. Another example, in science, is Dark Energy and Dark Matter: terms coined to explain a phenomena of gravitational forces on mass and the universal acceleration. – NationWidePants Jun 02 '16 at 14:34
  • In that case, your question appears to be less a religion/theology question (what we focus on here) than a philosophy of science / philosophy of religion question. Have you considered asking or searching on Philosophy.SE? – Matt Gutting Jun 02 '16 at 15:29
  • @MattGutting I wouldn't get a theological response from a philosophy forum, especially since they aren't likely to hold the same values as those populating this forum. – NationWidePants Jun 02 '16 at 16:44
  • 2
    Possibly true; but I don't think this is a problem specifically of Christian theology - or if it is, the answers can vary WIDELY depending on the theological approach. (Is there any reason, for example, to believe that a young-Earth creationist would hold the same view on the subject as a Quaker, or an Orthodox Christian? I don't think so; I think it's rather unlikely in fact.) – Matt Gutting Jun 02 '16 at 20:30
  • "How is acceptance of science different than accepting the Bible?" This actually provides a good reason to reveal contradictions in the Bible. If a scientist sees a contradiction in established theory, he can - and should - reveal that contradiction, seek peer review of his finding and then cooperate in identifying a better explanation. In one way, this answers the question put, but in a more general way, the question is too broad. – Dick Harfield Jun 02 '16 at 21:17

1 Answers1

1

Here the skeptic attempts to pit Jeremiah 3:12 (a promise to Israel that God will not be angry with them forever) and Jeremiah 17:4 (a statement that God’s anger over sin had been kindled and will burn forever) against each other.

In Jer. 3 God is calling Israel to repent of their sin and turn back to him and promises that his anger will not burn against them forever if they do. In the second passage, God is referring to those who do not turn back to him and how his anger against sin will never end. Thus, the contexts reveal that what is being addressed are two totally different situations. One addresses God’s forgiveness of persons, the other God’s holy hatred of sin. They are simply not even talking about the same things and thus cannot be contradictions.

Also, worth noting is that “forever” in this case is a hyperbolic statement meant to show the seriousness of the offense.

Grasper
  • 5,444
  • 3
  • 25
  • 66