This article is the first in a series for a category termed “Christian Contradiction”. I have found that most Christians I encounter tend to shy away from, “come let us reason together”.¹ Instead, it seems easier to supply reason based on personal experience, emotion and arcane traditions. Though genuine in intent, this is simply relativism –making the instructions of The Master personal, disposable and interchangeable rather than the will and wisdom we find in Scripture that builds one faith, in one Master.²

“we are ready to die, rather than to transgress the laws of our fathers.”
– 2Ma 7:2 KJVA

This experientially-charged, staunch, capriciousness, allows only for a second and less desirable approach; pointing out the obvious contradictions in a particular belief pattern. It is an unfortunate position in which to be placed. One must point to the negative in order to return the practice of critical thinking to an individual. The irony: though the negative format is misplaced as an undesirable characteristic of a person using the technique, this same person is verbally referred to as “knowledgeable” or treated as “on fire for The Lord”. It’s a mixture of emotions for the recipient however, this methodology yields strong results. People will at least consider, more quickly, that they believe things which make no sense because they were taught a belief pattern.

I say belief pattern because that is simply what we have been handed. Seminarian has passed to seminarian a mindset of “support the sect”. The concept of searching the Scriptures for Truth using logic, reasoning and trust (In His Word.) has been lost on “the church”. The “shepherds” instead are taught a pattern of hermeneutics developed only to prove man-made doctrinal systems of Catholicism, Calvinism, Christian Sabbatarianism, etc. Every progression in doctrine has improved only slightly on the predecessor. This series is the approach of demonstrating the contradictions within Christendom. The methodology of this project, I must reiterate, is a second option; a Plan B. Our goal should always be to align ourselves to the Will of The Master. For some, such as me, this means turning our backs on error we embraced as truth for decades. When ardent adherence to man-made doctrine squashes sound reasoning, I am suggesting that exposing contradictions may breakdown walls of resistance.

I will not introduce anything revolutionary in Scriptural interpretation. I plan to show some of the simplest and trusting (In His Word) methods that the church has been duped into abandoning. The main summary points of this methodology would be:

Trust in Common Sense :

If A+B=C, then it should stand to reason that C=A+B. Unfortunately in the church it may best be illustrated as: If A+B=C then for us (the church) C=B

“is there not an irony that so many ‘Spirit-led’ churches are led in doctrinally opposing directions?”

This tends to be the most offensive to the evangelical movement today. That is, stating that common sense or logic should be used in discerning Scripture. The eventual shift to a Gentile led congregation brought with it a dogmatic distortion of Scripture much like that of the Pharisee’s which Yeshua (Jesus) rebuked³. The modern mega-churches of our time recognized this and have reacted by devaluing the importance of Scripture and close-knit, fervent study. In place of readings from The Law and The Prophets⁴, we find mini Christian-rock concerts and feel good rating/fund raisers. The Word is lessened as “The Spirit Leads”. While I whole-heartedly believe in the work of The Spirit, is there not an irony that so many “Spirit-led” churches are led in doctrinally opposing directions?

Trust in Continuity:
The fact that many Christians do not believe in the inerrant Scriptures is due largely to deceptive doctrine. Doctrines of the church over the years have fluctuated and reversed so many times that a static text cannot possibly keep up. Therefore, most of the writings must have been cultural and are only relevant if they still make sense to us, today, in our culture.

The other side of the church camp is Sola Scriptura. I believe that the old adage, “if it isn’t in Scripture, I don’t consider it”, is a very solid foundation. Yet the contradiction is that this foundation stone of the Protestant Reformation has held on to inventions of the Roman Catholic Church, since its inception. The Protestant churches have no supporting Scripture for many beliefs. Many of their beliefs are found only in Canon Law. They have subscribed to a belief pattern they claim to reject.

The fundamental methodology needed here is simply: no contradictions. If a theology puts Scripture in direct opposition with itself, that theology is wrong. A simple example that tends to ruffle some feathers is justification. You don’t have to travel far in the church to hear, “We are justified by faith not by works.” This quip is unloaded quickly as a means to refute the notion that we as believers are to obey The Commandments of Elohim (God). The backing for this statement is usually Romans 3:28, among others.
“If a theology puts Scripture in direct opposition with itself, that theology is wrong.”

After a surface reading of the supporting text(s) it seems that this is more than a quip but rather a powerful, conclusive, truth. However, when we read Ya’akov (James)⁵, we see an apparent Scriptural contradiction. To alleviate these embarrassing passages, which many Christians are shocked to read, we must either twist Scripture or discount it as inerrancy. Thus, “Thy Word” becomes a flickering, dim, lamp to our feet.⁶ This a simplistic example, but one that requires rectification, not dismissal. We are not endowed with the authority to dismiss or ignore certain Scripture because it does not bode well for our belief pattern.

Trust in Context:
Context has been removed from Scripture and replaced by church anachronism. This is the masterful art of applying today’s relevancy to ancient text. This deception knows no bounds, replete with name and context changes to peoples, places, things and events. The Apostolic Scriptures (”new testament”), in particular have received a thorough white-washing; an ethnic cleansing of monumentally deceptive proportions. Using a play on our fundamental discernment of ducks⁷, we should apply the following rule with regards to Scriptural context: If one looks like Jew and acts like a Jew and writes like a Jew… then one probably is a Jew.

The intent of this series is to instruct and enlighten, using the above methodology, particularly those on whom the desire to grow and learn through reasoning is lost. The intent is not to ridicule. However, some of the contradictions and practices called, “The Lord’s” invoke zeal to guard His Torah against the onslaught of relativism and paganism.

we are ready to die, rather than to transgress the laws of our fathers.
– 2Ma 7:2 KJVA

---

1. Yeshayahu (Isaiah) 1:18
2. Ephesians 4:5
3. Mattithyahu (Matthew) 15:1-9
4. Act 13:15
5. Ya’akov (James) 2:17-26
6. Tehillim (Psalms) 119:105
7. Reference to the saying: “If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck.”