Biblical Contradictions and Their Resolutions in Theology
The concept of "controversy" in biblical theology often refers to a dispute or contention, particularly in a legal or divine context, where God or His people are engaged in a struggle against adversaries or unrighteousness [3]. This can manifest as a divine reckoning against those who oppose God's will or His chosen people [3]. For instance, the prophet Isaiah speaks of a "year of recompenses for the controversy of Zion," indicating a time when God will retaliate against those who have contended with Zion, viewing Zion's controversy as His own [3]. Similarly, the book of Hosea describes God's actions to hinder Israel's apostasy, using "thorns" and a "wall" to create obstacles that would lead them back to Him, implying a divine controversy against their idolatry [4].
Biblical texts also address apparent contradictions or theological difficulties that arise from God's actions and character. One such area of theological discussion concerns God's justice in election and non-election. The Apostle Paul, in Romans 9, anticipates objections to the doctrine that God chooses some and rejects others "not on account of their works, but purely in the exercise of His own good pleasure" [2]. An anticipated objection is, "Is there unrighteousness with God?" to which Paul responds with a firm "God forbid" [2]. This highlights a perceived tension between divine sovereignty and human understanding of justice. Another objection Paul addresses is, "Why doth he yet find fault? for who hath resisted his will?" [8]. This question challenges how God can blame individuals if their actions are ultimately subject to His will, especially if they are rejected by Him [8]. These passages demonstrate that the biblical authors themselves engaged with potential theological controversies and provided resolutions within their framework.
The idea of "unbelief" is presented as a significant sin, rooted in an "evil heart" and "hardness of heart" [1]. It is described as proceeding from a disinclination to truth, judicial blindness, and the influence of the devil [1]. Unbelief is seen as impugning the veracity of God and is exhibited in the rejection of Christ [1]. This understanding of unbelief underscores a moral dimension to human resistance against God, rather than merely an intellectual one.
The resolution of such controversies often involves a deeper understanding of God's character and purposes. For example, the idea that God "made man upright" but that humans have "sought out many schemes" (Ecclesiastes 7:29) provides an account for the origin of evil and the scarcity of upright individuals [5]. This suggests that human deviation from God's original design is the source of moral corruption, rather than a flaw in God's creation or justice [5].
Furthermore, the concept of a "chosen generation" or "elect" people, as described in 1 Peter 2:9, emphasizes God's sovereign selection [6]. This election is not based on outward signs alone, as Romans 2:28-29 clarifies that true Jewish identity and circumcision are matters of the heart, not merely external observances [7]. This distinction helps resolve the apparent contradiction between outward religious practice and inward spiritual reality, asserting that God's judgment and favor are based on genuine devotion rather than superficial adherence [7].
Sources
- Torrey's Topical Textbook “Torrey's Topical Textbook: Unbelief — Is sin -- Joh 16:9. Defilement inseparable from -- Tit 1:15. All, by nature, concluded in -- Ro 11:32. Proceeds from An evil heart. -- Heb 3:12. Slowness of heart. -- Lu 24:25. Hardness of heart. -- Mr 16:14; Ac 19:9. Disinclination to the truth. -- Joh 8:45,46. Judicial blindness. -- Joh 12:39,40. Not being Christ's sheep. -- Joh 10:26. The devil blinding the mind. -- 2Co 4:4. The devil taking away the word out of the heart. -- Lu 8:12. Seeking honour from men. -- Joh 5:44. Impugns the veracity of God -- 1Jo 5:10. Exhibited in Rejecting Christ. -- Joh 16:”
- Romans (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Romans 9:14: What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid--This is the first of two objections to the foregoing doctrine, that God chooses one and rejects another, not on account of their works, but purely in the exercise of His own good pleasure: "This doctrine is inconsistent with the justice of God." The answer to this objection extends to Rom 9:19, where we have the second objection.”
- Isaiah (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Isaiah 34:8: recompenses for the controversy of Zion--that is, the year when God will retaliate on those who have contended with Zion. Her controversy is His. Edom had thought to extend its borders by laying hold of its neighbor's lands and has instigated Babylon to cruelty towards fallen Judah (Psa 137:7; Eze 36:5); therefore Edom shall suffer the same herself (Lam 4:21-22). The final winding up of the controversy between God and all enemies of Him and His people is also foreshadowed (Isa 61:2; Isa 63:4; Isa 66:14-16; Mal 4:1, Mal 4:3; Th2 1:7-9; Rev 11:18; Rev 18”
- Hosea (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Hosea 2:6: thorns . . . wall-- (Job 19:8; Lam 3:7, Lam 3:9). The hindrances which the captivity interposed between Israel and her idols. As she attributes all her temporal blessings to idols, I will reduce her to straits in which, when she in vain has sought help from false gods, she will at last seek Me as her only God and Husband, as at the first (Isa 54:5; Jer 3:14; Eze 16:8). then--before Israel's apostasy, under Jeroboam. The way of duty is hedged about with thorns; it is the way of sin that is hedged up with thorns. Crosses in an evil course are God's hedge”
- Ecclesiastes (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Ecclesiastes 7:29: The "only" way of accounting for the scarcity of even comparatively upright men and women is that, whereas God made man upright, they (men) have, &c. The only account to be "found" of the origin of evil, the great mystery of theology, is that given in Holy Writ (Gen. 2:1-3:24). Among man's "inventions" was the one especially referred to in Ecc 7:26, the bitter fruits of which Solomon experienced, the breaking of God's primeval marriage law, joining one man to "one" woman (Mat 19:4-6). "Man" is singular, namely, Adam; "they," plural, Adam, Eve, an”
- 1 Peter (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on 1 Peter 2:9: Contrast in the privileges and destinies of believers. Compare the similar contrast with the preceding context. chosen--"elect" of God, even as Christ your Lord is. generation--implying the unity of spiritual origin and kindred of believers as a class distinct from the world. royal--kingly. Believers, like Christ, the antitypical Melchisedec, are at once kings and priests. Israel, in a spiritual sense, was designed to be the same among the nations of the earth. The full realization on earth of this, both to the literal and the spiritual Israel, i”
- Romans (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Romans 2:28: he is not a Jew which is one outwardly, &c.--In other words, the name of "Jew" and the rite of "circumcision" were designed but as outward symbols of a separation from the irreligious and ungodly world unto holy devotedness in heart and life to the God of salvation. Where this is realized, the signs are full of significance; but where it is not, they are worse than useless. Note, (1) It is a sad mark of depravity when all that is designed and fitted to melt only hardens the heart (Rom 2:4, and compare Pe2 3:9; Ecc 8:11). (2) Amidst all the inequalitie”
- Romans (Presbyterian) “Jamieson, Fausset & Brown on Romans 9:19: Thou shalt say then unto me, Why--"Why then" is the true reading. doth he yet find fault? for who hath resisted--"Who resisteth" his will?--that is, "This doctrine is incompatible with human responsibility"; If God chooses and rejects, pardons and punishes, whom He pleases, why are those blamed who, if rejected by Him, cannot help sinning and perishing? This objection shows quite as conclusively as the former the real nature of the doctrine objected to--that it is Election and Non-election to eternal salvation prior to any difference of personal ch”