Bible contradictions

Your first "contradiction" shows your ignorance of the bible. "You shall not kill" is actually not a command found in the Ten Commandments. The command from scripture in the original language actually says "You shall not murder" (Exodus 20:13). The Hebrew word for "murder" literally means "the intentional, premeditated killing of another person with malice." the original word in Hebrew is ratzakh which means "to kill" which is different from the word for murder but often gets mistranslated. (and no that doesn't mean that text is the worst form of communication.) An accidental killing is not murder: Exodus 21:12-13 Anyone who strikes a man and kills him shall surely be put to death. However, if he does not do it intentionally, but God lets it happen, he is to flee to a place I will designate. Numbers 35:22-25 But if without hostility someone suddenly shoves another or throws something at him unintentionally or, without seeing him, drops a stone on him that could kill him, and he dies, then since he was not his enemy and he did not intend to harm him, the assembly must judge between him and the avenger of blood according to these regulations. The assembly must protect the one accused of murder from the avenger of blood and send him back to the city of refuge to which he fled. A killing performed in self-defense (or in defense of one"s home) is not murder: Exodus 22:2 If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed A killing performed in an attempt to save the life of an innocent person is not murder: Exodus 2:11-12 One day, after Moses had grown up, he went out to where his own people were and watched them at their hard labor. He saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew, one of his own people. Glancing this way and that and seeing no one, he killed the Egyptian and hid him in the sand. (God did not judge Moses as a murderer because he was protecting the life of the slave) Genesis 14:14-16 When Abram heard that his relative had been taken captive, he called out the 318 trained men born in his household and went in pursuit as far as Dan. During the night Abram divided his men to attack them and he routed them, pursuing them as far as Hobah, north of Damascus. He recovered all the goods and brought back his relative Lot and his possessions, together with the women and the other people. (God did not judge Abram as a murderer because he was protecting the life of Lot) Killing becomes murder when (and only when) it is not properly justified, and the justifications are clear: you can use whatever force necessary to protect your own life from a hostile aggressor, or to save the life of an innocent from such imminent, life-threatening danger. The difference between the legal or illegal use of deadly force is really a matter of motive, intent and justification, and these distinctions come straight from the pages of Scripture. When God gives an order to kill it is not "murder" but justified killing. As for lying and dillusions: God is not commending lying here. He is simply utilizing it to accomplish His purposes. God is not promoting lying, but permitting it to bring judgment on evil. That is, God, for His own purposes of justice, allowed Ahab to be deceived by evil spirits whom He knew in His omniscience would be used to accomplish His sovereign and good will. God is sovereign even over evil and uses this to his advantage. Closer examination of scripture shows that God only uses this on those who will not see the truth either way. as for lying. these first two are taken out of context to the point of willful deception. the full quote is this."The Israelites did as Moses instructed and asked the Egyptians for articles of silver and gold and for clothing. 36 The Lord had made the Egyptians favorably disposed toward the people, and they gave them what they asked for; so they plundered the Egyptians." The Egyptians gave them their "plunder" willingly, therefore, it is not theft. The farmer didn't didn't stop them from taking the ox for one, I'm also not sure if they returned it or not but I imagine they did. Secondly, the ox, and everything else, rightfully belongs to God therefore he can take it if he needs it. as for the Sabbath. This is merely a dispensational difference between the old and new covenants. Pauls writings in Romans and Galatians outline some of these differences. On the other hand, many practicing Jews do still keep the Sabbath. As for Graven images. The spirit of the Law is not to make graven images for the purpose of worshipping them. A statue or picture is not the same as an idol. A good example of this distinction is in Numbers 21 when God told Moses to make a bronze serpent on a rod (which today is even a medical symbol on the back of ambulances). Jesus alluded to that event when he talked with a Jewish teacher in John 3. The people of Israel were complaining against God so God sent venemous snakes to kill them. But they repented and so God had Moses erect the bronze snake. He promise that whoever had been bitten and looked upon the bronze snake would live. Jesus used that as an allegory for his death on the cross, which would become the object of faith for eternal salvation. But then we read in 2Kings 18:4 that many years later the people of Israel began to worship the bronze snake and so the king appropriately had it destroyed. So also with religious symbols. They should be removed if they become objects of faith. The prohibition against making graven images was distinctly set in the context of worshiping idols. There are, then, several reasons why making the cherubim does not conflict with this command not to bow down to graven images. First, there was no chance that the people of Israel would fall down before the cherubim in the most holy place, since they were forbidden to go in the holy place at any time. Even the high priest went only once a year on the Day of Atonement (Lev. 16). Further, the prohibition is not against making any carved image for decorative purposes, but of those used in religious worship. In other words, they were not to worship any other God or any image of any god. These cherubim were not given to Israel as images of God; they were angels. Nor were they given to be worshiped. Hence, there is no way in which the command to make them violated the commandment in Exodus 20. Finally, the prohibition in Exodus 20 is not against religious art as such, which includes things in heaven (angels) and on earth (humans or animals). Rather, it was against using any image as an idol. That idolatry envisioned is evident from the fact they were instructed not to "bow down to them nor serve them" (Ex. 20:5). The distinction between non-religious use of images and a religious use is important. All of these so called contradictions are born from either ignorance of scripture, or the quotes being willfully removed from context. I repudiate the burden established at the end unless the parameters are narrowed and refined.