Biblical Inconsistencies

[ΩRôghênΩ]

how do those show inconsistencies?

 

[Tiberius]

we look for conflicting information.

We can find instances where information in one part of the Bible contradicts another part of the Bible.

We can also look for instances where information in the Bible contradicts information we have learnt through scientific techniques.

 

[JesusIsTheWay]

Very well, please tell me what the source of light was before God created the sun and stars. And if light does not need a source, why bother with making the source?

God created light itself. The source of light could be anything, including God Himself as in New Jerusalem (Revelation 21:23-25 | 23The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. 24The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it. 25On no day will its gates ever be shut, for there will be no night there.) Why did God decide to do things this way? I can't honestly tell you. God decided to use the sun to project the light He created. Maybe He made it simply to give us warmth, or some other reason.
The oil to make gas was created before the car, airplane, or any product the consumes oil. Is that illogical that the light the sun projects would be created before the sun itself?

But it does specifically say that there were no plants or trees before man. "...and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprung up," according to gen 2:5, which is before man is created.

And it does say that plants were created before man in Chapter 1.

Verse 11 says, "Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds."

Later on, AFTER the vegetation has been made, verse 26 says...

"Then God said, "Let us make man in our image."

A clear case of plants being made, and then man being made AFTER plants.

I was saying that plants were made before man was. I was agruing against the claim that the Bible was inconsistant with itself in the creation account. I am sorry if I wasn't clear and I'll try to make myself clear next time.

Note the word THEN in Gen 1:26. God makes the animals and birds THEN makes man. This clearly states that man came after animals and birds. Then there is the word NOW in gen 2:19. God makes man and only NOW makes the animals and birds. Clearly staing that man appeared before the animals and birds. Again a contradiction.

Not necessarily. Look at the verse carefully: "Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name." It is simply a restate that God had created the animals and birds. This is not saying God created them after man. The Bible is stating what God had done. He "formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air." After man was created, "He brought them to the man to see what he would name them."

In Chapter 1, God says that all the plants are available to be eaten after he has created people (Gen 1:29), yet in Gen 2:16 God tells Adam that he can eat all the plants and only then goes on to create Eve.

So if Eve was created AFTER God's menu suggestions in Chapter 2, why is it that in Chapter 1 both Adam and Eve were created BEFORE? Even if you argue that when the Bible says "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them" as in gen 1:27 is saying that God created adam, then after a bit created Eve (instead of creating both at the same time), it is still in contradiction, because something that occured before the creation of Eve in Chapter 2 occurs AFTER the creation of Eve in Chapter 1!

Genesis 1:1-2:3 is the account of creation, it doesn't get into the specifics of the creation of man, it simply states that God created man (male and female) in His image, man is ruler over the earth, God wants mankind to multiply, and He gives them the okay to eat any plant. It does not say God created male and female at the same time. No, it states, "God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." Genesis 2 is a more detailed acocount of what happened. Genesis 2 is a little more detailed in telling the creation of man. Regardless, both male and female were created the same day.

-David Lynn-

 

[JesusIsTheWay]

Inconsistency #6
God encourages reproduction.
God requires purification rites following childbirth which, in effect, makes childbirth a sin. (Note: The period for purification following the birth of a daughter is twice that for a son.)

Genesis 1:28
28 God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."

Leviticus 12:1-8
1 The LORD said to Moses, 2 "Say to the Israelites: 'A woman who becomes pregnant and gives birth to a son will be ceremonially unclean for seven days, just as she is unclean during her monthly period. 3 On the eighth day the boy is to be circumcised. 4 Then the woman must wait thirty-three days to be purified from her bleeding. She must not touch anything sacred or go to the sanctuary until the days of her purification are over. 5 If she gives birth to a daughter, for two weeks the woman will be unclean, as during her period. Then she must wait sixty-six days to be purified from her bleeding. 6 " 'When the days of her purification for a son or daughter are over, she is to bring to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting a year-old lamb for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or a dove for a sin offering. 7 He shall offer them before the LORD to make atonement for her, and then she will be ceremonially clean from her flow of blood.
" 'These are the regulations for the woman who gives birth to a boy or a girl. 8 If she cannot afford a lamb, she is to bring two doves or two young pigeons, one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for her, and she will be clean.' "

This "inconsistancy" is absurd. Because God commanded women to purify themselves after child birth does not make it a "sin" to have children. The purfication was commanded because of the bleeding (vv. 4-5,7). I'm not sure why God commanded 40 days of purification for a baby boy and 80 days for a baby girl.

Inconsistency #7
God was pleased with his creation.
God was not pleased with his creation.
(Note: That God should be displeased is inconsistent with the concept of omniscience.)

Genesis 1:31
31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

Genesis 6:5-6
5 The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time. 6 The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain.

I don't see how this is an inconsistancy. Your children may obey you when you ask them to take out the trash, but if you ask them to clean their room several times and they don't listen, you'll be upset and mad at thier disobedience. God was hurt that His creation was rebelling against Him. He was grieved that they had given themselves over to evil. They had forsaken His original plan. How is this inconsistant? Its God getting upset at mans wickedness.

Inconsistency #8
God was already known as "the Lord" (Jahveh or Jehovah) much earlier than the time of Moses.
God was first known as "the Lord" (Jahveh or Jehovah) at the time of the Egyptian Bondage, during the life of Moses.

Genesis 2:4, 4:26, 12:8, 22:14-16, 26:25
4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created.
When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens-

26 Seth also had a son, and he named him Enosh.
At that time men began to call on the name of the LORD

8 From there he went on toward the hills east of Bethel and pitched his tent, with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east. There he built an altar to the LORD and called on the name of the LORD.

14 So Abraham called that place The LORD Will Provide. And to this day it is said, "On the mountain of the LORD it will be provided."15 The angel of the LORD called to Abraham from heaven a second time 16 and said, "I swear by myself, declares the LORD, that because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son.
​

25 Isaac built an altar there and called on the name of the LORD. There he pitched his tent, and there his servants dug a well.

Exodus 6:2-3
2 God also said to Moses, "I am the LORD. 3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob as God Almighty, but by my name the LORD I did not make myself known to them.

"This does not necessarily mean that the patriarchs were totally ignorant of the name Yahweh ('The LORD'), but it indicates that they did not understand its fully implications as the name of the One who would redeem His people. That fact could be comprehended only by the Israelites who were to experience the exodus, and by their descendants." (Taken From NIV Study Bible).

Inconsistency #9
Adam was to die the very day that he ate the forbidden fruit.
Adam lived 930 years.

Genesis 2:17
7 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

Genesis 5:5
5 Altogether, Adam lived 930 years, and then he died.

God does not say, "you will immediately die." Rather, He says that man will eventually experience death. Man lost access to the "tree of life" (Genesis 2:9; 3:22). "Adam and Eve possessed both life and mortal discernment as they came from the hand of God. Their access to the fruit of the tree of life showed that God's will and intention for them was life. Ancient pagans believed that the gods intended for human beings always to be mortal. In eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve sought a creaturely source of discernment in order to be morally independent of God." (The NIV Study Bible)

Inconsistency #10
It is wrong to want to be able to tell good from evil.
It is immature to be unable to tell good from evil.

Genesis 2:15-17, 3:4-6
15 The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the LORD God commanded the man, "You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die."

4 "You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. 5 "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." 6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.

Hebrews 5:13-14
13 Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the teaching about righteousness. 14 But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to distinguish good from evil.

Adam and Eve only knew good. They knew God. God didn't want them to disobey and become like we are today. Sadly, they ate the fruit and in doing so, disobyed God. Since that has happened, we must be able to distinguish what good is, and what evil is, so that we may avoid evil. Its not inconsistancy.

Thats all for now,
-David Lynn-

 

[Tiberius]

God created light itself. The source of light could be anything, including God Himself as in New Jerusalem (Revelation 21:23-25 | 23The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. 24The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it. 25On no day will its gates ever be shut, for there will be no night there.) Why did God decide to do things this way? I can't honestly tell you. God decided to use the sun to project the light He created. Maybe He made it simply to give us warmth, or some other reason.

If God creates the light, why not just leave it that way? Your response seems to be the old "I can't explain it, so I'll just say that no one can understand the mind of God." That really isn't any answer at all.

The oil to make gas was created before the car, airplane, or any product the consumes oil. Is that illogical that the light the sun projects would be created before the sun itself?

Okay, this is a ridiculous statement. Cars do not create gasoline. The sun does create light. The argument makes no sense at all.

I was saying that plants were made before man was. I was agruing against the claim that the Bible was inconsistant with itself in the creation account. I am sorry if I wasn't clear and I'll try to make myself clear next time.

Genesis 2:5 says there were no plants because there had been no rain, and there weren't any people to till the ground.

Genesis 2:7 says God makes Adam.

Genesis 2:8 says God makes the garden.

And then, 2:9 says, "And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree..."

Plants are not mentioned until AFTER man was created. And it says very clearly that God makes the trees grow AFTER he made man! Chapter 2 is very clear that plants are made AFTER Man! Or is Chapter 2 wrong?

Not necessarily. Look at the verse carefully: "Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name." It is simply a restate that God had created the animals and birds. This is not saying God created them after man. The Bible is stating what God had done. He "formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air." After man was created, "He brought them to the man to see what he would name them."

In Chapter 1, God makes animals on the fifth day. God then makes Man on the sixth day. Thus I think it's safe to say that God made the animals first, then made Man.

In Chapter 2....

God makes man in 2:7. 2:8 and 2:9 talk about God making the garden. 2;10 to 2:14 talk about some rivers. 2:15 to 2:17 talk about God's instructions to Adam. 2:18 says how God figured it just wasn't right for Adam to be alone. 2:19 says that to ease Adam's loneliness, God makes the animals. Behold:

And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

See that part I emphasised? it tells us that the creation of the animals and the birds was part of God's efforts to keep Adam from being lonely.

Genesis 1:1-2:3 is the account of creation, it doesn't get into the specifics of the creation of man, it simply states that God created man (male and female) in His image, man is ruler over the earth, God wants mankind to multiply, and He gives them the okay to eat any plant. It does not say God created male and female at the same time. No, it states, "God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them." Genesis 2 is a more detailed acocount of what happened. Genesis 2 is a little more detailed in telling the creation of man. Regardless, both male and female were created the same day.

Okay, let's go through it one by one. A list of things as they happened in Chapter 1's version of creation, and the same list as chapter 2. I'll even include the verse numbers in case you want to look things up.

The Creation account in Genesis Chapter 1.

DAY ONE
1. God creates Heaven and Earth (1:1)
2. God creates light and names day and night. (1:3 - 1:5)

DAY TWO
3 .God makes the firmament to divide the waters and calls it "Heaven". (1:6)

DAY THREE
4. God gathers the water to make dry land and calls the land "Earth" and the waters "Sea". (1:9 - 1:10)
5. God creates plants on the land (1:11 - 1:12)

DAY FOUR
6. God creates the stars, then the Sun and Moon and puts them in the firmament of heaven. (1:14 - 1:17)
7. God divides the day from the night. (1:18)

DAY FIVE
8. God creates the animals from the water (1:20 - 1:22)

DAY SIX
9. God creates the animals from the land (1:24 - 1:25)
10. God creates man and woman (1:26 - 1:27)

DAY SEVEN
11. God rests. (2:2 - 2:3)

Now, let's have a look at how things go in Chapter 2. The numbers at the beginning of each point is the position it held in the Chapter 1 account. Alas that there are no days, and the Chapter 2 account is only a partial account.

10. God makes man (2:7)
5. God creates the garden in Eden and makes all the trees out of the ground (2:8 - 2:9)
8 & 9. God makes the animals (all of them out of the ground this time and none oput of the water) to keep Adam company. (2:18 - 2:20)
10. God creates woman (2:21 - 2:23)

You can see here that we need to shuffle things around a bit when we look at the Chapter 2 account.

Now, I've numbered each point in order for the Chapter 1 account, and then used each point's number in the Chapter 2 account. The order is clearly changed.

I don't see how this is an inconsistancy. Your children may obey you when you ask them to take out the trash, but if you ask them to clean their room several times and they don't listen, you'll be upset and mad at thier disobedience. God was hurt that His creation was rebelling against Him. He was grieved that they had given themselves over to evil. They had forsaken His original plan. How is this inconsistant? Its God getting upset at mans wickedness.

This is a stretch to me, but even if you are right, God, being all-knowing, surely wouldn't have been surprised that his creation would turn out so bad that he'd choose to wipe it out and pretty much start again. He knew it would happen right from the start.

This "inconsistancy" is absurd. Because God commanded women to purify themselves after child birth does not make it a "sin" to have children. The purfication was commanded because of the bleeding (vv. 4-5,7). I'm not sure why God commanded 40 days of purification for a baby boy and 80 days for a baby girl.

God designed it this way, remember? If the bleeding was so bad that it requireover a month of purification for a boy and almost 3 months for a girl, then he simply should have designed an alternative method that didn't require bleeding at all. He can do ANYTHING, remember?

"This does not necessarily mean that the patriarchs were totally ignorant of the name Yahweh ('The LORD'), but it indicates that they did not understand its fully implications as the name of the One who would redeem His people. That fact could be comprehended only by the Israelites who were to experience the exodus, and by their descendants." (Taken From NIV Study Bible).

I have absolutely no idea how you interpret the words "I did not make myself known to them" to mean "I did make myself known to them, but they just didn't get it." Truly, your logic is astounding.

God does not say, "you will immediately die." Rather, He says that man will eventually experience death. Man lost access to the "tree of life" (Genesis 2:9; 3:22). "Adam and Eve possessed both life and mortal discernment as they came from the hand of God. Their access to the fruit of the tree of life showed that God's will and intention for them was life. Ancient pagans believed that the gods intended for human beings always to be mortal. In eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Adam and Eve sought a creaturely source of discernment in order to be morally independent of God." (The NIV Study Bible)

Let's have a look at Genesis 2:17:

But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

See the emphasised part? ON THE DAY YOU EAT IT YOU WILL DIE. Not 930 years later, but that same exact day!

Adam and Eve only knew good. They knew God. God didn't want them to disobey and become like we are today. Sadly, they ate the fruit and in doing so, disobyed God. Since that has happened, we must be able to distinguish what good is, and what evil is, so that we may avoid evil. Its not inconsistancy.

So if you don't want someone to touch something, you put it in the middle of their living room and draw attention to it? Sounds like God was tempting Adam and Eve. of course, he needed to do that, because if he didn't, there wouldn't have been any reason to kick us out of the perfect life and the Xians of the world wouldn't be able to explain why bad things happen to nice people.

And I gotta ask - Why didn't God want Adam and Eve to be able to tell what was evil? I mean, you gotta admit that if they DID know, they wouldn't have eaten from the tree! And then none of that unpleasant stuff would have happened!

 

[joeboonda]

There are grand books written that help us understand any seeming inconsistencies in the Bible. If a person has an open mind and is willing to study, they will find the truth if they search for it honestly with all their heart. If not, they can keep throwing up barriers to accepting the Bible all their life, it is an individual choice. God loves us and chose to reveal Himself and His plan for our salvation in the pages of this book, we can come up with all sorts of excuses and 'arguements', or we can study and see the truth of how it all fits together quite wonderfully, and get on our knees and thank God for His free gift of salvation, for this amazing love He has for us.

 

[Tiberius]

So kind of God to give us a book (which we must pay for), but leave so much confusion that we need to buy extra books to understand it. Oh, but even then, the books to explain the Bible and the conflicting parts often contradict themselves! One book says the Bible passage means this, another book says the bible passage means that! Which are we to believe?

Anyway, let's just be grateful that we have access to bookshops. How many people have been sent to hell because they read the bible, didn't believe it because of the contradictions and been damed because they didn't have access to the books of explanation?

Those "explanations" are often stretched, relying on misinterpreted facts or bad science, and I've even seen them try to change the meanings of words to show they are correct.

 

[Adstar]

It is the Holy Spirit that gives us understanding of scripture. And i have never boughts a bible in my life. There are organisations that will give it free. and it is avaliable on the internet for free also.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[Tiberius]

It is the Holy Spirit that gives us understanding of scripture.

Why so many differing opinions then?

 

[dawny0826]

Why so many differing opinions then?

Because people are flawed.

 

[Tiberius]

Wasn't God clear enough then?

 

[sparkyluv]

Whilst discussing the bible with a Christian friend, we bumped into this little web-page:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html

I checked over the references, and the ones that I did bother to view are actually there.

This rather large list of inconsistencies makes me wonder just how intelligent the people writing the Bible actually were...

Does anyone have any thoughts on this? People questioning their faith maybe... :jiggy:

I love lists like these because it shows you how gullible people really are. People read these things and BELIEVE them. The Bible illiterate teaching the Bible illiterate the bible (the blind leading the blind), that's all it is. I found a very similar list on the net about NT inconsistencies and I went through them and whoever wrote that list either (1) can't read, (2) has no biblical knowledge at all, or (3) felt like lying to prove his point. The text was taken completely out of context, just like this list.

This doesn't prove there are inconsistencies in the bible. If it proves anything, it proves that 1 Cor 1:18 is true. The text has been taken out of context, that's all.

 

[Halcyon]

The text was taken completely out of context, just like this list.

This doesn't prove there are inconsistencies in the bible. If it proves anything, it proves that 1 Cor 1:18 is true. The text has been taken out of context, that's all.

Lol, because Christians never take anything in the bible out of context.

 

[sparkyluv]

Lol, because Christians never take anything in the bible out of context.

If they're bible illiterate, then they're bible illiterate. There are a lot of Christians out there who have no clue what they're talking about. But no Christian wrote that list, obviously.

 

[Inky]

I'm very Bible literate, and there certainly are inconsistencies. However, it doesn't mean the Bible is any less valuable because it's not perfect--the point of the book's existence was never to be a perfect text, but to be a guide. The inconsistencies are no issue if you read many of the stories symbolically and account for translation errors, which mainstream Christians have no problem doing. A couple from that page which are only "inconsistent" if you read the Bible completely literally:

Genesis 2:17, where Adam was to die the day he ate the forbidden fruit, and the rest of the story which recounts his life after Eden. Most churches teach that it's the word "die" here which is non-literal.

Genesis 10:5, 20, and 31, which state the existence of multiple languages before the tower of Babel. If the point of the Babel story is its lesson, not its historical accuracy, again we have no problem.

 

[Tiberius]

If they're bible illiterate, then they're bible illiterate. There are a lot of Christians out there who have no clue what they're talking about. But no Christian wrote that list, obviously.

A nice way of solving the problem. Whenever anyone challenges your position, you merely claim that they don't have any idea what they are talking about.

Your argument is, "Anyone who's actually read and understood the Bible wouldn't find a problem with it."

Sounds like, "No true Sctosman..." as far as I'm concerned.