Does the Bible Contradict Itself ?

[PruePhillip]

Dealing with 20,000 year old stories in modern terms is very humorous. Like a smart dumb which is a contradiction. View attachment 23446

Probably the biggest 'dumb' is the bible story that the Jews will gather out of all the nations and take back their country "with the sword." A bit like people calling themselves "Babylonian" resurrecting their ancient empire, language and religion - in the teeth of Iraqi military opposition.

 

[PruePhillip]

It is an impossible construction for a sea worthy craft.

It wasn't a sea, it was a flood. The "world" of the Bronze age wasn't the "world" we know today, just as "universe" today isn't what a universe was 20 years ago.

 

[shunyadragon]

It wasn't a sea, it was a flood. The "world" of the Bronze age wasn't the "world" we know today, just as "universe" today isn't what a universe was 20 years ago.

Being sea worthy would be no different than to survive a world or regional flood. The Arc was totally impossible and impractical in every way. It could not even hold together and float alone without the tonnage of animals described and food.

 

[David T]

Probably the biggest 'dumb' is the bible story that the Jews will gather out of all the nations and take back their country "with the sword." A bit like people calling themselves "Babylonian" resurrecting their ancient empire, language and religion - in the teeth of Iraqi military opposition.

Like reading the joseph narrative without realizing they are living it at the same time pretending they understand it!

 

[PruePhillip]

Being sea worthy would be no different than to survive a world or regional flood. The Arc was totally impossible and impractical in every way. It could not even hold together and float alone without the tonnage of animals described and food.

How many animals would you need for a flood?

 

[PruePhillip]

Like reading the joseph narrative without realizing they are living it at the same time pretending they understand it!

You might need to re-word this. Can't make sense of it.

 

[Brickjectivity]

It is impossible for God to lie. (Hebrew 6:18)
So how could his book be filled with glaring inconsistencies and significant discrepancies and still be called the Word of God?

Your insistence?

Thus some scribal variations crept in. But none are of such scope and weight as to cast doubt on the inspiration and authority of the Bible as a whole. By careful examination, seeming contradictions can be shown to have an honest solution.

No, because you have yet to establish the authority of the Bible before you should even attempt to defend it. All writing is inspired of God. Why - because it requires thought to write. Thought comes from God, and great thinkers often think alike but not always. Now establish the authority of the Bible, but you cannot. It is writing, not pure. Useful, not authoritative, unless you put it over you.

At times, Bible writers do not always seem to agree on matters relating to figures, order of events, wording of quotations, and so forth.
But consider: If you were to ask several eyewitnesses of an event to write down what they saw, would all accounts coincide entirely in wording and detail? If they did, would you not be suspicious of collusion among the writers?

Great thinkers often think alike, and the the same devices and narratives often are invented simultaneously and multiple times. Calculus -- Newton invents it first with Liebnitz hot on his heels. Solar panels were invented three times. No, there is no argument that the Bible is one book, except its books have been pasted into a binder.

So, too, Bible writers were allowed by God to retain their own particular style and language, while God saw to it that his ideas and pertinent facts were conveyed accurately.

This is not reasonable and is oppressive thinking. It says "Your thoughts are not as inspired as the Bible writing" yet the Bible records the opposite mulltiple times. Sure Paul says the prophecies aren't merely interpreting the Torah but contain also inspiration. So, how does this make the Bible authoritative for Christians? What do Adam and Eve gain from the fruit? To whom does the LORD say "Come let us reason together?" Why are the elders in Acts recorded to pick and choose what laws gentiles will keep? There are so many flaws in your argument for Biblical authority that it doesn't matter if the Bible has flaws or not.

Genesis 2:2 that records that God rested from all his work.

Correction: it says the LORD rested from his work, but go ahead and use whatever quotes aids you in trying to oppress and bind others into subservience to your vision of the Bible.

 

[Kenny]

Okay!, Okay! My turn to cherry pick the Bible.

Q. Does the Bible Contradict Itself ?
A. It Shore Does.

How old was Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem?

22. 2 Kings 8:26 26 Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother's name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel.
42. 2 Chronicles 22:2 Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri.

​

Who was the father of Shelah/Sala?

Cainan. Luke 3:35-36 . . . which was the son of Sala, 36 Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad,
Arpachshad. Genesis II: 12 When Arpachshad was thirty-five years old, he begot Shelah

​

Jesus came into Jerusalem with how many animals?

One - a colt. Mark 11:7 Luke 19:3 5. And they brought the colt to Jesus and threw their garments on it; and he sat upon it.
Two - a colt and an ***. Matthew 21:7. They brought the *** and the colt and put their garments on them and he sat thereon.​

Who killed Goliath?

David. I Samuel 17: 50 50 So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and smote the Philistine,....
Elhanan. 2 Samuel 21:19 19 . . . There was another battle with the Philistines, in Gob, and Elhanan, son of Jair from Bethlehem, killed Goliath of Gath​

.

Yes, there are copy errors, interpretation error :

1)


The correct age of Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem is 22. 2 Kings 8:17 tells us that Ahaziah's father Joram ben Ahab was thirty-two when he became king and he died eight years later, at the age of forty. Therefore, Ahaziah could not have been forty-two at the time of his father's death at age forty." (Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, page. 206-207.)

The discrepency in ages is due to a copyist error. We can see that the difference in ages is 20 years. The system of number notation used by the Jews at the time of Ezra consisted of horizontal hooks that represented decades.

would equal the number 14 where

would be 24. If one or both of the hooks were smudged or flaked off of a papyri, then the dates would be off by ten years or a factor of ten.

The fact that this is a copyist error does not invalidate the inspiration or authority of Scripture. Remember, God inspired the originals. They were without error. The copies have problems, though very very few. The copies are copies of inspired documents and, unfortunately, some copyist errors did creep into the manuscripts. However, they do not affect any doctrinal areas and are very rare.

2)Will address... going on airplane

3) There is no contradiction. Matthew 21:2-7 tells us that there was both a donkey and a colt. Mark and Luke focus on the colt only and mention that no one had ever sat upon it. Mark and Luke are focusing on this detail while Matthew focuses on the prophetic fulfillment (Matthew 21:4-5). Logically, if there are two animals, then there is also, at least, one animal. To say there was one does not mean there weren't two. This is not a verbal game. It is an issue of logic. Remember, the writers of the gospels wrote for a purpose. It was not to recount a chronologically precise account in minute details. It was to convey the validity of Christ. The fact that Mark and Luke mention one colt does not mean there is a contradiction anymore than saying that Frank and Joe came to my house last night but today I tell a friend about what Joe said last night and don't mention Frank.

4)
The answer lies in two areas. 1 Chronicles 20:5 says, "And there was war with the Philistines again, and Elhanan the son of Jair killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam." This is the correct answer; namely, that Elhanan killed Goliath's brother.

Second, it appears there was a copyist error in 2 Samuel 21:19. According to Gleason Archer's Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties on page 179, it says,

1. The sign of the direct object, which in Chronicles comes just before "Lahmi," was '-t; the copyist mistook it for b-t or b-y-t ("Beth") and thus got Bet hal-Lahmi ("the Bethlehemite") out of it.
2. He misread the word for "brother" ('-h) as the sign of the direct object ('-t) right before g-l-y-t ("Goliath"). Thus he made "Goliath" the object of "killed" (wayyak), instead of the "brother" of Goliath (as the Chronicles passage does).
3. The copyist misplaced the word for "weavers" ('-r-g-ym) so as to put it right after "Elhanan" as his patronymic (ben Y-'-r-y'-r--g-ym, or ben ya 'arey 'ore -gim -- "the son of the forests of weavers" -- a most unlikely name for anyone's father!). In Chronicles the 'ore grim ("weavers") comes right after menor ("a beam of ") -- thus making perfectly good sense.

Therefore, we see that 2 Samuel 21:19 had a copyist error and 1 Chronicles 20:5 is the correct information.

Carm.org / Gohn Gill / common sense.

 

[BilliardsBall]

It is impossible for God to lie. (Hebrew 6:18)
So how could his book be filled with glaring inconsistencies and significant discrepancies and still be called the Word of God?

Is consideration of how we got the Bible today the answer ?
These writings were "transmitted" or "entrusted" to scribes, sopherims and Masoretes, who made copies repeatedly for over a thousand year, until the Middle Ages.

Then they were translated from Hebrew to Greek and then to latin, from these thousands of manuscript Master copies were made. From these came the English translations.

Copied Manusscripts and Translations are not inspired !

Thus some scribal variations crept in. But none are of such scope and weight as to cast doubt on the inspiration and authority of the Bible as a whole. By careful examination, seeming contradictions can be shown to have an honest solution.

At times, Bible writers do not always seem to agree on matters relating to figures, order of events, wording of quotations, and so forth.
But consider: If you were to ask several eyewitnesses of an event to write down what they saw, would all accounts coincide entirely in wording and detail? If they did, would you not be suspicious of collusion among the writers?
So, too, Bible writers were allowed by God to retain their own particular style and language, while God saw to it that his ideas and pertinent facts were conveyed accurately.

But are there not texts in the Bible that say just the opposite of other texts?
Let us consider just one as an example:

Genesis 2:2 that records that God rested from all his work. Contrasting with this is Jesus comment at John 5:17 where he says that God has kept working until now. But as the context shows, the record in Genesis is speaking specifically of Gods works of material creation, while Jesus was referring to Gods works concerning his divine guidance and care for mankind.

Most people fail to put forth necessary effort, finding it so much easier just to go along with the critics.
Perhaps God is giving them exactly what they want:
2 Thess 3:11. "...That is why God lets an operation of error go to them...."

Could we not, instead imitate the example of the apostles who when perplexed by what they called a hard saying, silenced every objection with this: Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life....(John 6:60) ?

Hmm...

"So how could his book be filled with glaring inconsistencies and significant discrepancies and still be called the Word of God?"

Answer: It couldn't. So either the Bible has issues and isn't holy, or you are misunderstanding some things in the Bible.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Copied Manusscripts and Translations are not inspired !... Bible writers were allowed by God to retain their own particular style and language, while God saw to it that his ideas and pertinent facts were conveyed accurately.

Pretending that there are no contradictions in the text (let's just say that we accept that at face value), do you feel that holding the first-born sons of the Egyptians (from babies and infants to adult sons) accountable for their parents' decisions to continue to disobey God, and then going about the business of killing them all for their parents' transgressions accurately represents the disposition and moral authority of God? Because that's what the story of The Passover conveys even in the original texts. It is the story of God using Moses as a tool to execute His terror tactics.

And if that is the case, then I truly feel that there can be no sufficient reason given to follow God given the atrocities against mankind that He has committed. And this renders any contradictions to be found in The Bible an entirely moot point.

 

[shunyadragon]

How many animals would you need for a flood?

You have not addressed the problems with the arc.The arc is an impossible construction.
More animals and food than would fit in an arc.

 

[shunyadragon]

Hmm...

"So how could his book be filled with glaring inconsistencies and significant discrepancies and still be called the Word of God?"

Answer: It couldn't. So either the Bible has issues and isn't holy, or you are misunderstanding some things in the Bible.

Well . . . ah misunderstanding is a possibility, but that would discount the basis for your belief system.

The facts remain for the many contradictions such as the bizzaro Noah's Arc and the world flood, and the evidence that most of it is an edited compilation over time with no known authors and poor provenance.

 

[Segev Moran]

The short answer is no.
I used to think like you, that there are many inconsistencies, but so far, i haven't encountered a real inconsistency.
( i can only speak of the Hebrew bible written in the Hebrew language as this is the only one i read )

But are there not texts in the Bible that say just the opposite of other texts?

Nope.
It might at times seem like it, but when reading the entire context of the verses, you come to realize it was probably you not understanding the actual text. (that's how it was for me at least )

Genesis 2:2 that records that God rested from all his work.

Already, this is wrong.
The word Work is not the actual word.

וישבות ביום השביעי, מכל-מלאכתו אשר עשה

The word is מלאכתו.
In hebrew you have the words:

עבודה -> Work
עשיה -> the closest thing i cant think if is the word "Do", as I am Doing something.
מלאכה -> generate a new thing out of existing materials. Like a carpenter generates a chair out of wood.

(I really hope i managed to explain this, i fear i lack the English vocabulary to clearly explain what I've meant)

Can you give more examples of contradictions you encountered?

 

[shunyadragon]

The short answer is no.
I used to think like you, that there are many inconsistencies, but so far, i haven't encountered a real inconsistency.
( i can only speak of the Hebrew bible written in the Hebrew language as this is the only one i read )

How do you explain Noah's Arc and the world flood. It is a huge inconsistency with reality.

 

[Segev Moran]

How do you explain Noah's Arc and the world flood. It is a huge inconsistency with reality.

The OP was:
Does the Bible Contradict Itself ?

Putting that aside...

The biggest inconsistency we currently have is the size of the flood.

I don't have enough scientific knowledge to tell you if it is possible there was a global scale flood or not. as far as i know, it seems geologists suggest there is no evidence to such event.
But the more time passes, some claims made by many geologists came to be false.
I guess in time we will find out eventually if there was or wasn't such flood (there was a flood, the question is about the size of it).

Some interesting points to take into consideration:

Many religions across the globe speak of a giant flood that covered huge parts of the globe.
The bible claims that the water from the deep earth came to the surface along side with massive rains. it also speaks that when the flood was over, the water were pulled back into the land.
Recent discoveries suggest a massive amount of water is found at a depth of 630 Miles under the earth. more than that, the amount suggested to be the same as the ENTIRE amount of water of all the oceans.
regardless of the fact how they are there, i find it interesting the fact that the writer of the bible knew about their existence
it is also explained in books dated 800 and more years ago that the land was divided to 7 lands due to the events of the flood. only in recent years (70 or so) we discovered that indeed the land was once whole and split into seven (it was not long ago we discovered 7 and not 5 or 3 lands).
Another interesting explanation is the source of the flood rain that came from water from outer space. only recent discoveries revealed an enormous amounts of water in space.

There are many more clues that suggest that the story of the flood is not as far fetched as believed.

So before claiming it is false, i guess we need to be patient and see what more science discovers

 

[shunyadragon]

The OP was:
Does the Bible Contradict Itself ?

Putting that aside...

The biggest inconsistency we currently have is the size of the flood.

The Noah's Arc is also a severe problem.

I don't have enough scientific knowledge to tell you if it is possible there was a global scale flood or not. as far as i know, it seems geologists suggest there is no evidence to such event.
But the more time passes, some claims made by many geologists came to be false.
I guess in time we will find out eventually if there was or wasn't such flood (there was a flood, the question is about the size of it).

I am geologist with 50 years+ in the field, and there will be no new evidence to confirm even the possibility of a global nor regional flood in the proportions described in the Bible. Some have proposed the Black Sea flooding as a possibility, but recent geologic evidence says no.

{quote[
Some interesting points to take into consideration: [/quote]

i have dealt with these before an no chance.

[/quote]
Many religions across the globe speak of a giant flood that covered huge parts of the globe. [/quote]

Actually this is not the case. A few do, but they are mostly Mesopotamian accounts that are the source of the Biblical accounts. The Chinese accounts are accurately described and dated in Chinese records to a catastrophic river flood, and geologic evidence confirms the date recorded by the Chinese. The Japanese accounts and those of the Native Americans in the North West have been accurately describe in their traditions and writings as catastrophic tidal wave accounts, and confirmed by geologic evidence. Not all ancient cultures describe a catastrophic flood in their past.

The bible claims that the water from the deep earth came to the surface along side with massive rains. it also speaks that when the flood was over, the water were pulled back into the land.

A virtual geologic impossibility violating the laws of physics, and the known geology of the earth.

Recent discoveries suggest a massive amount of water is found at a depth of 630 Miles under the earth. more than that, the amount suggested to be the same as the ENTIRE amount of water of all the oceans.

This is NOT free water, but water naturally tied up in geologic formations natural to the history of the earth.

regardless of the fact how they are there, i find it interesting the fact that the writer of the bible knew about their existence

The writers of the Bible did not know about the geologic water tied up in the rock deep inside the earth. There is no 'free water' below a few kilometers of the surface of the earth. Their conclusions were based on artesian and spring waters found all over the world.

it is also explained in books dated 800 and more years ago that the land was divided to 7 lands due to the events of the flood. only in recent years (70 or so) we discovered that indeed the land was once whole and split into seven (it was not long ago we discovered 7 and not 5 or 3 lands).

Not really related to whether there was a flood or not.

Another interesting explanation is the source of the flood rain that came from water from outer space. only recent discoveries revealed an enormous amounts of water in space.

Ahhh . . . No. Woof! Unbelievable phony science. Maybe if you consider the other planets and our universe, but nothing that would be remotely related to the earth.

There are many more clues that suggest that the story of the flood is not as far fetched as believed.

What was provided so far is far fetched and bizarre as mythology. I seriously doubt you could present anything else that was reasonable.

 

[Segev Moran]

The Noah's Arc is also a severe problem.

Haven't learned much about that yet

I am geologist with 50 years+ in the field

Awesome.
Is it okey if i nag you with a question here and there? (Not religious related )

and there will be no new evidence to confirm even the possibility of a global nor regional flood in the proportions described in the Bible.

I have no other choice than trust your word as you claim it with certainty.
Although "Never" and Science is never a great statement

Some have proposed the Black Sea flooding as a possibility, but recent geologic evidence says no.

I will appreciate some reference

Not all ancient cultures describe a catastrophic flood in their past.

Agreed. that's not what i wrote

A virtual geologic impossibility violating the laws of physics, and the known geology of the earth.

Good to know
How about An earth quake? Can one cause a sort of a Geyser or something? (Just curious )

This is NOT free water, but water naturally tied up in geologic formations natural to the history of the earth.

It clearly states that there is a probability that there are unbound water inside earth in a depth of hundreds of kilometer below.

"Steven Shirey, a geochemist at the Carnegie Institution for Science in Washington, D.C., who was not involved in the study. One of the biggest surprises, he suggests, is evidence for the presence of unbound water at depths below 600 kilometers"

I guess it tells you much more than it tells me.

The writers of the Bible did not know about the geologic water tied up in the rock deep inside the earth. There is no 'free water' below a few kilometers of the surface of the earth. Their conclusions were based on artesian and spring waters found all over the world.

See above

Not really related to whether there was a flood or not.

True

Ahhh . . . No. Woof! Unbelievable phony science. Maybe if you consider the other planets and our universe, but nothing that would be remotely related to the earth.

What do you mean?
Hugh enormous amounts of water found all over space. As our earth came from the same space, how can you claim its got nothing to do with it??

https://www.fastcompany.com/1769468/scientists-discover-oldest-largest-body-water-existence-space

Just as an example...
This is one of many articles i encountered talking about massive amounts of water including one that suggests that water wwere possibly created in the early stages of our universe...

What was provided so far is far fetched and bizarre as mythology.

Same was said when one suggested time had a starting point

I seriously doubt you could present anything else that was reasonable.

As i wrote before, i guess time will tell

 

[dianaiad]

It is impossible for God to lie. (Hebrew 6:18)
So how could his book be filled with glaring inconsistencies and significant discrepancies and still be called the Word of God?

.......because God didn't write the bible?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Haven't learned much about that yet

Awesome.
Is it okey if i nag you with a question here and there? (Not religious related )

I have no other choice than trust your word as you claim it with certainty.
Although "Never" and Science is never a great statement

I will appreciate some reference

Agreed. that's not what i wrote

Good to know
How about An earth quake? Can one cause a sort of a Geyser or something? (Just curious )

It clearly states that there is a probability that there are unbound water inside earth in a depth of hundreds of kilometer below.

"Steven Shirey, a geochemist at the Carnegie Institution for Science in Washington, D.C., who was not involved in the study. One of the biggest surprises, he suggests, is evidence for the presence of unbound water at depths below 600 kilometers"

I guess it tells you much more than it tells me.


See above

True

What do you mean?
Hugh enormous amounts of water found all over space. As our earth came from the same space, how can you claim its got nothing to do with it??

https://www.fastcompany.com/1769468/scientists-discover-oldest-largest-body-water-existence-space

Just as an example...
This is one of many articles i encountered talking about massive amounts of water including one that suggests that water wwere possibly created in the early stages of our universe...


Same was said when one suggested time had a starting point

As i wrote before, i guess time will tell

Let's try this without a Gish Gallop. It appears that you are trying to misunderstand the science behind this topic on purpose when you do so. If you have questions or wish to make a point it is best to do so one at a time. Otherwise finding one error refutes the whole post when this technique is used. Or you could try to find out why this picture alone refutes a worldwide flood:

 

[Skwim]

This is taken out of context. I said if there were 'no discrepancy' then the cynic would challenge the accounts because you can't get four 'historians' writing the same thing.

No you did not. You said:

"Of course the bible "contradicts" itself - and it probably does so to put off the all-wise, all-knowing, know-it-all cynics."

Discrepancies on minor points shows the Gospels were not redacted or contrived at a later stage.

And I'm calling call:

And on that note - discrepancies between the hand written documents, going back to the First Century, are few and minor.

And again I'm calling

​

Obviously you should have phrased your

"We study them and FIND NO DISCREPANCIES."​

as

"We study them and find no discrepancies."

​

Although it wouldn't make it any less false.

.