The Bible Contradicts Itself

The Bible is full of contradictions and inaccuracies and therefore cannot be the word of God.

I have seen and read that statement over and over.
I agree with the conclusion but I do not agree with the statement.
I have never found or been shown a contradiction or innacuracy that could withstand closer scrutiny.

Therefore, I challenge readers who maintain that statement to show me something that is a "REAL" inaccuracy or contradiction and not somebodies flawed intepretation, that exists in the text and meaning of the bible.
I mean in the text and meaning of the bible and not someones interpretation.

In other words, don't try and tell me that the bible teaches that the earth is flat because It does not.
Sure, it speaks of the four corners of the earth, but it also speaks of the orb or sphere of the earth. Does that mean the bible is inconsistent and confused?

You may interpret that "the four corners of the earth" means that the bible is teaching a flat earth and therefore inaccurate.
Someone else may interpret "the orb or sphere of the earth" as meaning the bible is teaching a round earth

I maintain that both must be true.
Therefor I interpret that neither statement is meant to describe how the earth looks from a scientific standpoint. Instead, they are actually figurative terms meant to teach spiritual principles or spiritual truths.

Neither of those statements show that the bible is confused and inaccurate. What is confused and inaccurate? It is the interpretations! not the bible.

Also, don't try bringing up the miracles. You may not believe them but your disbelief does not prove they are impossible and never happened and my belief does not proove them possible or real. That is a pointless discussion that neither side can win.

So, show me a "REAL" one, one that does not rely totally on interpretation or disbelief or putting human limitations on God.

And we talk about which bible that is the only true and consistent one?

To quote Fastlane 69



The BibleS contradicts themselves

Use anyone of them that is a litteral translation.


It's easy to make statements when you don't back it up with examples.
I have read a few of those and not found any contradiction
So back to my question, where ???

The only contradictions are in the interpretation.
So the question really should be, which is the one true interpretation?
The answer is the one where you allow the bible to interpret itself!
and it shouldn't matter which translation you use.
In my experience, you can use any or all of them.
That aside, lets not get into interprertation differences, thats not what I am asking.

I am asking, where is the bible inacurate?
Where does the bible contradict itself?
In a way that dosn't rely on interpretation, diselief or putting human limitations on God.
I don't care which bible you use, just use any litteral translation!
They all say essentially the same thing.
I have read and compared enough different versions to feel confident in saying
"The truth is obvious in any and all of them"

In fact I will start one off

The age old "Where did cain get his wife from"
This question comes from the mistaken belief that the bible says
that Adam and Eve only had 2 children, Cain and Able.
It has been used by many teenagers in scripture at highschool in an attempt to discredit
the bible by highlighting its inaccurate and contradictory nature.

when in fact

they had sons AND daugters and the exact number is not mentioned.
This excerpt is from the King James Version (for those who insist that it is the one true version).
That version is fine if you don't mind reading a dead language. I much prefer to read it in modern english myself.

Anyway, there is no "REAL" mystery as to where this woman came from.
The bible itself tells us, in any litteral translation you care to read.

Let's start with a fairly simple one. Please consider the following two passages from the Bible:





In both passages we find a list of "birds." Included in the list of birds is a bird call a bat. Since when is a bat a bird?

Now, in the first passage the word fowl is used and this is because of the Hebrew word used which is different than the Hebrew word behind the word bird in the Deuteronomy passage. The word translated as "fowl" is for a winged creature and, yes, a bat is a winged creature. However, the list consists only of what we call "birds" with the one exception of the bat. The passage in Deuteronomy is a parallel. It also lists birds and incorporates the bat in with this list. However, it begins by saying that all the clean birds you can eat and then lists those which cannot be eaten because they are not clean. The Hebrew word translated "birds" is the word tziporim which literally means birds. The list that follows makes it obvious that the writer intends birds and that he includes the bat as a bird. Being parallel passages it is obvious that the writer of both passages includes the bat as a bird.

Bats aren't birds.

But let's look a little beyond this one passage. Let's go back to Leviticus for a moment and look at the following verse (which follows the other Leviticus passage I quoted above):



The Israelites are here commanded to not eat any fowls (winged creatures, according to the Hebrew word used) that creep, going up all four. Please name for me the winged creature that has four legs or four feet?

Before you do, the Bible gives you some examples of the four footed flying creatures in its list of the clean ones that can be eaten. Here is the passage:



Here the writer lists a few "four footed" creatures that fly: the locust, the beetle and the grasshopper. However, the last time I checked, all of these creatures had more than four feet!

But they are different, else there wouldn't be this many different versions. Means they contradict themselves. No matter how hard you try to ignore that. Else there would be just ONE version

To repeat my question which is essential before you can go on, WHICH ONE? WHICH IS THE ONLY TRUE AND CONSISTENT?

Give me a name

I think the problem is indeed the interpretation. For this reason, there will never be an agreement between believers and skeptics about how many contradictions the bible contains.

The bible was written by people of different knowledge and education. Which makes it perfectly understandable that many passages contradict other passages in hundreds of different ways. This link

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/by_name.html

lists 418 contradictions, but the bible also contains an even greater amount of plainly wrong statements, for instance a wrong value of the number Pi.

However, here comes interpretation: with more or less effort of faith, you can interpret away any contradiction in any possible book. Especially when it's translated from a dead language and you can choose to understand the original words in any way that fits your faith. You can believe in the nonexistence of bible contradictions in exactly the same way as you can believe in the bible miracles.

Dan.
Some interresting points that may indeed be inaccurate.

As you say a bat is not a bird, at least, it is not a bird by todays definition.
You must remember, these commandments were given to a simple people (by todays standards) some 3 to 4 thousand years ago with the intent of relaying Gods instructions in a way that they would understand. Would they have understood If it was said "of the mamals you must not eat the bat"? I don't know and cannot answer.

The insect with 4 legs that have feet is more interesting. Take a look at some pictures of grass hoppers and locusts and you will see 4 legs at the front of their bodies and 2 at the rear that are very different.
What is meant in the text by the statement "which have legs above their feet"?
Could that be refering to the fact that the rear legs have feet that are behind the legs?
Maybe, and with that in mind the rear legs of the beetle also have backwards facing feet. Indeed, maybe the answer is as simple as, the israelites only counted the legs at the front of the body?

Dan, if the fact that we today classify those creatures as having 6 legs is enough of an inaccuracy for you then fine. However, I am not at all convinced that our way is the only way of classifying legs, especially when there is 3 to 4 thousand years separating us from them.
I am not even convinced that ours is the best method of classifing them. Who's to say that in 50 years time science won't change its mind and begin saying that they actually have 4 legs and 2 of something else. It wouldn't be the first time that science has changed its mind.
Then I would be able to say that the bible was accurate all along and todays science was wrong.
That wouldn't be the first time that happened either.
Not so long ago, Archeologists used to deny the existence of the Assyrians.
But now we know they existed, now we know the lived just where the bible said they did
Now we know they were indeed as cruel as they were portrayed in the bible.
And so it goes, time and time again.
Anyway, I am not phased because the bible has not classified them in the same way that we do today.

I will, and have, conceed the fact that the bible is not a science textbook, especially in the light of todays science.

Tiles, Hi.
As I have already stated, I have read a few of those that you mentioned in full and I HAVE found them to be incredily consistent. I have also compared key teachings with many others (without reading the whole thing) and they too are consistent in the texts compared. So it is not essential at all.
Have you read any of them yourself? or are you merely repeating what you have heard?.
If you have read some and found them to be inconsistent, then, of which inconsistencies are you speaking of?

One of the reasons that there are so many translations (versions is probably not a good word here) is because language is constantly evolving, therefore the bible must be regularly re-translated into the common language of the day in order for it to be easily read by anyone who has the desire to read it. And thank God for that, I personally find "ye olde english" very difficult to read.

However, if you must have one named, then I name the King James Version but only becase there are some who insist that it is the only one.
I do not agree with that idea at all.

The problem with your statement is that fact that the beetle is listed in this group as well. The beetle does not have a drastically different set of back legs like the grasshopper and the locust does. And since these are all listed in the same group, it would make sense, especially in the Hebrew in which it was written, that all these insects are considered of a same kind with four legs. The beetle obviously has six legs.



It means what it says. It is a simple term. It means its leg are above its feet, not below. So you have a description of legs that end with feet.



However, the Bible is supposedly written by the god who knows everything and is perfect. He would know that a bat is not a bird and, therefore, would not include the bat in a list of birds nor would he use the Hebrew word for "bird" (tzipor) when describing them. He could have done a number of things when communicating to the ancient Hebrews:

1 - He could have listed the bat in its own category apart from any mention of birds

2 - He could have taught the ancient Hebrews that bats are not birds and then included them in the proper category of unclean animals that are not to be eaten.

However, this was not done.

The only real similarity that a bat has to a bird is that it flies. However, so do other animals and they are not listed here. It is very obvious that bats are different from birds as they do not lay eggs, do not have feathers and bills, they have teeth, etc.

Hmm, your way of reading must be very interesting



Ah, so english language has changed this much the last few years that there is need for dozens of translations? Okay



Okay. So the King James Bible is the one and only and true and most consistent Bible around. All other bibles fails and are untrue. Thanks. That's all i wanted to know

Contradictions, source is evilbible.com:

Theological doctrines:

1. God is satisfied with his works
Gen 1:31
God is dissatisfied with his works.
Gen 6:6
2. God dwells in chosen temples
2 Chron 7:12,16
God dwells not in temples
Acts 7:48
3. God dwells in light
Tim 6:16
God dwells in darkness
1 Kings 8:12/ Ps 18:11/ Ps 97:2
4. God is seen and heard
Ex 33:23/ Ex 33:11/ Gen 3:9,10/ Gen 32:30/ Is 6:1/
Ex 24:9-11
God is invisible and cannot be heard
John 1:18/ John 5:37/ Ex 33:20/ 1 Tim 6:16
5. God is tired and rests
Ex 31:17
God is never tired and never rests
Is 40:28
6. God is everywhere present, sees and knows all things
Prov 15:3/ Ps 139:7-10/ Job 34:22,21
God is not everywhere present, neither sees nor knows all
things
Gen 11:5/ Gen 18:20,21/ Gen 3:8
7. God knows the hearts of men
Acts 1:24/ Ps 139:2,3
God tries men to find out what is in their heart
Deut 13:3/ Deut 8:2/ Gen 22:12
8. God is all powerful
Jer 32:27/ Matt 19:26
God is not all powerful
Judg 1:19
9. God is unchangeable
James 1:17/ Mal 3:6/ Ezek 24:14/ Num 23:19
God is changeable
Gen 6:6/ Jonah 3:10/ 1 Sam 2:30,31/ 2 Kings 20:1,4,5,6/
Ex 33:1,3,17,14
10. God is just and impartial
Ps 92:15/ Gen 18:25/ Deut 32:4/ Rom 2:11/ Ezek 18:25
God is unjust and partial
Gen 9:25/ Ex 20:5/ Rom 9:11-13/ Matt 13:12
11. God is the author of evil
Lam 3:38/ Jer 18:11/ Is 45:7/ Amos 3:6/ Ezek 20:25
God is not the author of evil
1 Cor 14:33/ Deut 32:4/ James 1:13
12. God gives freely to those who ask
James 1:5/ Luke 11:10
God withholds his blessings and prevents men from receiving
them
John 12:40/ Josh 11:20/ Is 63:17
13. God is to be found by those who seek him
Matt 7:8/ Prov 8:17
God is not to be found by those who seek him
Prov 1:28
14. God is warlike
Ex 15:3/ Is 51:15
God is peaceful
Rom 15:33/ 1 Cor 14:33
15. God is cruel, unmerciful, destructive, and ferocious
Jer 13:14/ Deut 7:16/ 1 Sam 15:2,3/ 1 Sam 6:19
God is kind, merciful, and good
James 5:11/ Lam 3:33/ 1 Chron 16:34/ Ezek 18:32/ Ps 145:9/
1 Tim 2:4/ 1 John 4:16/ Ps 25:8
16. God's anger is fierce and endures long
Num 32:13/ Num 25:4/ Jer 17:4
God's anger is slow and endures but for a minute
Ps 103:8/ Ps 30:5
17. God commands, approves of, and delights in burnt offerings,
sacrifices ,and holy days
Ex 29:36/ Lev 23:27/ Ex 29:18/ Lev 1:9
God disapproves of and has no pleasure in burnt offerings,
sacrifices, and holy days.
Jer 7:22/ Jer 6:20/ Ps 50:13,4/ Is 1:13,11,12
18. God accepts human sacrifices
2 Sam 21:8,9,14/ Gen 22:2/ Judg 11:30-32,34,38,39
God forbids human sacrifice
Deut 12:30,31
19. God tempts men
Gen 22:1/ 2 Sam 24:1/ Jer 20:7/ Matt 6:13
God tempts no man
James 1:13
20. God cannot lie
Heb 6:18
God lies by proxy; he sends forth lying spirits t deceive
2 Thes 2:11/ 1 Kings 22:23/ Ezek 14:9
21. Because of man's wickedness God destroys him
Gen 6:5,7
Because of man's wickedness God will not destroy him
Gen 8:21
22. God's attributes are revealed in his works.
Rom 1:20
God's attributes cannot be discovered
Job 11:7/ Is 40:28
23. There is but one God
Deut 6:4
There is a plurality of gods
Gen 1:26/ Gen 3:22/ Gen 18:1-3/ 1 John 5:7


Moral Precepts

24. Robbery commanded
Ex 3:21,22/ Ex 12:35,36
Robbery forbidden
Lev 19:13/ Ex 20:15
25. Lying approved and sanctioned
Josh 2:4-6/ James 2:25/ Ex 1:18-20/ 1 Kings 22:21,22
Lying forbidden
Ex 20:16/ Prov 12:22/ Rev 21:8
26. Hatred to the Edomite sanctioned
2 Kings 14:7,3
Hatred to the Edomite forbidden
Deut 23:7
27. Killing commanded
Ex 32:27
Killing forbidden
Ex 20:13
28. The blood-shedder must die
Gen 9:5,6
The blood-shedder must not die
Gen 4:15
29. The making of images forbidden
Ex 20:4
The making of images commanded
Ex 25:18,20
30. Slavery and oppression ordained
Gen 9:25/ Lev 25:45,46/ Joel 3:8
Slavery and oppression forbidden
Is 58:6/ Ex 22:21/ Ex 21:16/ Matt 23:10
31. Improvidence enjoyed
Matt 6:28,31,34/ Luke 6:30,35/ Luke 12:3
Improvidence condemned
1 Tim 5:8/ Prov 13:22
32. Anger approved
Eph 4:26
Anger disapproved
Eccl 7:9/ Prov 22:24/ James 1:20
33. Good works to be seen of men
Matt 5:16
Good works not to be seen of men
Matt 6:1
34. Judging of others forbidden
Matt 7:1,2
Judging of others approved
1 Cor 6:2-4/ 1 Cor 5:12
35. Christ taught non-resistance
Matt 5:39/ Matt 26:52
Christ taught and practiced physical resistance
Luke 22:36/ John 2:15
36. Christ warned his followers not to fear being killed
Luke 12:4
Christ himself avoided the Jews for fear of being killed
John 7:1
37. Public prayer sanctioned
1 Kings 8:22,54, 9:3
Public prayer disapproved
Matt 6:5,6
38. Importunity in prayer commended
Luke 18:5,7
Importunity in prayer condemned
Matt 6:7,8
39. The wearing of long hair by men sanctioned
Judg 13:5/ Num 6:5
The wearing of long hair by men condemned
1 Cor 11:14
40. Circumcision instituted
Gen 17:10
Circumcision condemned
Gal 5:2
41. The Sabbath instituted
Ex 20:8
The Sabbath repudiated
Is 1:13/ Rom 14:5/ Col 2:16
42. The Sabbath instituted because God rested on the seventh day
Ex 20:11
The Sabbath instituted because God brought the Israelites
out of Egypt
Deut 5:15
43. No work to be done on the Sabbath under penalty of death
Ex 31:15/ Num 15:32,36
Jesus Christ broke the Sabbath and justified his disciples in
the same
John 5:16/ Matt 12:1-3,5
44. Baptism commanded
Matt 28:19
Baptism not commanded
1 Cor 1:17,14
45. Every kind of animal allowed for food.
Gen 9:3/ 1 Cor 10:25/ Rom 14:14
Certain kinds of animals prohibited for food.
Deut 14:7,8
46. Taking of oaths sanctioned
Num 30:2/ Gen 21:23-24,31/ Gen 31:53/ Heb 6:13
Taking of oaths forbidden
Matt 5:34
47. Marriage approved
Gen 2:18/ Gen 1:28/ Matt 19:5/ Heb 13:4
Marriage disapproved
1 Cor 7:1/ 1 Cor 7:7,8
48. Freedom of divorce permitted
Deut 24:1/ Deut 21:10,11,14
Divorce restricted
Matt 5:32
49. Adultery forbidden
Ex 20:14/ Heb 13:4
Adultery allowed
Num 31:18/ Hos 1:2; 2:1-3
50. Marriage or cohabitation with a sister denounced
Deut 27:22/ Lev 20:17
Abraham married his sister and God blessed the union
Gen 20:11,12/ Gen 17:16
51. A man may marry his brother's widow
Deut 25:5
A man may not marry his brother's widow
Lev 20:21
52. Hatred to kindred enjoined
Luke 14:26
Hatred to kindred condemned
Eph 6:2/ Eph 5:25,29
53. Intoxicating beverages recommended
Prov 31:6,7/ 1 Tim 5:23/ Ps 104:15
Intoxicating beverages discountenanced
Prov 20:1/ Prov 23:31,32
54. It is our duty to obey our rulers, who are God's ministers
and punish evil doers only
Rom 13:1-3,6
It is not our duty to obey rulers, who sometimes punish the
good and receive unto themselves damnation therefor
Ex 1:17,20/ Dan 3:16,18/ Dan 6:9,7,10/ Acts 4:26,27/
Mark 12:38,39,40/ Luke 23:11,24,33,35
55. Women's rights denied
Gen 3:16/ 1 Tim 2:12/ 1 Cor 14:34/ 1 Pet 3:6
Women's rights affirmed
Judg 4:4,14,15/ Judg 5:7/ Acts 2:18/ Acts 21:9
56. Obedience to masters enjoined
Col 3:22,23/ 1 Pet 2:18
Obedience due to God only
Matt 4:10/ 1 Cor 7:23/ Matt 23:10
57. There is an unpardonable sin
Mark 3:29
There is not unpardonable sin
Acts 13:39


Historical Facts

58. Man was created after the other animals
Gen 1:25,26,27
Man was created before the other animals
Gen 2:18,19
59. Seed time and harvest were never to cease
Gen 8:22
Seed time and harvest did cease for seven years
Gen 41:54,56/ Gen 45:6
60. God hardened Pharaoh's heart
Ex 4:21/ Ed 9:12
Pharaoh hardened his own heart
Ex 8:15
61. All the cattle and horses in Egypt died
Ex 9:3,6/ 14:9
All the horses of Egypt did not die
Ex 14:9
62. Moses feared Pharaoh
Ex 2:14,15,23; 4:19
Moses did not fear Pharaoh
Heb 11:27
63. There died of the plague twenty-four thousand
Num 25:9
There died of the plague but twenty-three thousand
1 Cor 10:8
64. John the Baptist was Elias
Matt 11:14
John the Baptist was not Elias
John 1:21
65. The father of Joseph, Mary's husband was Jacob
Matt 1:16
The father of Mary's husband was Heli
Luke 3:23
66. The father of Salah was Arphaxad
Gen 11:12
The father of Salah was Cainan
Luke 3:35,36
67. There were fourteen generations from Abraham to David
Matt 1:17
There were but thirteen generations from Abraham to David
Matt 1:2-6
68. There were fourteen generations from the Babylonian captivity
to Christ.
Matt 1:17
There were but thirteen generations from the Babylonian
captivity to Christ
Matt 1:12-16
69. The infant Christ was taken into Egypt
Matt 2:14,15,19,21,23
The infant Christ was not taken into Egypt
Luke 2:22, 39
70. Christ was tempted in the wilderness
Mark 1:12,13
Christ was not tempted in the wilderness
John 2:1,2
71. Christ preached his first sermon on the mount
Matt 5:1,2
Christ preached his first sermon on the plain
Luke 6:17,20
72. John was in prison when Jesus went into Galilee
Mark 1:14
John was not in prison when Jesus went into Galilee
John 1:43/ John 3:22-24
73. Christ's disciples were commanded to go forth with a staff
and sandals
Mark 6:8,9
Christ's disciples were commanded to go forth with neither
staffs nor sandals.
Matt 10:9,10
74. A woman of Canaan besought Jesus
Matt 15:22
It was a Greek woman who besought Him
Mark 7:26
75. Two blind men besought Jesus
Matt 20:30
Only one blind man besought Him
Luke 18:35,38
76. Christ was crucified at the third hour
Mark 15:25
Christ was not crucified until the sixth hour
John 19:14,15
77. The two thieves reviled Christ.
Matt 27:44/ Mark 15:32
Only one of the thieves reviled Christ
Luke 23:39,40
78. Satan entered into Judas while at supper
John 13:27
Satan entered into him before the supper
Luke 22:3,4,7
79. Judas committed suicide by hanging
Matt 27:5
Judas did not hang himself, but died another way
Acts 1:18
80. The potter's field was purchased by Judas
Acts 1:18
The potter's field was purchased by the Chief Priests
Matt 27:6,7
81. There was but one woman who came to the sepulchre
John 20:1
There were two women who came to the sepulchre
Matt 28:1
82. There were three women who came to the sepulchre
Mark 16:1
There were more than three women who came to the sepulchre
Luke 24:10
83. It was at sunrise when they came to the sepulchre
Mark 16:2
It was some time before sunrise when they came.
John 20:1
84. There were two angels seen by the women at the sepulchre, and
they were standing up.
Luke 24:4
There was but one angel seen, and he was sitting down.
Matt 28:2,5
85. There were two angels seen within the sepulchre.
John 20:11,12
There was but one angel seen within the sepulchre
Mark 16:5
86. Christ was to be three days and three nights in the grave
Matt 12:40
Christ was but two days and two nights in the grave
Mark 15:25,42,44,45,46; 16:9>
87. Holy ghost bestowed at pentecost
Acts 1:8,5
Holy ghost bestowed before pentecost
John 20:22
88. The disciples were commanded immediately after the
resurrection to go into Galilee
Matt 28:10
The disciples were commanded immediately after the
resurrection to go tarry at Jerusalem
Luke 24:49
89. Jesus first appeared to the eleven disciples in a room at
Jerusalem
Luke 24:33,36,37/ John 20:19
Jesus first appeared to the eleven on a mountain in Galilee
Matt 28:16,17
90. Christ ascended from Mount Olivet
Acts 1:9,12
Christ ascended from Bethany
Luke 24:50,51
91. Paul's attendants heard the miraculous voice, and stood
speechless
Acts 9:7
Paul's attendants heard not the voice and were prostrate
Acts 26:14
92. Abraham departed to go into Canaan
Gen 12:5
Abraham went not knowing where
Heb 11:8
93. Abraham had two sons
Gal 4:22
Abraham had but one son
Heb 11:17
94. Keturah was Abraham's wife
Gen 25:1
Keturah was Abraham's concubine
1 Chron 1:32
95. Abraham begat a son when he was a hundred years old, by the
interposition of Providence
Gen 21:2/ Rom 4:19/ Heb 11:12
Abraham begat six children more after he was a hundred years
old without any interposition of providence
Gen 25:1,2
96. Jacob bought a sepulchre from Hamor
Josh 24:32
Abraham bought it of Hamor
Acts 7:16
97. God promised the land of Canaan to Abraham and his seed
forever
Gen 13:14,15,17; 17:8
Abraham and his seed never received the promised land
Acts 7:5/ Heb 11:9,13
98. Goliath was slain by Elhanan
2 Sam 21:19 *note, was changed in translation to be
correct. Original manuscript was incorrect>
The brother of Goliath was slain by Elhanan
1 Chron 20:5
99. Ahaziah began to reign in the twelfth year of Joram
2 Kings 8:25
Ahaziah began to reign in the eleventh year of Joram
2 Kings 9:29
100. Michal had no child
2 Sam 6:23
Michal had five children
2 Sam 21:8
101. David was tempted by the Lord to number Israel
2 Sam 24:1
David was tempted by Satan to number the people
1 Chron 21:1
102. The number of fighting men of Israel was 800,000; and of
Judah 500,000
2 Sam 24:9
The number of fighting men of Israel was 1,100,000; and of
Judah 470,000
1 Chron 21:5
103. David sinned in numbering the people
2 Sam 24:10
David never sinned, except in the matter of Uriah
1 Kings 15:5
104. One of the penalties of David's sin was seven years of
famine.
2 Sam 24:13
It was not seven years, but three years of famine
1 Chron 21:11,12
105. David took seven hundred horsemen
2 Sam 8:4
David took seven thousand horsemen
1 Chron 18:4
106. David bought a threshing floor for fifty shekels of silver
2 Sam 24:24
David bought the threshing floor for six hundred shekels of
gold
1 Chron 21:25
107. David's throne was to endure forever.
Ps 89:35-37
David's throne was cast down
Ps 89:44


Speculative Doctrines

108. Christ is equal with God
John 10:30/ Phil 2:5
Christ is not equal with God
John 14:28/ Matt 24:36
109. Jesus was all-powerful
Matt 28:18/ John 3:35
Jesus was not all-powerful
Mark 6:5
110. The law was superseded by the Christian dispensation
Luke 16:16/ Eph 2:15/ Rom 7:6
The law was not superseded by the Christian dispensation
Matt 5:17-19
111. Christ's mission was peace
Luke 2:13,14
Christ's mission was not peace
Matt 10:34
112. Christ received not testimony from man
John 5:33,34
Christ did receive testimony from man
John 15:27
113. Christ's witness of himself is true.
John 8:18,14
Christ's witness of himself is not true.
John 5:31
114. Christ laid down his life for his friends
John 15:13/ John 10:11
Christ laid down his life for his enemies
Rom 5:10
115. It was lawful for the Jews to put Christ to death
John 19:7
It was not lawful for the Jews to put Christ to death
John 18:31
116. Children are punished for the sins of the parents
Ex 20:5
Children are not punished for the sins of the parents
Ezek 18:20
117. Man is justified by faith alone
Rom 3:20/ Gal 2:16/ Gal 3:11,12/ Rom 4:2
Man is not justified by faith alone
James 2:21,24/ Rom 2:13
118. It is impossible to fall from grace
John 10:28/ Rom 8:38,39
It is possible to fall from grace
Ezek 18:24/ Heb 6:4-6, 2 Pet 2:20,21
119. No man is without sin
1 Kings 8:46/ Prov 20:9/ Eccl 7:20/ Rom 3:10
Christians are sinless
1 John 3: 9,6,8
120. There is to be a resurrection of the dead
1 Cor 15:52/ Rev 20:12,13/ Luke 20:37/ 1 Cor 15:16
There is to be no resurrection of the dead
Job 7:9/ Eccl 9:5/ Is 26:14
121. Reward and punishment to be bestowed in this world
Prov 11:31
Reward and punishment to be bestowed in the next world
Rev 20:12/ Matt 16:27/ 2 Cor 5:10
122. Annihilation the portion of all mankind
Job 3: 11,13-17,19-22/ Eccl 9:5,10/ Eccl 3:19,20
Endless misery the portion of all mankind
Matt 25:46/ Rev 20:10,15/ Rev 14:11/ Dan 12:2
123. The Earth is to be destroyed
2 Pet 3:10/ Heb 1:11/ Rev 20:11
The Earth is never to be destroyed
Ps 104:5/ Eccl 1:4
124. No evil shall happen to the godly
Prov 12:21/ 1 Pet 3:13
Evil does happen to the godly
Heb 12:6/ Job 2:3,7
125. Worldly good and prosperity are the lot of the godly
Prov 12:21/ Ps 37:28,32,33,37/ Ps 1:1,3/ Gen 39:2/
Job 42:12
Worldly misery and destitution the lot of the godly
Heb 11:37,38/ Rev 7:14/ 2 Tim 3:12/ Luke 21:17
126. Worldly prosperity a reward of righteousness and a blessing
Mark 10:29,30/ Ps 37:25/ Ps 112:1,3/ Job 22:23,24/
Prov 15:6
Worldly prosperity a curse and a bar to future reward
Luke 6:20,24/ Matt 6:19,21/ Luke 16:22/ Matt 19:24/
Luke 6:24
127. The Christian yoke is easy
Matt 11:28,29,30
The Christian yoke is not easy
John 16:33/ 2 Tim 3:12/ Heb 12:6,8
128. The fruit of God's spirit is love and gentleness
Gal 5:22
The fruit of God's spirit is vengeance and fury
Judg 15:14/ 1 Sam 18:10,11
129. Longevity enjoyed by the wicked
Job 21:7,8/ Ps 17:14/ Eccl 8:12/ Is 65:20
Longevity denied to the wicked
Eccl 8:13/ Ps 55:23/ Prov 10:27/ Job 36:14/ Eccl 7:17
130. Poverty a blessing
Luke 6:20,24/ Jams 2:5
Riches a blessing
Prov 10:15/ Job 22:23,24/ Job 42:12
Neither poverty nor riches a blessing
Prov 30:8,9
131. Wisdom a source of enjoyment
Prov 3:13,17
Wisdom a source of vexation, grief and sorrow
Eccl 1:17,18
132. A good name is a blessing
Eccl 7:1/ Prov 22:1
A good name is a curse
Luke 6:26
133. Laughter commended
Eccl 3:1,4/ Eccl 8:15
Laughter condemned
Luke 6:25/ Eccl 7:3,4
134. The rod of correction a remedy for foolishness
Prov 22:15
There is no remedy for foolishness
Prov 27:22
135. A fool should be answered according to his folly
Prov 26:5
A fool should not be answered according to his folly
Prov 26:4
136. Temptation to be desired
James 1:2
Temptation not to be desired
Matt 6:13
137. Prophecy is sure
2 Pet 1:19
Prophecy is not sure
Jer 18:7-10
138. Man's life was to be one hundred and twenty years
Gen 6:3/ Ps 90:10
Man's life is but seventy years
Ps 90:10
139. The fear of man was to be upon every beast
Gen 9:2
The fear of man is not upon the lion
Prov 30:30
140. Miracles a proof of divine mission
Matt 11:2-5/ John 3:2/ Ex 14:31
Miracles not a proof of divine mission
Ex 7:10-12/ Deut 13:1-3/ Luke 11:19
141. Moses was a very meek man
Num 12:3
Moses was a very cruel man
Num 31:15,17
142. Elijah went up to heaven
2 Kings 2:11
None but Christ ever ascended into heaven
John 3:13
143. All scripture is inspired
2 Tim 3:16
Some scripture is not inspired
1 Cor 7:6/ 1 Cor 7:12/ 2 Cor 11:17

Regarding Bibles are all the same, have a look here:

http://www.chick.com/information/bibleversions/comparison.asp

As told, your way of reading must be very interesting

excuse me? Reread my post and you will find that I said nothing of the kind. This is typical of all claims that the bible contradicts itself. You take a small fraction of what I did say and add your own words and imply that I said it. I actually said all literal translations of the bible are true and consistent, and I have said that several times. You asked the question "which one" with a loaded gun. You asked the question in the hope I would name one so that you could attempt to shoot me down with your conclusion.
You failed, because I saw your shot coming. Thats why I expressed it the way that I did. So you could shoot yourself in the foot by taking one of my statements out of context, thereby exposing the methodology used for all claims against the bible.

As to the link you provide, and your lengthy list, I will give them consideration and scrutinise them in context from which the translated statements have been extracted and isolated.
But these will be just more of the same of what you just did to my words.
The inconsistency will rely on how you interpret the words.
One way will show an inconsistency and the other way will not.

My way of reading is not to take at face value the aparent meaning of a single statement extracted from its context.
My way of reading is to read the statement in its context to see what was really meant and not what you say it means. If you think that is the wrong way to read (anything) then you are welcome keep your way.

Tiles and JCL
I appreciate your attempts to enlighten me, truely. I have no desire to believe something that is not true.

JCL I understand your comments and your reasoning, but if something that is reguarded as an inconsistency can be given a plausile and reasonable alternative does that not eradicate that inconsisency as being fact.
I stress "plausile and reasonable" which is why I don't want to get into the miracles.

For example, the link you provide has a very good example of what I am talking about


At first glance this appears to be an inconsistency.
I guess this springs from the mistaken belief that Jesus only had 12 folowers
as well as the few women specifically mentioned throughout the Gospells.

However

shows that there were actually many disiples that were following him around and not just the 12 whom he appointed as appostles.

From this is it not plausible and reasonable to conclude that there were other women among the "company" of his disciples?
Is it not plausible and reasonable that women from among that "company" were standing "on afar off" as recorded by Matthew, Mark and Luke?
Is it not also plausible and reasonable that the women who were closest to Jesus also "stood near the cross" as recorded by John?
Is in not plausible and reasonable to conclude that there is no inconsistency here? Both are acurate and true.

I say this from my heart, it has been my experience that examining these aparent inconsitancies in the context of the whole bible instead of as isolated statements always fade away into nothingness.
At least it has so far, which is why I raised the challenge. Maybe someone has seen something that has no plausible and reasonable alternative.
I honestly have no desire to believe something that can be demonstrated to be false

I am looking into the links and examples that you have provided.
Don't worry I am not going refute them all here. I am sure you don't want me to do that!

I will come back with any I find that turn out to be "real" inconsistencies.
I will also come back and report on the whole that I found none if that turns out to be the case.
If i do come back with "there are none", then you can challenge me for my explanation on any specific ones that you want.
Otherwise, thanks for the examples of what you call inconsistencies
regards

You say they all fade away, but you have not answered my second post on the "bat/bird" and "four legged fly bug" topic. So that has not faded away yet. And this is one of the simpler ones. Nothing too complex ... yet.

I will say one more word to Tiles and all who give examples.

Have you yourself actually examined the examples you cite from evilbible.com
to see if they really are inconsistencies or do you accept them at face value because they fit your desire that the bible be false?

Hi dan, just noticed your post.
I'm sorry, I thought I did answer it?

Is it not plausible and reasonable to say that the israelites had a different way of counting legs than we do?
Is it not plausible and reasonable to say that everything that flew was called a bird?
Is it not plausible and resonable to conclude that the meaning of the word "Bird" for them was different to what it is for us.
These descriptions were given in a way that the israelites would be able to identify what could and could not be eaten. They were not given as a modern day science lesson to an ancient people.

Having an agricultural background as they did, I am sure that they had seen grasshoppers and locusts and beetles many times prior to receiving those commandments as well as after receiving them.
Obviously, they were not confused by it.

Dan, has not the system of classifying animals, insects etc, evolved, changed and undergone reclassification over the past 1000 years, in direct proportion to the growth of knowledge?
Will the system of classifying animals, insects etc not continue to evolve, change and undergo reclassification far into the future?
Of course not.
Is it correct to say that scientists 100 years ago were wrong because they did not follow the system we currently have?
I dont believe so. I think it is unreasonable and padantic to do so!

Oh your second post... above that incredily long one of Tiles.
I missed it.

Yes God could have done as you say and given them a lesson.

The rear legs of many beetles do go backwards from the body similar to locusts and different to the 4 at the front.
And many others do not. There are many kinds of Beetle and thismight be how to distingtuish between the beetles that can be eaten and the beetles that cannot. I believe this is plausible and reasonable

Could it not also mean "don't count the legs that are in front of the feet"?
Also, should the appendages at the end of their legs be called "feet".....hmmmm.


OK....which ones do you have in mind?


Dan, If my answer is not plausible and reasonable, can you please explain why because I do not understand why not?

The reason your answers are not reasonable is because they do not agree with the text, especially the original Hebrew in which it was written. Let's look at some of the explanations you presented.



Legs are legs, no matter which direction they point in. The verses quoted do not mention direction. They simply count legs. Nothing more. Nothing less. None of the creatures listed have only four legs. They all have six. So no matter how it is sliced, it is incorrect.



This is by no means reasonable nor plausible. In the list of birds, the list is pretty specific, even giving names. If god wanted to list specific beetles, he could have named them. The ancient peoples from various parts of the region had names for the various beetles. God could have used those names. The text does not use those names and, as a result, the generic noun used simple means "beetle."

Also, as pointed out above, the simple Hebrew of the quoted verses is clear that it is counting only four legs and no more ... not four legs that are different from the others.

Actually, as I look at images of beetles, your description is incorrect:



Actually, most beetles have two pair (four legs) pointing to the BACK with one par pointing to the front. The rest tend to have two par pointing to the back, two more toward the middle and the remaining two toward the front.







The next image is a photo of an ancient Egyptian carving of a dung beetle:



Again ... six legs ... two sets pointing to the back with one set toward the front.



No. Because the Hebrew word in the text does not mean "front" but "above." Also, as I pointed out, beetles tend to have two sets toward the BACK and not the front.



The funny thing is that ancient Hebrew did not use a word for "feet." They had one word for the entire leg and that word was "regel." In fact, football (soccer) in Israel today is called Kidur Regel (kidur = ball and regel = leg) and, while it means football is really leg ball (the adjective follows the noun in Hebrew). So the word translated as "foot" is really a generic term that can apply to any part of the leg, including the foot.

The other word in the verse ... the one translated as "legs" ... is a Hebrew word that derives from the root word meaning to "bend" or to "bow." So have "legs" above their "feet" is really having a place that "bends" above their "legs" or "feet" and this would speak more of the multiple joints in an insects legs.



So the basic passage is trying to say that there are creatures that go about on all fours (i.e. have four legs) and that these creatures have wings and that their legs have multiple joints. Then the passage identifies them as the locust, the grasshopper and the beetle. However, as said numerous times, all of these creatures have six legs and not four.

The passage is plain in the literal translations such as the King James Version of the Bible. The meaning is just as plain in the Hebrew text that was used to translate the King James Version (9th century Masoretic text).

You can try to come up with excuses all you would like, but the Bible is in error here.



One thing at a time. One thing at a time ...

I would interpret "go about on all fours" as meaning the creature in question
uses all its limbs to walk, belly to the ground. Is there any one who can
track that phrase back to hebrew?

I say this because, in modern times, WE have no complaints if someone says
"look, that person is down on all fours".
Nobody Ive ever met would correct him and say "No they arent, they are on
two arms and two legs, so you should say they are down on two by two."

I conclude that it is possible that the phrase "on all fours" is applicable
where 'all' limbs are being used to move, and the belly is toward the ground,
regardless of the number or type of actual limbs involved.
(Symbolising subserviance maybe? Kneeling an all fours? Like face-down praying?)

I can read the Hebrew (though not perfectly). I have a Hebrew Bible here as well. And I can do the research on this. This is one of the reasons I brought this up as I did. This is why I mentioned the Hebrew words used.



We say that because it is TRUE! If a person is down on their hands and their knees then they are literally on all fours (as opposed to standing on two feet). So the word "four" literally means "four". It is the same in the Hebrew phrase about the creatures.



Nope. That is not how it is being used. The phrase is not an idiom. It is not a figure of speech. It is written in such a way as to literally mean that the creatures have four legs (and no more).

While it is kind of funny that those ancient people didn´t seem to be able to count the legs of insects, I don´t really see the relevance of it.

It's not really all the relevant. However, for people that claim that the Bible is perfect and without error because, as they say, it was given by the perfect, all-knowing god, then there should be no mistake, no matter how trivial. But, as we can see, they got it wrong by claiming that beetles, grasshoppers and locusts have only four legs/feet. That is an error. Therefore, the Bible is not perfect and without error. And this is just one small thing.

They also included the bat in with a list of birds despite the fact that the bat does not lay eggs, does not have feathers, does not have a beak, but has teeth instead, etc. So even if they categorized animals differently, it would be pretty obvious that a bat is not a bird and it would certainly be known to a god that supposedly knows everything and is, himself, perfect. So, again, this little exercise simply demonstrates that the Bible is not perfect and, as a result, it could not have come from a perfect god.

And this is just one, small example.

But we see something else from this example as well. Instead of seeing the error, no matter how simple and plain it is, the Christian who believes the Bible is perfect, will try to find a way to resolve the error even if they have to twist the passage to say what it would not naturally mean. So, "legs above feet" somehow becomes back legs that aren't counted in order to arrive at four legs despite beetles, locusts and grasshoppers all having six, etc.

Ah delerna, are we again at the point where you totally ignore all arguments because they don't fit to your ancient religious poisoned picture of the world?

There is just one word of god, right? And this word is the only true and consistent one, right?

I say where does all the different versions of the bible come from then? When there is just one true word, then there should be just one true book.

Which means from hundret bible versions there is one true bible around, and 99 wrong ones. Which means 99% of all christians read the wrong book, not the one and only true one.

And instead of answering me directly you start to dance around that, start again to insult me, doubt my sources, my knowledge, my human being ...

I would say you are a fundamentalist. And it never makes sense to discuss with a fundamentalist.

The bible only contradicts itself because:
The mindset of those who wrote and had input into it, the "gods" read and understand ONE thing.
And the others the "sheep" read and understand another thing.
//
This is a language of communication between the elite, those self elevated "gods" and their "staff, the priests etc" who constantly depict what they have done and intend to complete in the future to the rest of mankind.
//
At the same time it serves as a BIND for the "sheep" who have given up their ability to THINK for themselves.
//
This is my view of the bible today, having been one of these "sheep", but i escaped the sheep pen.
//
Imagine wanting to be a "sheep", it boggles the mind, literally, but they are masters at boggling people's minds, they have been doing it for ages.

Dan
You are the one who brought up other animals that fly.
I merely asked which ones you were refering to.

you are also the one who brought this up


Reflecting on your point I came to realize that God actually gave the job of classifing and naming the animals to us (humans).


So no, I don't agree with you. I don't think God would have given them a lesson on how he thought they should be classified.
I think God would have used whatever classification they were using at the time.
If they classified bats as bird then he would have listed them among the birds.
y the way, Bats have more in common with birds than the ability to fly. Bats and birds both have 2 legs. You are in error there.

From the direction the discussion has taken at this point, you seem to have dropped grasshoppers and locusts.
Does that mean you are accepting that there may be a way to see them being classified as having 4 legs?

As to the beetle, I'm sorry I wasn't trying to give an absolute answer here. I was trying to express that there is more than one way to classify ... well anything. What the actual criteria they used to classify beetles as having 4 I have no way of knowing.
But it seems obvious to me that however they classified the number of legs, they were not confused by the description at all and if anyone should have found it a faith destroying error, they would have. Or else you think they were a pretty stupid people as a nation.

I maintain it is an error that is dependant on how you interpret it.
I definitely do see room for interpretation of what is a leg and what is not a leg.
Otherwise it would simply say
"that goeth upon [all] four"

and not add in the extra clarification
"that goeth upon [all] four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth;"
which I believe could indicate direction or something else not thought of.

You seem to have quite a good grasp of Herew and I do not argue against what you are saying. I could not, even if I wanted to.
However I do not agree with your interpretation and you do not agree with mine.
I think we should leave the grasshopper, locust, beetle, bat enigma at that or else we will just go around in circles and not get anywhere.

Tiles
I think I will stop at this point.
When you seek to discredit me by starting again to insult me, doubt my sources, my knowledge, my human being it all becomes pointless.

pararealist
There are some very good points you have brought up, and I agree with you on those points.
However, we have left a discussion of bible contradictions and entered a discussion about religion.

Actually, as interesting as it has been, the discussion over numers of legs and what are birds is really more a topic of "The bible contradicts science" rather than "the bible contradicts itself"
JCL and tiles posts were more what I was talking about.

Delerna, you started that one first. Interesting, but not really surprising, that you, besides ignoring all facts and arguments and questions, even start to play bad that way now too. Twisting facts again.

Must really i as the atheist remind you? You shall not lie.

Talk about a stretch. The verse you quoted say nothing at all about classifying anything. It simply says that the man was to NAME the animals. Naming is different from classifying.

But let's give you this argument a moment. Let's say that Adam did classify the animals. There are a few things to consider. Even if he did, then that does not necessarily mean that his classification scheme made it through the supposed flood spoken of in the Bible and down to Moses for him to use. And if it did, then Adam's classification of animals is a mess if he includes a bat as a bird.

But even if god did leave the classification of animals up to man, the Bible, a timeless book, could have expressed that bats, along with the birds mentioned, are unclean and not to be eaten, without touching on the word "bird." There are simple grammatical ways to do this and a perfect god could have done that (especially if an imperfect person like myself could come up with a way to do it).



You would have done just fine in Bible times, then. You are very, very wrong here. Bats do NOT have two legs. They indeed do have four. And when the walk and crawl, they do so ON ALL FOUR. Their front legs are their wings. The finger/toes of those front legs are very long with skin stretched between them and this allows them to fly with them. Birds do not have this structure and when they walk they do so only on their two legs. Bats, once again, walk on all fours when they walk.



Not at all. I responded about beetles because of what you said about beetles. I was simply responding to you. Nothing more. Nothing less. Grasshoppers and Locusts all have six legs. Legs are commonly understood as those limbs that a being/creature uses to get about, to walk, hop, jump, etc. All of the mentioned creatures (grasshopper, locust and beetle) use all six of their limbs to move about. It is obvious to just about anyone (except possibly you and Moses) that these creatures have six legs and not four. The Bible is in error.



It doesn't really matter how they classified them. They were wrong to say they had four legs.



Well, the vast majority of that nation today believes the Bible to be a superstitious myth. Many of the Jews in antiquity did as well.

As far as the Law goes (that which supposedly was given to Israel by god through Moses), Israel hardly ever paid any attention to it, according to what is written in the Bible itself. Read the Old Testament and you will find that most of the time the nation did not even perform certain rituals such as the Passover, etc. So it is likely that they did not even pay attention to the number of legs written about in the passages I have quoted.



And that can be said for any "contradiction" when the Christian gets involved and feels the need to maintain that the Bible is the perfect word of god.

"Hey, son! Look at that car over there?"
"What car, dad?"
"That car! The one with the wings!"
"Dad! That's a plane!"
"Son, that all depends on how you interpret it!"
"Well, then I see two of 'em!"
"If that is how you interpret it, then good for you, son! Good for you!"

With the sort of logic you are employing, nothing has meaning and so does everything . I can say that 2+2=4 and you would tell me that it all depends on how you interpret it. That is a loose and fluid way of examining things and, when it is fully employed, nothing can ever be proven wrong. I could write my own Bible and get away with it using this logic.



Then you don't understand the language (Hebrew) in which these things were written. You don't understand how they used their language to convey thoughts and ideas. You don't understand the way things are emphasized in Hebrew. And, as a result, you can then "interpret" it any way you want.



You want to drop it and call it an "enigma" when it is an error. You can tell me a plane is a car all you want and interpret a plane as a car all you want, but that does not mean you are correct. But you cannot admit the Bible is in error, so it is safer to call it an enigma than to admit that the perfect Bible may not be perfect at all.

And, as a result, this is the fate for any argument that anyone could bring against the Bible. Once some of these contradictions are brought up (such as in the list that Tiles provided) they will be explained away via interpretation (which varies from church to church and denomination to denomination) and, if not explained, will not be admitted as a contradiction, but relegated to the realm of an enigma.