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.