Agnosticism, Atheism, Bible Study, Christianity, Faith, God, Morality, Religion, Truth

Letter to Kathy (the Bible Has Problems)

Dear Kathy,

Since you graciously agreed (in our recent conversation) to let me present you with some examples of the Bible’s problems, I decided to do it in this way so it would have its own comment thread. As I’ve said, when I was a Christian, one strike against the Bible was not enough to shake my faith — maybe it only seemed problematic, maybe there was an explanation we hadn’t uncovered yet, maybe the historical accounts were wrong, etc. But as the problems began to mount up, I reached a point where I could no longer deny the fact that the Bible had actual errors.

A couple of suggestions before we begin. Try to be as open-minded about this as possible. As you go through these examples, ask yourself if God would allow such problems to exist in a message that he wanted all people to accept and believe? According to the Bible, whenever God sent someone a message, whether it was Pharaoh or Gideon or Nebuchadnezzar or Paul, they had no question whom it was from. They didn’t always follow it, as we see with people like Pharaoh and Solomon, but they didn’t question the source of the message or what it stated. So why would God operate differently today? Why would he want us to be so confused about his message that we’re able to question whether or not it’s really from him?

Another thing to keep in mind is that even if you come to the conclusion that the Bible has actual problems, that doesn’t mean you have to stop believing in God. There are a number of Christians who don’t believe in inerrancy. And even if you lose faith in the Christian god, that still doesn’t mean you have to stop believing in God. A number of people, including several of our founding fathers, were deists. I have a lot of sympathy for that view and plan to do a post on it soon.

Some of the items listed here will have links that provide additional information, especially when the issue is too detailed to list here. I hope that you’ll check out those links, since some of them are quite significant points. And regardless of how this article strikes you, I hope it will help serve as a great springboard to launch you into your own research.

Some of the Problems

Creation
The creation accounts in Genesis do not match what we’ve learned through science. This isn’t shocking news, but it bears looking into. Evolution and the Big Bang Theory had nothing to do with my deconversion, but I’ve learned more about both since leaving Christianity. It’s shocking how much misinformation I had been operating under. Not to say that all Christians are that way — that was simply my experience. But the evidence for both evolution and the Big Bang are far more substantial than I had ever realized. Two good resources for learning more about these issues are the following (though I’d also recommend checking out the recent Cosmos series, as well as some of the PBS NOVA specials):

Marco’s Daddy and the Beginning of Life on Earth


http://talkorigins.org/

Another problem with the creation accounts is that Genesis 1 says that plants and trees were made on the 3rd day, while man was made on the 6th. But Genesis 2:5-9 says that man was created before there were any plants or trees in the land. Also, the 1st chapter says that man was created after all the animals, but the 2nd chapter implies that it was the other way around. It seems strange that such discrepancies would exist only a chapter apart, but there are a number of textual clues that suggest the first 5 books of the Bible were assembled over a long period of time from various writings written by a number of different people. Many scholars believe that Genesis 1 and 2 represent two separate versions of the creation story that were both included because the compilers didn’t know which was more accurate. Whatever the reason, there’s no question that the differences exist and are hard to explain.

10 Plagues
During the 10 plagues, God afflicts all of Egypt’s livestock with a disease (Ex 9:1-7), and it specifies that it would affect the “horses, the donkeys, the camels, the herds, and the flocks.” We’re told that all of Egypt’s livestock died. But the later plague of boils was said to affect both man and beast (verse 10 of chapter 9). Maybe it meant non-livestock animals. But Ex 11:5 says that the death of the firstborn would also affect Egypt’s cattle, and in Exodus 14, Pharaoh pursues the Israelites with horses.

Hares Chew the Cud
Leviticus 11:6 tells us that hares chew the cud. They do not. Animals that chew the cud are called ruminants. When they eat plant matter, it goes to their first stomach to soften, and then it’s regurgitated to their mouth. They spend time re-chewing it, and then it is swallowed and fully digested. Ruminants (cows, sheep, goats, etc.) are recognizable because their chewing of the cud is very obvious. Hares (rabbits) don’t chew the cud; however, their mouths do move frequently, so it’s possible to see why some people may have assumed that they do chew the cud. Of course, God would know they didn’t, and this is why the passage is problematic. You can read more about this here.

Arphaxad
In the genealogy given in Genesis 11:10-12, we see that Noah fathered Shem and Shem fathered Arphaxad. At the age of 35, Arphaxad fathered Shelah. This information is confirmed in 1 Chron 1:18. But Luke 3:35-36 tells us that Arphaxad’s son was Cainan, and he was the father of Shelah.

Where does Luke get this information? It disagrees with the Old Testament, so who should we believe? Some have suggested that Genesis and 1 Chronicles simply left out Cainan for some reason. But why would they do that? To further complicate it, how could Cainan have fit in there? Genesis tells us that Arphaxad was 35 when he fathered Shelah. Does it really seem likely that Arphaxad became a grandfather by 35, especially when you consider the extreme old ages that people lived to at that time?

Another explanation is that some copyist messed up when copying Luke and Cainan is just a mistake. But this is not much better. First of all, the error would have needed to occur early for it to be in all our copies of Luke. Secondly, are we really comfortable saying that we have the inspired word of our creator, but it got messed up by some guy who wasn’t paying close attention? To me, that doesn’t lend a lot of credence to the idea of inspiration or inerrancy.

Instead, the most likely explanation is that Luke made a mistake. This, of course, would indicate that he was not inspired.

Problems in the Book of Daniel
In Daniel 5, the writer refers to Belshazzar as the son of Nebuchadnezzar 7 different times. Yet we know from multiple contemporary sources that Belshazzar’s father was Nabonidus, who was not related to Nebuchadnezzar. The same chapter says that Darius the Mede took over Babylon, but this person does not seem to have ever existed. Daniel says that he was the son of Ahaseurus, and in mentioning this, the author of Daniel indicates that he was thinking of a later ruler — the persian emperor Darius the Great, whose son was Ahaseurus. This post in particular goes into the problems surrounding the 5th chapter, but if you’d like to learn about the problems in the rest of the book, you can access each article in the series here.

Jairus’s Daughter
In Mark 5:23, Jairus finds Jesus and says that his daughter is at the point of death. While they’re on their way to the house, some of his servants find them on the way and say that she has died and there’s no point in troubling Jesus further.

However, in Matthew 9:18, Jairus already knows that his daughter has died, but tells Jesus that if he’ll lay his hands on her, she’ll live. This may seem like a minor difference, but honestly, there’s only one scenario that could be true. Either the girl was already dead, or she wasn’t. And if Jairus already knew she was dead, then there was no point in his servants coming to tell him that (so of course, they don’t appear in Matthew’s account).

The Centurion
This is similar to the previous issue. Matthew and Luke both record a centurion who asks Jesus to heal his sick servant. Matthew 8:5-13 says that the centurion himself comes before Jesus to ask for help. Luke 7:1-10 says that the Jewish elders went on his behalf, and then he sent servants to follow up. In Luke, Jesus never speaks to, or even sees, the centurion at all.

Hight Priest
In Mark 2:23-28, Jesus talks about the occasion from the Old Testament when David ate the showbread, which Jesus said was in the days of Abiathar the high priest. However, in 1 Samuel 21:1-6, it appears that Ahimelech was the high priest. Some have tried to answer this problem by saying that Abiathar was alive during that particular episode, so Jesus’ statement is still true. But that’s obviously not the intent of the passage. After all, we would correct anyone who said that the tragedy of 9/11 occurred during the days of President Barack Obama. He may have been alive at the time, but that event did not happen while he was President.

430 Years
Galatians 3:16-17 says this:

The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise.

Here, Paul says that the law came 430 years after the promises were made to Abraham. But in Exodus 12:40-41, we see:

Now the length of time the Israelite people lived in Egypt was 430 years. At the end of the 430 years, to the very day, all the LORD’s divisions left Egypt.

If the Israelites were in Egypt 430 years, then there could not have been 430 years between Abraham’s promises and the law. God made the promises to Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3, and as we read on through Genesis, we see that Abraham had no children at this time. Later, he had a son named Isaac. When Isaac was 60 years old, he had Jacob (Gen 25:24-26), and Jacob had 12 sons that produced the 12 tribes of Israel. Already, we can see that some time has passed since Abraham received the promise. Once Jacob’s sons were all grown with families of their own, they finally settled in Egypt. Jacob was 130 years old at this time (Gen 47:9), and this marks the beginning of that 430 year period that the Israelites spent in Egypt.

That means that the time between the promise to Abraham and the giving of the law was actually over 600 years. So why did Paul say 430 years? I think it’s obvious that this was a simple mistake. He remembered the 430 year figure because that’s how much time the Israelites spent in Egypt, and so he simply misspoke. It’s not a big deal… except that he’s supposed to be inspired by God.

Jesus’ Birth
There are a number of issues surrounding Jesus’ birth. First, Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts contradict one another on virtually all the details, which you can read about here. Secondly, Matthew seems to invent an episode where Herod kills all the children in Bethlehem who are 2 and under, causing Mary, Joseph, and Jesus to flee to Egypt (instead of just returning home to Nazareth, because only Luke says that they started in Nazareth). Matthew does this in order to “fulfill” some Old Testament passages that actually have nothing to do with Jesus or killing babies. You can read about Matthew’s misuse of the Old Testament here — it’s quite blatant.

The Virgin Birth is one of the most famous aspects of Jesus’ story, and it was supposedly done in fulfillment of a prophecy from Isaiah. But it turns out that Isaiah was prophesying no such thing — he was talking about an event that was happening in his own time, and Matthew (once again) just appropriated the “prophecy” for his own devices. You can read all the details here.

Another problem concerning Jesus’ birth narratives is that Matthew and Luke both offer genealogies for Jesus, but they are completely different from one another. Worse, they don’t match the genealogies listed in the Old Testament, either. And Matthew claims that there was a pattern in the number of generations between Abraham and David, between David and the Babylonian captivity, and between the Babylonian captivity and Christ. But to get this neat division, he is forced to leave out some names. In other words, that pattern didn’t happen. You can read more about that here.

The Triumphal Entry
While not as blatant as most of these other issues, when Matthew recounts Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem, he once again borrows from the Old Testament, but seems to make a mistake in his implementation. See here for more info.

Judas’ Death
Judas is well known for being the disciple that betrayed Jesus, but what’s not as well known is there are two different accounts of his death, and it’s very hard to reconcile them. According to Matthew, Judas threw his money down at the chief priests’ feet and went out and hanged himself. We’re not told where he did this. The priests then take the money, and instead of putting it back in the treasury (since it’s blood money), they buy a field to use for burying strangers. Because they bought the field with this money, it’s called the “Field of Blood.”

According to Acts, Judas bought a field with his money (we’re not told that he was remorseful), and he somehow fell down, bursting open in the middle and bleeding to death. The field was called “Field of Blood” after that because of the manner in which Judas died.

To make things more complicated, Matthew (of course) says that this happened in accordance with Jeremiah’s prophecy, but there’s nothing in Jeremiah that matches up. The closest reference comes from Zechariah, not Jeremiah.

These issues really complicate the notion of divine inspiration, and you can read more about them here.

The Crucifixion
There are several big problems with the way the gospels record the events of Jesus’ death, including the fact that different times of day are given for it, and even different days altogether. You can read more about this here.

The Resurrection
There are also a number of problems concerning the resurrection, some minor, some major. They’re too involved to get into here, but you can read all about them here and here.

The Problem of Hell
The notion of Hell is fraught with problems. It might even surprise you to learn that the Bible’s teachings on the afterlife change dramatically between the Old and New Testaments. I go into detail about Hell’s problems here, here, and here.

The Problem of Evil
Another huge problem for Christianity is the problem of evil, which I talk about here. This post also addresses the “problem of Heaven.”

The Bible’s Morality
While a number of people believe that the Christian god is the source of all morality, the Bible is actually filled with some monstrous acts that are either commanded by God, done with his consent, or carried out by him directly. I talk about some specific examples here, and I address some of the common responses to them here.

Conclusion

Kathy, there are a number of other examples that could be given, including the prophecy of Tyre that we’ve been discussing. But to me, these are some of the most significant and clear-cut problems. We could try to manufacture explanations for every one of these — some might be more believable than others. But why should we have to? If a perfect God inspired this book, why should it contain so many discrepancies? And honestly, some of these issues can’t be explained. They’re just wrong. The problems go well beyond internal contradictions and unfulfilled prophecies. There are problems of authorship, problems with the doctrines, and problems with the way the texts were written, transcribed, and compiled.

I’m sure you’ve spent your time as a Christian trying to reach those who are lost. You’ve always believed that Christianity is truth, and it’s the one thing that everyone needs. But could it be that Christianity is just as false as every other religion in the world? And if that’s the case, wouldn’t you want to leave it behind? When one is dedicated to finding truth, they have to be prepared to follow it wherever it leads. It’s not always easy or popular. It’s not even a guarantee that you’re right. All it means is that you follow the evidence where it leads to the best of your ability. If you find out that you’re wrong about something, you adjust course when the evidence dictates. If God exists, and if he’s righteous, what more could he ask for than that? I’ll close with my favorite quote:

Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.
— Marcus Aurelius

1,782 thoughts on “Letter to Kathy (the Bible Has Problems)”

  1. “No problem port. I wouldn’t take any of your comments to heart regardless. So no damage”

    Mike, I wasn’t sure if that was another jab at me, but hey! I’m glad there is no damage 🙂

    Like

  2. “Mike, I wasn’t sure if that was another jab at me, but hey! I’m glad there is no damage :)”

    Port It means I don’t take you seriously. I am neither trying to hide it or take a jab. Its just a fact.

    Like

  3. atheists believe that the entire universe happened in a split second” – the universe as is now did NOT happen in a split second, and no one believes that, but rather took 14.5 BILLION years. And I did read the Huff Post article, and discovered that he made a considerable number of mistakes in his article – I would strongly suggest that he spend far more time studying the formation of the universe before the considers writing another article about it.

    Like

  4. Mike,

    calling respect and valuing other people “wishy washing” and “wanting us all to get along” when engaging with them is like calling kindness and sacrifice “just lying down and letting people walk all over you”.

    goodnight dude,

    Like

  5. One more thing Mike,

    “Port It means I don’t take you seriously. I am neither trying to hide it or take a jab. Its just a fact.”

    Thankyou for being honest,

    but can you see how this is belittling?

    This is something a bully would say. Its one thing for someone to call someone else a d***head, but its another thing to say that you don’t take someone seriously. That is a cruel thing to say, maybe you don’t realise this….

    It is so dismissive its almost comical, but the sad thing is that when you say these things its not a joke. Do you like being taken seriously Mike?

    Like

  6. “calling respect and valuing other people “wishy washing” and “wanting us all to get along””

    I don’t even quite understand this word salad but again I was not saying that you had to disrespect anyone I just pointed out the obvious as You are right now – you can stand up fine for certain things but I don’t see you standing up for any christian truth very often unless its please get along with my atheist friends

    Like

  7. why can’t you take the stories of the OT, like Noah’s ark and Adam & Eve as allegorical?</em" – Oh, I can – it's the priests who wrote the flood story, for example, which was plagiarized from an actual Mesopotamian flood that covered only about three counties in 2900 BCE, and tried to pass it off as the truth, and the fundamental inerrantists, who claim every word of the Bible happened exactly as the Bible says it did, with whom I have a problem.

    Like

  8. “but can you see how this is belittling?

    This is something a bully would say. Its one thing for someone to call someone else a d***head, but its another thing to say that you don’t take someone seriously. That is a cruel thing to say, maybe you don’t realise this….”

    NO I don;t and I don;t accept it either. You have gone on long posts and back and forths about my style and me and show no shyness WHATSOEVER but I never see you standing up really for anything else. I don’t take that as serious for anyone and you are really telling me now that if I do not take your seriously for those objective reasons that that is belittling? I am not going to lie to you Port. I just don’t take you seriously and I gave you now the reasons like three times

    and the idea that I either take you seriously or I am a bully is just nonsense

    Like

  9. “I don’t even quite understand this word salad ”

    I’ll try again then.

    What I meant was that to say that treating another person with respect, and valuing them as a human being (made in Gods very image) is just “wanting everyone to get along” as you asserted

    is I think just as unreasonable saying that a person (like a nurse maybe) who sacrifices their time overtime for other peoples needs is just “letting people walk all over them”.

    Everyone needs grace, value and kindness. people get it from different interactions, but its something we all share.

    Like

  10. “is I think just as unreasonable saying that a person (like a nurse maybe) who sacrifices their time overtime for other peoples needs is just “letting people walk all over them”. ”

    IF a christian nurse can never do anything but nurse and when issues comes up does not stand up for the gospel then I cannot take their Christianity seriously either. I really don;t kow how else to put it . I’ve said it like five times now.

    Like

  11. Ok Mike, its my turn to call a spade a spade.

    “and the idea that I either take you seriously or I am a bully is just nonsense”

    Its one thing to say to someone that you don’t take some of their points seriously,

    or that you don’t agree with them.

    But to say that you don’t take another person seriously as a person, is cruel.

    It’s just mean Mike. I believe your self aware enough to see that it is mean.

    And I know other people on here say mean things, that do not add to the conversation or if you prefer debate. Ark and Arch have had their run ins with you. They have said things that were not necessary.

    I just don’t get why you need to be writing in this way, just make your points, let them be considered as they are, without the added meanness.

    Like

  12. Accepting the Noah’s Ark story as allegorical is not that much of a problem, it’s an Aesop fable with a moral – toe the line, or god will drown your ass —

    The Adam & Eve story, on the other hand, is not so easy to accept as an allegory, in that it plants the seeds of “original sin,” that continues to move the plot forward for the rest of the book. We humans are not perfect by any means, but I’d like to think that we have the ability to look at ourselves and see the areas in which we need to improve, and over time, make those changes, whereas the worst of us is no worse than the tyrannical god you profess to worship.

    Like

  13. Arch, that very comment goes against the notion of have a respectful conversation” – Portal, I began exactly that way, I provided evidence, at Kathy’s request, which she ignored, then later berated me for failing to provide evidence. At that point, I removed my gloves.

    Like

  14. And Mike, if your next comment is going to be that I’m just focusing on you…

    I ask the same thing for Ark, Arch, KC…

    everyone:

    just make your points, let them be considered as they are, without the added meanness.

    Arch, did taking off the gloves improve the discussion?

    Like

  15. “But to say that you don’t take another person seriously as a person, is cruel. ”

    Port I do not subscribe to your ideas on the subject and flat out reject your definitions of cruel. plus you are trying to twist what I said I never said ANYWHERE “as a person”. YOU made that up. There is no where in the entire Bible that states that everyone has to take everybody else seriously no matter what their position on things is.. God calls people at times foolish and the NT testament says certainly people should even be ostracized for their beliefs etc. I do not take you seriously as a christian because I never see you standing up for christianity in any meaningful way. Period. Its the truth of what I see and you can call that whatever you want.

    Right now your back and forth with me only proves you are not shy a all about the things you really believe in

    Like

  16. “just make your points, let them be considered as they are, without the added meanness.”

    Port I flat out reject your definition of mean or cruel so I’ll just totally disregard your comments, your directions and show you how to say goodnight for real

    Goodnight

    Like

  17. Everyone needs grace, value and kindness. people get it from different interactions, but its something we all share.” – you’re being too Christian, Portal – that’s a concept that’s far beyond Mike’s comprehension.

    Like

  18. Mike,

    “plus you are trying to twist what I said I never said ANYWHERE “as a person”. YOU made that up.”

    not trying to twist it, at least I don’t think. Maybe I was…I think it just came off that way to me

    You have given me some things to think about 🙂

    No wakkas

    Like

  19. “so I’ll just totally disregard your comments”

    case and point Mark. I don’t read every comment on the threads, but the flat out disregard comments from a particular person is not cool, just like you wouldn’t like it if someone did that to you…

    yeah your right, it took me awhile to say goodnight haha 🙂

    Like

  20. Arch, did taking off the gloves improve the discussion?” – I didn’t take off my gloves until well after Mike and Kathy had made it obvious that they had no interest in a discussion.

    Like

  21. ” Mike, you are way to funny ! The sites you just listed have mostly zero to 10 comments per post. The most I found was still under 60. No wonder you come over to the atheist sites. This is where it’s happening. ”

    @Mike, ” ROFL ……this poor deluded soul thinks nate’s blog gets more traffic then DI and UD because they moderate and don’t keep long comment sections. Dude you crack me up. I just stopped reading you right there. You have about ten regular posters here just posting over and over and frankly Nate should be happy I am here because I AND few other christians are THE ones to wake this joint up. ”

    Last 10 Posts Comment Avg.
    http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/ 14.5
    http://www.uncommondescent.com/ 3.1
    http://www.evolutionnews.org/ No comment section
    http://blog.drwile.com/ 9.7

    Nates Finding Truth 239.7

    How long of comment sections do they keep , Mike ? 60 ? That’s the highest count I found.

    Thanks for doing Nate a huge favor for being on here. I doubt he would have continued without you. NOT

    Like

  22. Mike, you and Kathy in your delusion feel that anyone questioning the NT is not or ever was a Christian. This is where both of you are flat wrong.

    What you fail to realize is that many of us already have the T-shirt you two are wearing. For many reasons we no longer can wear this T-shirt. Just like Billy Graham’s buddy , Charles Templeton who I mentioned earlier. He was an ordained minister for over 20 years but while furthering his education came to the conclusion that Christianity was false.

    This should make a rational person at least think and say why ? But then again ……………

    Like

  23. @Mike, ” I just recall now that you take objections to scripture that do not sit well with you even in the NT. As far as the NT goes that means you are not a Christian”

    Like

  24. I don’t care what anyone says about ” censorship” these two have sailed so far over the horizon that ANY response from them will instantly become meaningless tripe.

    Metaphorically screw Kathy and her censorship whinging…and Mike is well just plain silly.
    And to use that word means I have considered every other expletive.

    I would ban him without a second thought.
    If I wanted to discuss religion with the mentally ill I am sure there are institutions full of people like Mike.

    Mike…you are a sanctimonious, indoctrinated, ignorant ass. Do everyone a favour and simply sod off.

    Like

  25. @Mike,

    You have no idea whether I suffered a loss or not. You don’t get to decide that because I choose to read and comment and share in an atheist community what I did and didn’t suffer. People grieve in different ways.

    I haven’t lied about you or anybody else. All I did was have the audacity to disagree about it’s nature. Disagreeing with you about your book is lying? *shrug*

    I also thought I’d made it pretty clear in previous comments that I knew exactly why you were here. But if I were a lurking Christian I certainly wouldn’t be impressed by your brand of Christianity. It looks more like vitriol.

    Truly I didn’t think you would set me up to be the judge or jury of anything.

    You clearly cannot answer the question about death preceding any fall so instead you’ve gone on the attack instead of saying “I don’t know” as if that’s a weakness. That’s a word you don’t like. I’m not the one pretending to have it all figured out. You seem to think you do. More power to you.

    I’m not offended in the least that I can’t answer all the questions. I’m not offended in the least that you disagree. It doesn’t bother me that you believe what you believe. You came here on the offensive because you are offended that someone might have a different opinion. For all the screaming about censorship – isn’t that exactly what you’re after here? You would just as soon we all shut up and didn’t exercise our freedom to say that we once believed and now do not? You want to be on the attack all the time? Don’t be surprised when even the mildest mannered person gets enough of it.

    I know where you’re getting it that my faith wasn’t real. It says it right there in your book. So it must be true. I’ve pointed that out several time on my own blog. Because that’s what your book says we cannot possibly be surprised that that’s what you’d believe. Do you honestly not think that I know you don’t agree? That I hope to convince you? That’s just the thing, isn’t it?

    It’s not your views or beliefs I take exception to: it’s you terrible bedside manner.

    You ARE delusional…

    I have been before….I’m sure I am about some things now, but it isn’t about what your intent is. I’ve been called worse by better.

    Like

Comments are closed.