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):
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
It was actually a compliment albeit sprinkled with a little sarcasm .
LikeLike
“Yes, you disagree with my conclusions just as I disagree with yours.. so I’m here, more than willing to address the SPECIFICS.. I don’t care how long it takes.”
Noooooooo! My sister. Do not bind me to this purgatory forever. Id like to leave and they would have me gone. Free me 🙂
Besides You don’t get it though Kathy by specifics Nate Means HIS specifics he does not mean all because in almost all of his articles he doesn’t have all the facts. Because if you point out facts that ARE pertinent to his making a wrong conclusion he will tell you you are fudging and reconciling the passage and that his point stands nevertheless because his own misinterpretation of the facts would never be possible if God had made it clearer to him (even in cases where few see any issue at all). Its the ultimate I can never be truly wrong argument if you think about it.
I can never have ultimate responsibility for misunderstanding something or not doing enough research because the very fact the I misunderstood it or even had to do a certain amount of research is proof of the validity of my own argument.
Sweet self affirmation and circularity.
Its kind of like the God didn’t intervene argument. God’s guilty because he didn’t stop something from happening only in this case if if God doesn’t write it in a certain way AND make sure that cultural, linguistic and scientific terms never change across tens of centuries in fallen Human society then shucks he’s guilty for my skepticism anyway and not my own lack of study’s fault.
After all God should always bend as far back as his Omnipotence allows to make sure those who question and insult him are accommodated.
.
.
LikeLike
““If you were where I am now, you wouldn’t have left God.
Kathy, it’s comments like this that are completely and totally uncalled for. You really don’t know any of us.”
Seee? IF you guys really were true Christians why do you have an issue with Christians holding the position they do. You would understand it not talk about it being totally uncalled for. You betray no present or past understanding of being a committed vibrant Christian. Kathy is relating her experience in Christ which she views as credible, real and authentic. Why should she NOT say what she said? I’d say the exact same thing and no matter how you try to claim otherwise I am well aware of almost all the issues you bring up on this blog having debated these issues for two decades.
LikeLike
Kathy, you are so hung up on pointing out the faults and failures of “liberals/atheists” that you completely misinterpret and/or overlook many people’s comments. Need an example? You just did it to Ruth. And you’ve done it to me.
I’m sure you are sincere in your attempts to discuss your beliefs, but I think we would all be far better served if you read people’s comments with a little more care before you respond.
LikeLike
“I understand the fall perfectly well and bought into it as a believer.”
You may know it now that I have explained it to you and you said “I see your point” but I am sorry – that cat is out the bag. making the charge you did and asking the question you did about something so basic as the fall and why we sin and are sinners is pretty close to a person claiming to being a Christian and not understanding the cross
Every christian of any depth has to understand issues that are basic to Christianity or they are not one and have never been one.
LikeLike
“Actually, Ruth seems to get the basics just fine — it’s probably one of the reasons she doesn’t believe it.”
Actually Nate if you claim not understanding the doctrine of the fall of man is indication of knowing the basics then You are the same boat of not understanding the basics – so your affirmation as no merit..
LikeLike
KC – doorknobs —
LikeLike
“It was actually a compliment albeit sprinkled with a little sarcasm .’
You are a liar KK and anyone who dares to even claim you were attempting to compliment would be a liar too.
LikeLike
Mike,
you wrote:
“Every christian of any depth has to understand issues that are basic to Christianity or they are not one and have never been one.”
I have a question for you…what about kids or adults who are intellectually disabled?
I have worked with adults with intellectual disability, and they have expressed a understanding of heaven, but to the extent they understand other things is something God only knows.
Jesus asks us to come to Him as children, I believe understanding is given to those who do have a disability. The Message is powerful, yet simple I think. For example: Matthew 11:25
what are your thoughts on this?
LikeLike
@Mike,
I was asking those questions from my perspective, now, as an unbeliever. I understood and knew everything you explained. That interpretation isn’t the only one within Christianity, though. I was asking questions of you trying to figure out what you believe. Trying to have an understanding of your POV. I’ll be sure not to do that in the future.
I had a cat in a bag? When? Where? I’m not even a cat person.
LikeLike
Arch- Doorknobs Both male & female
LikeLike
KC – does the term,”Casting pearls before swine” have any meaning for you?
LikeLike
“You are a liar KK and anyone who dares to even claim you were attempting to compliment would be a liar too.”
Mike, it’s Sunday ! Did you wake up on the wrong side of the pew ? You and your Apostle Paul would certainly be experts in lying.
LikeLike
Yes Arch, it has a deeper meaning today. 🙂
LikeLike
““Is it possible for any contemporary person to believe that God , being omniscient and knowing in advance that his Garden of Eden experiment would end in disaster, nevertheless went ahead with it ? This is even more difficult to accept when one contemplates the chaotic result of it all”
Thanks. now we know that Templeon had no proper understanding. Rather than being educated as you claimed he was in fact clueless and you have presented us with proof positive of his ignorance. God went ahead with it because he wanted people to be able to choose him. An inevitable consequence of having people choose for or against you is given enough people and time someone will choose against. Saying that choice must never be offered because of that consequence is ludicrous. So rather than it being impossible to believe its easily understandable. and rather than showing Templeton was educated why he left the faith it shows he had not thought the issue through.
LikeLike
“Mike Anthony” – “click” – “delete” – GOTTA love that button!
LikeLike
“Mike, it’s Sunday ! Did you wake up on the wrong side of the pew ? You and your Apostle Paul would certainly be experts in lying.”
A liar caught in the act trying to yell “you too” – has the world ever seen that before?
LikeLike
“Thanks. now we know that Templeon had no proper understanding. Rather than being educated as you claimed he was in fact clueless and you have presented us with proof positive of his ignorance.”
Yes Mike you must be right once again about someone who attended Princeton Theological Seminary.
Mike, which Theological Seminary did you attend ?
LikeLike
“I have worked with adults with intellectual disability, and they have expressed a understanding of heaven, but to the extent they understand other things is something God only knows.”
The more I think about it, I could see that everyone I worked with would have understood the Message of the Gospel I think, even if they think differently. The Message of God sacrificing Himself and taking the punishment for us I think can be universally understood.
LikeLike
There you go again. I never called you a liar. I said you were an expert in lying. Having knowledge of. Oh but I forgot. You can read minds and know intentions. 🙂
LikeLike
Kathy, here is the video about Sathya Sai Baba’s miracles. It starts with a resurrection account (starting at 9:39)
And yet.. it’s STILL a THEORY. There’s a reason for that.. because it COULD change as we learn more.. this actually DOES happen.
Absolutely. Science is predicated on the advancement of knowledge, so theories can and do change as new evidence comes to light. Newton’s theories on gravity, for instance, have been superseded by Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. That doesn’t mean Newton was wrong or that gravity no longer exists—it just means that Einstein came up with a better explanation of how it operates.
The Theory of Evolution has withstood 150 years of scrutiny and has become the backbone of modern medicine and biology. That’s why it’s taught in science class.
LikeLike
“I was asking those questions from my perspective, now, as an unbeliever. I understood and knew everything you explained.’
oh puh-leaze. So you forgot what you believed as Christian? – a basic concept? and no you are lying you were not just asking my view you were saying something did not make sense to you and you obviously were using your understanding to make that assessment. The point you said you got AFTER I explained it was Sunday schools stuff. You clearly did not understand it and so you clearly did not understand basic Christianity.
own one or not the cat that just left? was and is out of the bag.
LikeLike
@arch
“Mike Anthony” – “click” – “delete” – GOTTA love that button!
If you don’t stop it, you’ll eventually go blind. 🙂
LikeLike
“There you go again. I never called you a liar. I said you were an expert in lying.”
Careful there sparky You twist those neurons into a pretzel and you might have a spark out.
LikeLike
Nan said:
“Kathy, you are so hung up on pointing out the faults and failures of “liberals/atheists” that you completely misinterpret and/or overlook many people’s comments. Need an example? You just did it to Ruth. And you’ve done it to me.”
I don’t know what you are referring to.. can you please point it out specifically? both examples?
“I’m sure you are sincere in your attempts to discuss your beliefs, but I think we would all be far better served if you read people’s comments with a little more care before you respond.”
Should I just insult the people I disagree with instead? .. like Arch & kc have been doing? Would that be more productive?
This is just more liberal bias.. sorry but I feel it’s extremely productive to point out bias and hypocrisy.. as it is to point out my faults.. which I don’t mind at all.. as long as it is without bias and hypocrisy/ aka double standards.
LikeLike