# Contradictions in the bible **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 20, 2011, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471 "2011-08-20T22:02:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2011, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/1 "2011-08-20T22:02:51Z")
Rather then hijack this thread: [how big is the creationist movement? - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=621044) on creationism, I am just curious how biblical literalists explain the internal contradictions of which there are many? Also since much of the bible is old testament, which they include I assume, why don’t they follow, say, the kosher laws that declare that the pig is unclean and may not be eaten? ---
**Author:** ![Crazyhorse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crazyhorse/32/31_2.png) [@Crazyhorse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crazyhorse)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2011, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/2 "2011-08-20T22:20:58Z")
> [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > I am just curious how biblical literalists explain the internal contradictions of which there are many? According to the folks over at [Christiananswers.net](http://www.christiananswers.net/q-comfort/contradictions-bible.html), it’s just a trick to weed out the unfaithful. Sort of a Divine entrapment scheme: > [@](#): > > The godly base their confidence on two truths: 1) “all [Scripture](http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/scripture.html) is given by [inspiration](http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/inspiration.html) of [God](http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/god.html)” ([2 Timothy 3:16](http://www.christiananswers.net/bible/2tim3.html#16)); and 2) an elementary rule of Scripture is that God has deliberately included seeming contradictions in [His Word](http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/wordofgod.html) to “snare” the proud. He has “hidden” things from the “wise and prudent” and “revealed them to babes” ([Luke 10:21](http://www.christiananswers.net/bible/luke10.html#21)), purposely choosing foolish things to confound the [wise](http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/wisewisdom.html) ([1 Corinthians 1:27](http://www.christiananswers.net/bible/1cor1.html#27)). > > ``` > If an ungodly man refuses to humble himself and obey the [gospel](http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/gospel.html), and instead desires to build a case against the [Bible](http://www.christiananswers.net/dictionary/bible.html), God gives him enough material to build his own gallows. > > ``` ---
**Author:** ![11811](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/1/9d8465/32.png) [@11811](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/11811)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2011, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/3 "2011-08-20T22:29:05Z")
> [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > Rather then hijack this thread: [how big is the creationist movement? - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=621044) on creationism, I am just curious how biblical literalists explain the internal contradictions of which there are many? Also since much of the bible is old testament, which they include I assume, why don’t they follow, say, the kosher laws that declare that the pig is unclean and may not be eaten? I think when you say Bible literalists, the assumption is we’re talking about Christians. The specific permission regarding kosher food is covered in the New Testament. > **[Is Eating Pork Unclean? - Shady Grove Ranch](https://shadygroveranch.net/is-pork-unclean)** > > By Bailey Cadman Occasionally sincere Bible-believers will ask us whether the Bible does not say that pork is unclean, and therefore question whether Christians ought to eat it. “Now that’s a good question,” as my brother-minister R.C. Sproul says.... I think any conflicts in the Bible are settled in favor of existing prejudices. 11811 ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2011, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/4 "2011-08-20T22:55:43Z")
Generally it involves trying to find ambiguities in the language by which they can contrive loopholes and convoluted reconciliations. Natural speech is generally not so precise and careful that it can seal off all possible ambiguities in every word, and when you have independent texts making contradictory claims, it is virtually always possible (as long as they don’t directly reference each other…i.e. Matthew saying Luke is a liar) to massage ambiguities in language or context so as to create loopholes by which the claims can be connected. Just as an exercise, you can write two mutually contradictory claims, and as long as those claims don’t reference each other, you can make them reconcile practically any of them with enough linguistic massage and construction of _ad hoc_ connective extrapolation. Or to put in another way, they employ liberal amounts of bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_is\_the\_new\_Analog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a88e4f/32.png) [@Digital\_is\_the\_new\_Analog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_is_the_new_Analog)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2011, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/5 "2011-08-21T01:47:08Z")
I’m currently reading a book called _Misquoting Jesus_, by **Bart D. Ehram**. It talks quite a bit about this. -D/a ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2011, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/6 "2011-08-21T01:58:00Z")
Ehrman has a whole book about Biblical contradictions called [Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don’t Know About Them)](http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Interrupted-Revealing-Hidden-Contradictions/dp/0061173932). ---
**Author:** ![HeyHomie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heyhomie/32/207_2.png) [@HeyHomie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HeyHomie)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2011, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/7 "2011-08-21T12:55:05Z")
> [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > Also since much of the bible is old testament, which they include I assume, why don’t they follow, say, the kosher laws that declare that the pig is unclean and may not be eaten? The short answer is that Jesus’ teachings, and the teachings of later writers (Paul mostly) in the New Testament which expand upon Jesus’ teachings, more or less indicate that Jesus made Old Testament law obsolete, and the law that governs Christians should be based on love. This, of course, means that any Christian who quotes Old Testament law as an excuse to persecute gays, but yet still eats shrimp, is being, at best, intellectually dishonest. But that’s a different thread entirely. ---
**Author:** ![psychonaut](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/psychonaut/32/4655_2.png) [@psychonaut](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychonaut)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2011, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/8 "2011-08-21T13:09:20Z")
> [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > Rather then hijack this thread: [how big is the creationist movement? - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=621044) on creationism, I am just curious how biblical literalists explain the internal contradictions of which there are many? There are a wide variety of techniques for addressing the wide variety of contradictions found in the Bible. For any given contradiction, there are probably a half dozen different excuses of varying plausibility a Biblical literalist could use to explain it away. For example, the gospels indicate that Judas hanged himself, but in Acts it’s claimed he died in a field when he fell and “burst asunder”, spilling his guts. I have heard Christians attempt to reconcile these two passages by claiming that his guts burst asunder as a consequence of his hanging himself. Other Christians claim the proper interpretation of “hanged himself” is actually “squeezed himself with great emotion”, so the gospel passage doesn’t refer to his death at all. Still others claim that Judas did indeed hang himself, but that the suicide was botched and he didn’t die then. ---
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2011, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/9 "2011-08-21T13:11:00Z")
> [@HeyHomie](#): > > The short answer is that Jesus’ teachings, and the teachings of later writers (Paul mostly) in the New Testament which expand upon Jesus’ teachings, more or less indicate that Jesus made Old Testament law obsolete, and the law that governs Christians should be based on love. > > This, of course, means that any Christian who quotes Old Testament law as an excuse to persecute gays, but yet still eats shrimp, is being, at best, intellectually dishonest. But that’s a different thread entirely. Yes, but they talk about the “absolute inerrancy” of the bible, by which they mean old and new. But I understand the various gospels also tell somewhat different stories. Anyway, the 6 day creationists are certainly quoting the old testament. Never mind the shrimp and pork eaters. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2011, 1:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/10 "2011-08-21T13:15:37Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Generally it involves trying to find ambiguities in the language by which they can contrive loopholes and convoluted reconciliations. And that concept is strengthened by the idea that God provides “mysteries” to test our faith, and anything we don’t understand or don’t agree with is evidence of the greater intelligence of a supernatural being. We aren’t intended to understand it, so quite trying and worship. Or, we are only pawns in the game of life, as Mongo said. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2011, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/11 "2011-08-21T13:31:11Z")
Contradictions are considered minor. If you believe, as [the Christian answers site](http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t003.html) says, that the Bible is [ul][_]Historically accurate,[_]Scientifically accurate,[\*]and contains fulfilled prophecies,[/ul]none of which are believed by more rationally thinking people (see the [staff reports on the Bible](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1985/who-wrote-the-bible-part-1)), then you can ignore a contradiction here and there. ---
**Author:** ![Voluble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/4af34b/32.png) [@Voluble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voluble)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2011, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/12 "2011-08-21T13:57:14Z")
> [@HeyHomie](#): > > The short answer is that Jesus’ teachings, and the teachings of later writers (Paul mostly) in the New Testament which expand upon Jesus’ teachings, more or less indicate that Jesus made Old Testament law obsolete, and the law that governs Christians should be based on love. > > This, of course, means that any Christian who quotes Old Testament law as an excuse to persecute gays, but yet still eats shrimp, is being, at best, intellectually dishonest. But that’s a different thread entirely. I don’t know much about the subject but it seems it might not be totally unreasonable that the latter teachings replace the former except in the areas where the latter is silent on a specific issue. So if prohibitions against pork were explicitly removed but those against sodomy, or whatever the Bible calls homosexuality, were not then they would still be acting consistently with their beliefs. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2011, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/13 "2011-08-21T14:49:55Z")
> [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > Yes, but they talk about the “absolute inerrancy” of the bible… Who Does? Do you know some people who make that claim? Can we get them here to answer the questions? ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2011, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/14 "2011-08-21T16:39:30Z")
> [@HeyHomie](#): > > The short answer is that Jesus’ teachings, and the teachings of later writers (Paul mostly) in the New Testament which expand upon Jesus’ teachings, more or less indicate that Jesus made Old Testament law obsolete, . Let’s say essentially those later writers. Jesus unambiguously declares in the gospels that not even a dot in the Law will change till the end of times. To which is only opposed a specific statement in specific circumstances (Jesus healing the sicks on the Sabbath and asking who wouldn’t rescue his donkey on Sabbath). One of the reasons why I think Christianism should more properly be called Paulism. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2011, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/15 "2011-08-21T17:23:02Z")
> [@Voluble](#): > > I don’t know much about the subject but it seems it might not be totally unreasonable that the latter teachings replace the former except in the areas where the latter is silent on a specific issue. So if prohibitions against pork were explicitly removed but those against sodomy, or whatever the Bible calls homosexuality, were not then they would still be acting consistently with their beliefs. Paul says the entire old covenant was rendered moot by the crucifixion. Note, though, that Jesus himself never said this. Jesus, according to the Gospels, said to keep every bit of the law and obey the pharisees. Paul also said that the “pillars” in Jerusalem (Peter, James and John) were still keeping kosher and following Jewish law. These were guys who actually knew Jesus, were in his entourage and learned directly from him. One of them (according to Paul) was his brother. If Jesus ever said that Mosaic law was no longer binding, it’s pretty odd that those guys who were closest to him, including his own brother, weren’t aware of it. Of course, Paul said he got all his information directly from Jesus’ ghost and “not from any man,” so it boils down to whether you believe Jesus’ ghost actually spoke to Paul. ---
**Author:** ![HeyHomie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heyhomie/32/207_2.png) [@HeyHomie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HeyHomie)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2011, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/16 "2011-08-21T18:11:47Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Paul says the entire old covenant was rendered moot by the crucifixion. > > Note, though, that Jesus himself never said this. Jesus, according to the Gospels, said to keep every bit of the law and obey the pharisees. Paul also said that the “pillars” in Jerusalem (Peter, James and John) were still keeping kosher and following Jewish law. These were guys who actually knew Jesus, were in his entourage and learned directly from him. One of them (according to Paul) was his brother. If Jesus ever said that Mosaic law was no longer binding, it’s pretty odd that those guys who were closest to him, including his own brother, weren’t aware of it. > > Of course, Paul said he got all his information directly from Jesus’ ghost and “not from any man,” so it boils down to whether you believe Jesus’ ghost actually spoke to Paul. There’s also Peter’s vision in Acts 10, where, more or less, Jesus told Peter to ignore Old Testament law - at least as it regards clean & unclean food, and clean & unclean persons. Of course, Jesus was making a larger point, but still… > [@Acts 10](#): > > The next day as Cornelius’s messengers were nearing the town, Peter went up on the flat roof to pray. It was about noon, 10 and he was hungry. But while a meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw the sky open, and something like a large sheet was let down by its four corners. 12 In the sheet were all sorts of animals, reptiles, and birds. 13 Then a voice said to him, “Get up, Peter; kill and eat them.” > 14 “No, Lord,” Peter declared. “I have never eaten anything that our Jewish laws have declared impure and unclean.\*\*” > > 15 But the voice spoke again: “Do not call something unclean if God has made it clean.” 16 The same vision was repeated three times. Then the sheet was suddenly pulled up to heaven. > > 17 Peter was very perplexed. What could the vision mean? Just then the men sent by Cornelius found Simon’s house. Standing outside the gate, 18 they asked if a man named Simon Peter was staying there. > > 19 Meanwhile, as Peter was puzzling over the vision, the Holy Spirit said to him, “Three men have come looking for you. 20 Get up, go downstairs, and go with them without hesitation. Don’t worry, for I have sent them.” > > 21 So Peter went down and said, “I’m the man you are looking for. Why have you come?” > > 22 They said, “We were sent by Cornelius, a Roman officer. He is a devout and God-fearing man, well respected by all the Jews. A holy angel instructed him to summon you to his house so that he can hear your message.” 23 So Peter invited the men to stay for the night. The next day he went with them, accompanied by some of the brothers from Joppa. > > 24 They arrived in Caesarea the following day. Cornelius was waiting for them and had called together his relatives and close friends. 25 As Peter entered his home, Cornelius fell at his feet and worshiped him. 26 But Peter pulled him up and said, “Stand up! I’m a human being just like you!” 27 So they talked together and went inside, where many others were assembled. > > 28 Peter told them, “You know it is against our laws for a Jewish man to enter a Gentile home like this or to associate with you. But God has shown me that I should no longer think of anyone as impure or unclean. 29 So I came without objection as soon as I was sent for. Now tell me why you sent for me. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2011, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/17 "2011-08-21T18:27:04Z")
Acts was written long after Peter and Paul were dead (and written by an author who never knew Peter), so can’t be taken as a reliable indication of anything ever claimed by Peter or as any indication that the original disciples ever stopped keeping the law. The only primary source we have about the apostles is Paul, and Paul never says they stopped keeping the law, only that he argued with them about it. ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2011, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/18 "2011-08-21T18:50:20Z")
> [@Hari\_Seldon](#): > > Rather then hijack this thread: [how big is the creationist movement? - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=621044) on creationism, I am just curious how biblical literalists explain the internal contradictions of which there are many? The Bible attempts to expand our mind to think beyond the 3 dimensions that we observe directly to the multi-dimensional space we actually live in, it is literally mind expanding. Apparent conflicts is one such way of doing this. In a 2d world 2 lines will cross if they are not parallel but that does not apply if we are in 3d. That is what God is trying to show us about our world. Try to take Him as His word and define your world around His. God comes right out and tells us things that in our word can’t seem right, such as I(Jesus) and the Father are one, The man is united to the woman and become one flesh, etc. God is telling it as it is, it just man’s conventional teachings are a bit behind. > [@](#): > > Also since much of the bible is old testament, which they include I assume, why don’t they follow, say, the kosher laws that declare that the pig is unclean and may not be eaten? There are 2 paths since the whole mess with the serpent in the garden. The path of rules that lead to sin and death and the path of Love that leads to life. These are the 2 paths we get to chose to live under, which is basically broken down OT and NT, but there is much overlapping, such as King David was under the new covenant and Paul imposed OT rules such as women not speaking. Jesus came to set the people free, which means the OT laws are nailed to tree, they have no enforcement (death where is your sting). And they will get in the way of doing God’s work. ---
**Author:** ![gatorslap](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gatorslap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gatorslap)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2011, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/19 "2011-08-22T05:53:20Z")
My copy of the Bible quotes Jesus as saying “Do not suppose that I came to throw down the law or the prophets – I did not come to throw down, but to fulfill.” (Matthew 5:17) Once something has been fulfilled, it is no longer in effect. Jesus fulfilled the laws of the Old Testament, therefore they are no longer binding on mankind. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2011, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471/20 "2011-08-22T06:00:57Z")
He didn’t say anything like that. You’re making a rather strained semantic stretch. You’'re also ignoring the fact that in the very next verse Matthew has Jesus say this: For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Have Heaven and Earth passed away yet? if not, then Jesus says the law is still the Law. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/contradictions-in-the-bible/593471.md?page=2)