Are there contradictions in the Bible?

[OnTheFence]

All my life I have been told, and believed that the Bible is the word of God and that it contained no contradictions yet recently an atheist friend of mine told me to read the first two chapters of Genesis and to take special note that the order of creation in chapter one is different from the order in chapter two. I assumed he was wrong until I read it and sure enough, in Genesis chapter one, the animals were created before man and then in Genesis chapter 2 it's the other way around. Can anyone shed some light on this? Is this a contradiction or is there more information that I should be aware of?

 

[Blazin Bones]

First, neither account claims to be 100% exact. Second In Genesis two it reads that "when no bush of the feild was in was yet in the land and no small plant of the feild had yet sprung up." This does not indicate order necessarily but rather that God had not put any plants in the region where we was going to place Eden and Adam and Eve.

 

[Guest]

We should be careful when reading ancient documents. Oddly, there seems to be agreement between atheists and the more conservative brands of Christianity that the Bible must be read in a strict literalist manner. What they are often unaware of are their own modern conceptions being reading into their "strict literalist" interpretation of the Bible. Thus, modern conceptions of science, logic, evidence, and so on are expected of an ancient document. This is faulty if our goal is a "literal" understanding. That is, understanding the document as it was intended to be understood or as it would have been understood by those during the time period.

Thus, I would pose the following question. Did the writer(s) and/or editor(s) of the Genesis creation accounts follow a worldview in which the chronological record was expected to be followed?

 

[handy]

Hi OnTheFence, welcome to the forum.

No, the differing accounts of creation in Genesis do not reflect a contradiction. The two chapters simply emphasize different aspects of the creation process.

Genesis 1 through to Genesis 2:3 is an outline of the order of creation. Genesis 2:4-6 are a summary of that outline.

The rest of Genesis 2 isn't a different creation story. Rather it's a detailed account of how God created Adam and Eve. God had formed the animals before Adam and Eve, and in Genesis 2 we see it emphasized that God had formed the animals out of the ground and then He brought them to Adam for naming.

Look to Genesis 1 for the order of creation. Look to Genesis 2 for the emphasis as to why man holds dominion over the earth.

 

[Fembot]

All my life I have been told, and believed that the Bible is the word of God and that it contained no contradictions yet recently an atheist friend of mine told me to read the first two chapters of Genesis and to take special note that the order of creation in chapter one is different from the order in chapter two. I assumed he was wrong until I read it and sure enough, in Genesis chapter one, the animals were created before man and then in Genesis chapter 2 it's the other way around. Can anyone shed some light on this? Is this a contradiction or is there more information that I should be aware of?

First of all, what are you listening to an atheist for? Second, there appears to be two creation accounts. However, the second mention is an expansion on what is mentioned in chapter one. There aren't two different stories but different parts of the one account. No contradictions exist.

And so we should, "trust in the Lord with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths. "(Proverbs 3:5-6)

Thank you Lord

 

[Fembot]

Hi OnTheFence, welcome to the forum.

No, the differing accounts of creation in Genesis do not reflect a contradiction. The two chapters simply emphasize different aspects of the creation process.

Genesis 1 through to Genesis 2:3 is an outline of the order of creation. Genesis 2:4-6 are a summary of that outline.

The rest of Genesis 2 isn't a different creation story. Rather it's a detailed account of how God created Adam and Eve. God had formed the animals before Adam and Eve, and in Genesis 2 we see it emphasized that God had formed the animals out of the ground and then He brought them to Adam for naming.

Look to Genesis 1 for the order of creation. Look to Genesis 2 for the emphasis as to why man holds dominion over the earth.

Thanks handy!

 

[jasoncran]

We should be careful when reading ancient documents. Oddly, there seems to be agreement between atheists and the more conservative brands of Christianity that the Bible must be read in a strict literalist manner. What they are often unaware of are their own modern conceptions being reading into their "strict literalist" interpretation of the Bible. Thus, modern conceptions of science, logic, evidence, and so on are expected of an ancient document. This is faulty if our goal is a "literal" understanding. That is, understanding the document as it was intended to be understood or as it would have been understood by those during the time period.

Thus, I would pose the following question. Did the writer(s) and/or editor(s) of the Genesis creation accounts follow a worldview in which the chronological record was expected to be followed?

i like ur explanation of that as that's how i see that, and if u look at the jewish canon the historical books 1 and 2 samuel and 1 and 2 kings are 1 and 2 chronicles are with the books ezra,daniel,esther,nehemaiah. if i remember correctly, unlike our bible that has some of those books before psalms and daniel after.

Jason

 

[John]

I've never come across any contradictions in my travels

 

[Paidion]

What's the big deal if there are contradictions in the Bible? Will you lose your faith, if there are such contradictions? Is your faith in the Bible? Or is your faith in Christ?

I think there are some contradictions in the Bible, but because many people are alarmed at the very idea, they go to all sorts of lengths to try to show that they are not "true" contradictions.

For now, I will relate just one of these. I'm sure some one will come up with an ingenious explanation to show that these verses are in perfect harmony.

Who moved David to take a census?

2 Samuel 24 RSV:
1 ¶ Again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, "Go, number Israel and Judah."
2 So the king said to Joab and the commanders of the army, who were with him, "Go through all the tribes of Israel, from Dan to Beersheba, and number the people, that I may know the number of the people."
3 But Joab said to the king, "May the LORD your God add to the people a hundred times as many as they are, while the eyes of my lord the king still see it; but why does my lord the king delight in this thing?"
4 But the king’s word prevailed against Joab and the commanders of the army. So Joab and the commanders of the army went out from the presence of the king to number the people of Israel.

1 Chronicles 21 RSV
1 ¶ Satan stood up against Israel, and incited David to number Israel.
2 So David said to Joab and the commanders of the army, "Go, number Israel, from Beersheba to Dan, and bring me a report, that I may know their number."
3 But Joab said, "May the LORD add to his people a hundred times as many as they are! Are they not, my lord the king, all of them my lord’s servants? Why then should my lord require this? Why should he bring guilt upon Israel?"
4 But the king’s word prevailed against Joab. So Joab departed and went throughout all Israel, and came back to Jerusalem.

You will notice the wording of corresponding verses is very similar. This is also the case with succeeding verses. So there's no doubt that the same event is being recorded in both books.

Surely there is a vast diffence between being incited by the LORD and being incited by Satan.

 

[Guest]

i like ur explanation of that as that's how i see that, and if u look at the jewish canon the historical books 1 and 2 samuel and 1 and 2 kings are 1 and 2 chronicles are with the books ezra,daniel,esther,nehemaiah. if i remember correctly, unlike our bible that has some of those books before psalms and daniel after.

To be honest, my perspective is not too original. The idea of considering culture is an element to the historical-grammatical method of biblical interpretation. This method is promoted by a number of conservative Christian scholars (e.g., Craig Blomberg, Gordon Fee, Norman Geisler, and so on).

What I think tends to be a real shame within the Christian faith, is too many are unwilling to reevaluate their accepted position on given passages. They are convinced they have the true understanding, and the seeking of answers stops. I think such an approach is degrading to God and the Bible. Anyway, I'm disgressing.

So, I recommend an exploration of what the passages meant to the original readers and/or writers would be worthy of a search, and first trying to understand it within that context before we can begin to understand it within our own.

 

[Guest]

What's the big deal if there are contradictions in the Bible? Will you lose your faith, if there are such contradictions? Is your faith in the Bible? Or is your faith in Christ?

I agree. I think Christians place too much stock in the doctrine of inerrancy. It is unnecessary for salvation, and, to the best of my knowledge, it is not an element of orthodox Christianity. (Small o.) It is a problem when we make certain doctrines necessary elements to Christian belief because that necessity for certainty can be the unraveling to a faith.

Further, most formulations of the doctrine of inerrancy reflect the "original autographs" and not necessarily the copies we hold in our hands. I think it's a great disservice to not communicate this point. I have no problem with arguing for confidence in the the Bible's we hold today, but I am really weary of arguing in favor of their inerrancy.

Well, unless it's the King James of course. ;)

 

[handy]

I don't think that there are any substantive contradictions in the Bible. I think there are different viewpoints of certain events and also what best can be described as "typos", unimportant errors that do not change the message or content of the Bible at all.

I'm sure some one will come up with an ingenious explanation to show that these verses are in perfect harmony.

OK, I'll bite! But I don't know how ingenious this is, because it seems all rather straightforward to me:

God uses Satan as a tool just as easily as He used Judas. After all, did He not use Satan to test Job? God is the ultimate inciter of David, but He used Satan to test David in this. The message in both accounts is unchanged though, David had angered God, and I'm really not sure in what way, and God tested David by using Satan to incite David to do a census. Joab was a voice of conscience providing that way of escape the 2 Corinthians 10:13 talks about, but David nonetheless sinned against the Lord.


I always make it a point to view the Bible as fully inerrant because it spurs me onward to deeper understanding of Scripture. I have learned a great deal, and uncovered many wonderful gems in the Word all while reconciling "contradictions". Sometimes I think God allowed these things in the Scriptures just to see if we trust Him enough to believe that He is able to keep His message to us intact.

 

[jasoncran]

I don't think that there are any substantive contradictions in the Bible. I think there are different viewpoints of certain events and also what best can be described as "typos", unimportant errors that do not change the message or content of the Bible at all.

I'm sure some one will come up with an ingenious explanation to show that these verses are in perfect harmony.

OK, I'll bite! But I don't know how ingenious this is, because it seems all rather straightforward to me:

God uses Satan as a tool just as easily as He used Judas. After all, did He not use Satan to test Job? God is the ultimate inciter of David, but He used Satan to test David in this. The message in both accounts is unchanged though, David had angered God, and I'm really not sure in what way, and God tested David by using Satan to incite David to do a census. Joab was a voice of conscience providing that way of escape the 2 Corinthians 10:13 talks about, but David nonetheless sinned against the Lord.


I always make it a point to view the Bible as fully inerrant because it spurs me onward to deeper understanding of Scripture. I have learned a great deal, and uncovered many wonderful gems in the Word all while reconciling "contradictions". Sometimes I think God allowed these things in the Scriptures just to see if we trust Him enough to believe that He is able to keep His message to us intact.

in the book of John does it not say that Word was god, if Jesus is the Word of God in a sense( the message not every single copy of the bible ) then if it contradicts itself then wouldn't Jesus be a liar?

 

[Ret]

All my life I have been told, and believed that the Bible is the word of God and that it contained no contradictions yet recently an atheist friend of mine told me to read the first two chapters of Genesis and to take special note that the order of creation in chapter one is different from the order in chapter two. I assumed he was wrong until I read it and sure enough, in Genesis chapter one, the animals were created before man and then in Genesis chapter 2 it's the other way around. Can anyone shed some light on this? Is this a contradiction or is there more information that I should be aware of?

First of all, what are you listening to an atheist for? Second, there appears to be two creation accounts. However, the second mention is an expansion on what is mentioned in chapter one. There aren't two different stories but different parts of the one account. No contradictions exist.

And so we should, "trust in the Lord with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths. "(Proverbs 3:5-6)

Thank you Lord

Appreciate the question OTF, and the observation Fem. There have been times when things like this puzzled my own belief. My latest observation, rather revelation of the differences between Gen 1 and Gen 2 is the point that Gen 1 - 2:3 is an over-all design of how the entire plan of salvation (day) is bound by the darkness (night) of time, wrath, and law for 6 mornings and evenings, with the 7th day - having no morning and evening as God is in control and 'night' flees away! A wonderful study.

Gen 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created,
in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, KJV

One 'day' with God, contains all the generations of the heavens and of the earth...
Reality mixed with symbolism starts in Gen 2:4 and continues through Revelation 22.

 

[Fembot]

All my life I have been told, and believed that the Bible is the word of God and that it contained no contradictions yet recently an atheist friend of mine told me to read the first two chapters of Genesis and to take special note that the order of creation in chapter one is different from the order in chapter two. I assumed he was wrong until I read it and sure enough, in Genesis chapter one, the animals were created before man and then in Genesis chapter 2 it's the other way around. Can anyone shed some light on this? Is this a contradiction or is there more information that I should be aware of?

First of all, what are you listening to an atheist for? Second, there appears to be two creation accounts. However, the second mention is an expansion on what is mentioned in chapter one. There aren't two different stories but different parts of the one account. No contradictions exist.

And so we should, "trust in the Lord with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths. "(Proverbs 3:5-6)

Thank you Lord

Appreciate the question OTF, and the observation Fem. There have been times when things like this puzzled my own belief. My latest observation, rather revelation of the differences between Gen 1 and Gen 2 is the point that Gen 1 - 2:3 is an over-all design of how the entire plan of salvation (day) is bound by the darkness (night) of time, wrath, and law for 6 mornings and evenings, with the 7th day - having no morning and evening as God is in control and 'night' flees away! A wonderful study.

Gen 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created,
in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, KJV

One 'day' with God, contains all the generations of the heavens and of the earth...
Reality mixed with symbolism starts in Gen 2:4 and continues through Revelation 22.

You just opened up my eyes to something! I'm going to reflect on this.

Gen 1 - 2:3 is an over-all design of how the entire plan of salvation (day) is bound by the darkness (night) of time, wrath, and law for 6 mornings and evenings, with the 7th day - having no morning and evening as God is in control and 'night' flees away!

Thank you

 

[samuel]

The only contradictions in the Bible, are those that lie between some peoples ears.

 

[handy]

I don't think that there are any substantive contradictions in the Bible. I think there are different viewpoints of certain events and also what best can be described as "typos", unimportant errors that do not change the message or content of the Bible at all.

I'm sure some one will come up with an ingenious explanation to show that these verses are in perfect harmony.

OK, I'll bite! But I don't know how ingenious this is, because it seems all rather straightforward to me:

God uses Satan as a tool just as easily as He used Judas. After all, did He not use Satan to test Job? God is the ultimate inciter of David, but He used Satan to test David in this. The message in both accounts is unchanged though, David had angered God, and I'm really not sure in what way, and God tested David by using Satan to incite David to do a census. Joab was a voice of conscience providing that way of escape the 2 Corinthians 10:13 talks about, but David nonetheless sinned against the Lord.


I always make it a point to view the Bible as fully inerrant because it spurs me onward to deeper understanding of Scripture. I have learned a great deal, and uncovered many wonderful gems in the Word all while reconciling "contradictions". Sometimes I think God allowed these things in the Scriptures just to see if we trust Him enough to believe that He is able to keep His message to us intact.

in the book of John does it not say that Word was god, if Jesus is the Word of God in a sense( the message not every single copy of the bible ) then if it contradicts itself then wouldn't Jesus be a liar?

That's the way I look at it. I'm not speaking of very single copy of the bible or every translation, but rather the substantive message and truths that God teaches through His word. I'm not so sure we can equate Jesus as the Word with the Bible, but nonetheless we know for a fact that the Holy Spirit inspired the writers of the Bible. I cannot accept that the Holy Spirit wouldn't see to it that not only was the texts correct, but that they remained correct.

Again, I'm not speaking of truly unimportant stuff like whether or not Josiah was 8 or 18 when he began his reign as king. Doesn't matter and who cares. An issue like the census of Israel and who instigated it, well now to me that was worth pursing simply because of there is a difference if something was done because of God or of Satan. Some try to state that Jesus Himself is a contradiction of the God of the Old Testament. It's claims like these in which the Christian should study and reconcile, because that claim puts the entire Christian faith on line.

 

[jasoncran]

if the bible is full of or some contradictions then all manner of sin justifactions can come in as in homosexuality because that jesus never spoke on that issue, only paul,john, and some of the ot prophets did.or abortions,drugs(which is in the book of revalations and other nt books in the from the greek word pharmacia)

do u all see that,

 

[Guest]

jasoncran,

I understand what you are arguing, but I disagree. Sin justifications do not necessarily follow from an errant Bible.

 

[jasoncran]

jasoncran,

I understand what you are arguing, but I disagree. Sin justifications do not necessarily follow from an errant Bible.

u see, if we were to say that jesus never in the ot address these sins, homosexality,drug use and others, but only whats writen by the apostles that he said, they being human and not god, then they have hatred or erroneus believs them selves then how can the bible be in allignment, i have seen this done and that why i say that, and though jesus didn't say
it directly about homosexuality and drug use the apostle john did in a vision of the new jerusalem.

i aggree to disagree with u