The HyperTexts

Bible Contradictions and False Prophecies
by Michael R. Burch

Is the Bible the infallible, inerrant word of God, or does the Bible contradict itself? It is quite clear that the Bible contradicts itself, repeatedly. This is because different human beings with very different beliefs wrote the Bible over many centuries. Here are some rather obvious examples "from the beginning." The first three chapters of Genesis contradict themselves, they contradict reality and science, and they contradict the Christian beliefs that God is all-loving, all-compassionate, all-merciful, all-wise and all-just. Nothing could be further from the truth...

• There are two contradictory creation accounts: Genesis 1:1 to 2:3, and Genesis 2:4-25.

• In the first creation account, trees and other plants were growing before the sun was created! We know that didn't happen. (Genesis 1:11-19)

• In the first creation account there were seven days of creation, with male and female humans created at the same time, with no rib removal, and both being given dominion over the earth, as equals, together. (Genesis 1:26-31) However, the "dominion" thing would prove to be a false prophecy, since human beings have never had dominion over viruses and other disease-inducing microbes, or mosquitoes and tse-tse flies, etc.

• In the first creation account the order is (1) a watery earth which is somehow lit without a sun; (2) the sky as a solid transparent dome ("firmament") which separates the water of the seas from the rainwater above because the ancient Hebrews did not understand evaporation; (3) land with trees and other plants but still no sun to make anything grow; (4) the sun, moon and stars, which are tiny lights embedded in the solid dome of the sky and are not needed for trees and other plants to grow; (5) birds and fish; (6) land animals and humans; (7) a day of rest. (Genesis 1:1 to 2:3)

• In the second creation account there is a single day of creation in which the creation order is (1) Adam first, out of the dust of the ground; (2) trees, but only in the Garden of Eden; (3) a single river to water the Garden of Eden which forked into four named rivers; (4) animals, to be helpers for Adam; (5) Eve last, from a manly rib, to be his helper (a mite chauvinistic, no?). Thus the second order of creation is completely different from the first. (Genesis 2:4-25)

• Both biblical orders of creation are clearly wrong. We now know the proper order: (1) the oldest stars, (2) our sun, (3) the earth, (4) the moon, (5) sea life, (6) land life, (7) birds after a long process of evolution from dinosaurs, (8) many species not created all at one time but appearing and disappearing over an enormous span of time, (9) human beings.

• Apart from the obvious fact that the writers of Genesis were clueless about the order of creation, there is a huge contradiction in the role of women. If the first creation account, men and women were created simultaneously, as equals, and were both given dominion over the earth. In the second creation account, Eve was only created as a helper and an afterthought, after none of the animals were found to be suitable "helpers" for Adam.

• Genesis claims Adam and Eve became like God, knowing right from wrong, when in reality the biblical God did not know right from wrong. Rather, Jehovah became the first murderer when he slaughtered animals to give their skins to Adam and Eve as clothes. Why didn't he use his superpowers to give them clothes of cotton, wool, or some other nonlethal fiber? Does God not grok that it's wrong to murder animals when their deaths can easily be avoided? Furthermore, Jehovah unjustly murdered Adam, Eve and all their descendents (us) when he had denied Adam and Eve the knowledge of good and evil, meaning they couldn't have known it was "wrong" to eat the forbidden fruit. That was like putting poisoned milk before two babies and warning them that it would be "wrong" to drink the milk, when they couldn't understand the concept of "wrong" any more than than two kittens. Good parents would not fail to baby-proof the lethal milk, or fruit. And why on earth did Jehovah sentence all the innocent animals to suffer and die when they didn't eat the forbidden fruit and didn't gain the knowledge of good and evil? According to the logic of Genesis the animals should have remained immortal. Throughout the Garden of Eden account, the biblical God never displays a sense of justice and does not know right from wrong himself. (Genesis 3:21)

• The Genesis creation account accuses human beings of being responsible for suffering and death entering the world. But the fossil record proves that trillions of animals suffered and died long before human beings existed. Paul's gospel, which he claimed to have received directly from God, claimed that Jesus was the "second Adam" sent to "atone" for the sin of the "first Adam." But the real Creator would have known there was no perfect Garden of Eden and no "fall." Obviously, Paul either lied about the source of his gospel, or someone else made that bogus claim later, pretending to be Paul.

• In any case the Bible begins with a series of obvious contradictions that cannot be reconciled.

Other Bible Contradictions

God is the author of evil (Amos 3:6, Isaiah 45:7, Lamentations 3:38, Jeremiah 18:11, Ezekiel 20:25) ... but ... God is not the author of evil (many other verses).

God prohibits human sacrifice (Leviticus 18:21) ... but ... The "spirit of God came upon" Jephthah and he murdered his daughter as a burnt offering (Judges 11:30-31).

God will not keep his anger forever (Jeremiah 3:12) ... but ... according to the same prophet God will keep his anger forever (Jeremiah 17:4).

Don't let the sun go down on your wrath ... but ... The biblical God will harbor his wrath against nonbelievers and many Christians (the goats) forever.

God knows everything and has perfect knowledge of the future (many verses) ... but ... God had to murder Job's children to see if he would remain faithful (Job 1:1-19).

"No man hath seen God at any time." (John 1:18) ... but … "I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." (Genesis 32:30)

There is only one God (1 Corinthians 8:6 and many other verses) ... but ... There are other gods (Deuteronomy 10:17, Psalm 97:7, Psalm 86:8, 2 Chronicles 2:5, several others).

There is only one God ... but ... God is a judge among the Gods (Psalms 82:1).

God is perfect and never makes mistakes ... but ... God repented that he had created the earth (Genesis 6:6).

With God all things are possible (Matthew 19:26) ... but ... God could not defeat primitive men with iron chariots (Judges 1:19).

Noah was a just man and "perfect" in his generations, so God saved him ... but ... Noah was a drunkard who engaged in some sort of nude perversion with his son. (Genesis 9:20-27)

God commands Noah to bring two of every kind of animal onto the ark (Genesis 6:19), then changes his mind to sevens of the clean animals (Genesis 7:2) ... but ... Noah brings just twos of the animals after all (Genesis 7:9). And what did the predators eat for the year they were on the ark, pray tell?

God created the great flood to purge the world of wickedness ... but ... He failed because the giant Nephilim, who make men seem like grasshoppers, somehow survived. (Numbers 13:33)

“God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man.” (James 1:13) ... but “And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham.” (Genesis 22:1)

Jealousy is a sin (Galatians 5:19-20) ... but ... The biblical God is a very jealous God, and thus a sinner (Exodus 34:14).

“He that goeth down to the grave shall come up no more. ” (Job 7:9) ... but ... “The hour is coming, in which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth.” (John 5:28-29)

Abraham was justified by faith, not works (Romans 4:2) ... but ... Abraham was justified by his works (James 2:21).

Abraham had only one son (Genesis 22:2) ... but ... in the same book Abraham had two sons (Genesis 4:22), then later six other sons (Genesis 25:1).

Moses received the Ten Commandments at Mount Sinai (Exodus 31:18) ... but ... it was actually at Mount Horeb (1 Kings 8:9, 2 Chronicles 5:10, Malachi 4:4).

Jesus died before the veil of the temple was rent (Matthew 27:50-51, Mark 15:37-38) ... but ... he died after the veil of the temple was rent (Luke 23:45-46). And how would anyone watching the crucifixion know the exact moment the veil was rent, or vice versa?

One woman went to the tomb (Matthew and John) ... but ... two women went to the tomb (Mark) ... but ... three women went to the tomb (Luke).

The women went to the tomb during the day (Mark) ... but ... it was at night (John).

The women said nothing to anyone because they were bewildered and afraid (Mark 16:8) ... but ... they immediately ran to tell the disciples (Matthew 28:8).

Of the male disciples only Peter went to the tomb (Luke) ... but ... it was Peter and John in a footrace (John) ... but ... none of the male disciples even knew that the tomb was empty and did not go there at all (the original version of Mark).

The disciples believed the women's report (Matthew) ... but ... they did not believe (Mark and Luke).

Jesus appeared to all the disciples the first time (Matthew) ... but it was only to two of them (Mark and Luke) ... but it was to ten of them (John) ... but it was to only one of them (1 Corinthians).

Jesus did not ascend into heaven (Matthew and John) ... but he ascended in Galilee (Mark) ... but it was in Bethany (Luke) ... but it was on Mount Olivet (Acts).

Herod wanted to kill John the Baptist (Matthew 14:5) ... but ... Herod knew John the Baptist was just and holy, and welcomed him gladly (Mark 6:20).

Jesus's grandfather via Joseph was Jacob (Matthew 1:1) ... but ... Jesus's grandfather via Joseph was Heli (Luke 3:23).

Saul committed suicide by falling on his own sword (1 Samuel 31:4-6) ... but ... an Amalekite killed him (2 Samuel 1:1-16).

“Cursed be he that lieth with his sister.” (Deuteronomy 27:22) ... but ... God blessed Abraham, who married his sister — his father’s daughter. (Genesis 20:11-12, Genesis 17:15-16)

“The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father.” (Ezekiel 18:20) ... but ... “I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation.” (Exodus 20:5)

The evangelist Paul, who wrote much of the New Testament, gave a clear teaching about women being able to speak in church, but another Bible writer (pretending to be Paul) completely contradicted him by saying women could not speak in church, in the same book, 1 Corinthians!

Paul considered himself to be a prophet: "For I [Paul] would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ." (Galatians 1:11) Furthermore, Paul said: "If anyone thinks he is a prophet or spiritual, let him recognize that the things which I write to you are the Lord's commandment. But if anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized." (1 Corinthians 4:37-38 ) So Paul clearly described himself as a prophet and said anyone who contradicted him was not to be recognized as a prophet. But we will find undeniable evidence of such false prophets in the Bible itself. One false prophet even put lying words in Jesus's mouth, saying Jesus would murder children for their mother's sins! And one of those "sins" was something Paul said was not a sin at all: eating foods offered to idols. Both Jesus and Paul said Christians can eat anything they please. Paul specifically said Christians could eat foods offered to idols. So why would a false prophet, on the pages of the Bible, not only contradict Jesus and Paul, but pretend to speak for Jesus and have him threaten to murder children for a sin they did not commit themselves, which was not even a sin according to Jesus and Paul? This will be explained shortly, citing book, chapter and verse, but first let's quickly look at some of the contradictions in the Bible in more detail ...

In 1 Corinthians 11, Paul clearly says women are allowed to pray and prophesy in church. In this passage, Paul is speaking about proper behavior in church: how to dress, how to take communion properly, how to pray and prophesy, etc., and he says: "But every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is the same as having her head shaved. For if a woman does not cover her head, she might as well have her hair cut off; but if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then she should cover her head." (1 Corinthians 11:5-6)

Here, Paul is saying that women can be prophets, and pray publicly, as long as they cover their heads. But in the same book a few chapters later, someone pretending to be Paul contradicts him, saying: "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church." (1 Corinthians 14:34-35)

How can women prophesy if they are not allowed to speak? There are other Bible verses attributed to Paul in which he clearly saw women as being leaders of the church. For instance, he called Junia one of the foremost apostles, and Junia is a female name. But there are other verses attributed to Paul in which he said that women should not speak in church, or teach. So clearly there are contradictions. The simple explanation is that these books started out as letters, and as the letters were copied, men other than Paul added their opinions. But their opinions sometimes contradicted what Paul said, and according to him, what they said should thus not be recognized. Therefore, certain Bible verses should not be recognized by Christians and the Bible is not "infallible" or "inerrant" according to Paul.

Another example of one writer contradicting another in the Bible has to do with hair length. In the same chapter we have been discussing, someone pretending to speak for Paul, or adding to his original letter, says that it is a shame for a man to have long hair due to "nature" (1 Corinthians 11:14). However, this contradicts not only a clear teaching of the Bible, but something that Paul did himself. In the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament), the men consecrated to God, the Nazirites, never cut their hair. Judges like Samson and prophets like Samuel never cut their hair. It seems likely that John the Baptist was a Nazirite, because he didn't drink wine, and that was another Nazirite vow.

It seems impossible that the writer of the "no long hair" verse was Paul, because Paul was trained as a Rabbi and would have known about the Nazirites. In fact, Paul even took a Nazirite vow when he returned to the Jerusalem temple from his missionary work abroad. As part of the vow he would not have drunk wine or cut his hair.

Once again there is a clear contradiction, with the rest of the Bible teaching that men can have long hair, and never cut it, and that this is not "shameful" but a sign of consecration to God. Samson's long hair was not only a sign of his consecration to God, but the source of his strength, according to the Bible. How could a Christian make such a mistake? We have to remember that during the period of time that Paul's epistles were being copied and distributed, many Christians lived far from Israel, were unfamiliar with Jewish traditions, and had never read the Old Testament. Why? Because they didn't know the Hebrew language, the scrolls were rare and expensive, and with no spaces between the words and the massive scrolls being unwieldy to unroll, it would have been very difficult even for someone who could read Hebrew to look anything up. We are spoiled with concordances and online search tools. Very few gentile Christians would have had the opportunity to even see a Hebrew Bible, much less use one for research. So the gentile Christians who copied and added to Paul's instructions made mistakes. Serious mistakes, such as saying that women should not speak in church.

A third example of one prophet refuting another prophet is rather ironic. The prophet Ezekiel (or a Levite scribe pretending to be Ezekiel) in Ezekiel chapters 26-28 predicted that Nebuchadnezzar would sack, despoil and destroy Tyre, leaving it uninhabited forever. But he was later refuted by another prophet, himself! Ezekiel (or someone pretending to be Ezekiel) admitted that his earlier prediction had been false, since after many years of trying, Nebuchadnezzar had been unable to sack Tyre (probably because it was an island fortress with a formidable navy). So the prophet (or Levite scribe), speaking in Ezekiel chapters 29-32, predicted that Nebuchadnezzar would instead defeat and destroy Egypt, leaving it a completely uninhabited wasteland for 40 years, devoid of all animals and with all Egyptians going into captivity. But that never happened either, as Egypt has been continuously populated by human beings and animals ever since the prediction. Nebuchadnezzar never invaded Egypt successfully and certainly never conquered Egypt or left it an uninhabited waste. The prophet who made these false predictions was refuted by two biblical figures, since both Jesus and Paul visited Tyre, which remains populated to this day, and because Jesus and his family sought refuge from Herod in Egypt, which also remains populated to this day.

The prophet who predicted that Nebuchadnezzar would sack Tyre admitted his false prophecy, saying:

Mortal, King Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon made his army labour hard against Tyre; every head was made bald and every shoulder was rubbed bare; yet neither he nor his army got anything from Tyre to pay for the labour that he had expended against it. Therefore, thus says the Lord God: I will give the land of Egypt to King Nebuchadrezzar of Babylon; and he shall carry off its wealth and despoil it and plunder it; and it shall be the wages for his army. I have given him the land of Egypt as his payment for which he laboured, because they worked for me, says the Lord God. (Ezekiel 29:18-20)

But the prophet was wrong again, because Nebuchadnezzar never plundered Egypt either.

Perhaps the most obvious refutation of one prophet by another occurs between the Levites, who prophesied that they would always make sacrifices in the temple (Jeremiah 33:18), and prophets who said that God did want sacrifices at all, but rather desired compassion and justice, predicting that the Israelites would lose the land and go into captivity if they kept up their evil ways. Six Hebrew prophets said that God did not want sacrifices and Jesus quoted two of them.

" ... nor will the Levitical priests ever fail to have a man to stand before me continually to offer burnt offerings, to burn grain offerings and to present sacrifices." (Jeremiah 33:18)

The prophecies of the Levites that they would always offer sacrifices in the temple, and that an heir of David would always occupy the throne of Israel, were soon refuted. The temple was destroyed. The Levites went into captivity. Ten of the tribes of Israel were lost forever. For hundreds of years there were no sacrifices because the temple did not exist. Then Herod rebuilt the temple and the sacrifices resumed. But almost immediately the temple became corrupt, and it was destroyed again, never to be rebuilt. So once again the prophets of the Bible disagreed with each other. In this case, the Levites were obviously false prophets.

The Bible has many false prophecies that can never come true, such as Nebuchadnezzar leaving Tyre and Egypt uninhabited wastes. Nebuchadnezzar is long dead and can never fulfill those prophecies. The writers of the Bible were wrong about many things and there is no reason to believe false prophets. In fact, the Bible clearly says that if a prophet makes even one incorrect prediction, no one should believe him!

Isaiah 17:1-2 prophesies that Damascus would cease to be a city and become a heap of ruins, to remain forever desolate. Yet some 27 centuries after the prediction was made, Damascus is one of the oldest cities in the world and is still going strong. The Bible confirms this, since Paul had his vision of Jesus Christ on the road to Damascus, and there was an early Christian church in Damascus.

Jeremiah 25:11 predicted that the Israelites would be captives in Babylon for 70 years, and 2 Chronicles 36:20-21 portrays that prophecy as having been fulfilled. But the Israelites were taken into captivity by the Chaldeans when Jerusalem fell in 586 B.C. and Cyrus of Persia issued an order in 538 B.C. allowing them to return from Babylon to Judah. Thus, the Babylonian captivity lasted only about 48 years.

Examples of other unfulfilled Old Testament prophecies include:

(1) The Israelites will occupy the land from the Nile to the Euphrates (Genesis 15:18); this never happened.

(2) The Israelites will never lose their land and shall be disturbed no more (II Samuel 7:10); in fact, ten of the Israelite tribes were lost forever, and the remaining tribes of Judah and Benjamin lost their land to the Roman empire. The Romans appointed foreigners to be kings over the land of Judah. King Herod was not a Jew but an Imudean appointed to rule by the Romans.

(3) King David’s throne and kingdom shall be established forever (II Samuel 7:16); but his kingdom fell apart shortly after his death and there were no more Israelite kings of Israel.

(4) No uncircumcised person will ever enter Jerusalem (Isaiah 52:1); but of course Jerusalem was conquered and ruled by the uncircumcised Romans, among other foreign conquerors.

(5) The river of ancient Egypt, identified as the Nile in the RSV, will dry up (Isaiah 19:5-7); but the Nile has never dried up. There are similar prophecies in Ezekiel, previously noted, about the Nile, but none of the Ezekiel prophecies about Egypt have come true, as also noted previously.

False prophecies in the New Testament include:

In Matthew 16:28, Jesus tells his disciples: “There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.” The people who were standing there all died eventually, and they never saw Jesus return to establish his kingdom. Paul had to “talk down” the Christians of his day because other Christians were dying and Jesus had not returned as promised.

In Mark 13:24-30 Jesus announced: “Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.” The things he had mentioned included the sun being darkened, the moon not giving any light, the stars of heaven falling, the Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power and glory, and angels gathering the elect (the rapture). That generation passed away long ago without any of the predicted events occurring.

Another false prophecy is John 14:13-14, where Jesus promises: “Whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If ye ask any thing in my name, I will do it.” Every Christian who has prayed knows this is not true.

Jesus predicted the complete destruction of the Jerusalem Temple buildings: “Do you see all these things? I tell you the truth: there will not be a stone left on a stone here; all will be torn down” (Matthew 24:2 with parallels prophecies in Mark 13:2 and Luke 19:44). But this never happened because today the Wailing Wall still stands and some of the great foundation stones of the Temple have been uncovered, with many huge stones standing on other stones. I saw the great foundation stones standing on each other in an episode of The Naked Archeologist. It turns out that the Romans did not completely destroy the Temple, after all.

How did this happen? The men re-writing the New Testament to suit their purposes were far away, in Greece or Rome, and could not actually visit the Temple themselves. They heard rumors that the Temple had been completely destroyed, but the rumors were wrong. So they put a false prophecy in the mouth of Jesus, many years after the fact.



John of Patmos: Errors, Contradictions and False Prophecies

by Michael R. Burch

Should anyone believe the Revelation of John of Patmos aka John the Divine? Or is the book of Revelation full of errors, contradictions and false prophecies? Was the writer of the Apocalypse a prophet, or a deeply disturbed lunatic?

Robert G. Ingersoll branded Revelation "the insanest of all books."

Thomas Jefferson considered Revelation "merely the ravings of a maniac."

Martin Luther said "Christ is neither taught nor known in it."

John Calvin "had grave doubts about its value."

Mark Twain said, "Most people are bothered by those passages of Scripture they do not understand, but the passages that bother me are those I do understand." I agree with Mark Twain. What bothers me about the Revelation of John of Patmos is not the parts I don't understand, but the parts I do understand: the parts where God, Jesus Christ and the Angels abandon every ethical teaching enshrined in the Bible and becoming a pack of rabid, religion-besotted serial killers.

Clearly, the book of Revelation is full of errors and horrors. And the errors and horrors are not only factual, scientific and prophetic, but also theological, because John of Patmos clearly refuted core Christian beliefs. For example, John called Jesus the "bright and morning star" when that was Lucifer's designation (Isaiah 14:11-15). John then went on to describe a God who acts like the Devil: killing women, children and innocent animals, then torturing human beings with fire and brimstone "in the presence of the Lamb and Holy Angels." What sort of "Lamb" and what sort of "Angels" torture other beings with fire and brimstone, or sit idly by and watch them being tortured? Will heaven be like Auschwitz? Will Jesus Christ turn out to be another Mengele and God the Father another Hitler?

In his bizarre, palpably evil "revelation," John of Patmos said Jesus would kill the children of an adulteress "with death." Strange grammar aside, according to the Bible, Jesus rescued an adulteress from being stoned, so why would he kill children for something their mother did, when the act didn't merit death even for her? Why do so many Christians insist on turning Jesus into a woman-killer and a child-killer, when they say he will return to destroy multitudes of non-Christians? Good men do not kill women and children purposefully for any reason, and to kill anyone for having sex is barbaric. When Christians calmly assume that having sex is a valid reason for other people to be killed, then tortured for all eternity, one must question whether they believe that Jesus Christ is actually the Devil. If like John of Patmos they believe Jesus will kill children because adults have sex, they make him seem perverse beyond all belief.

Of course one cannot "prove" that there is an afterlife, or that God exists, or that Jesus continues to live in some other dimension. But it almost seems not to matter, to me. What's the point of "belief" if the only "hope" is that beings worse than Hitler and Mengele will allow their obedient slaves to watch them kill, then eternally torture, other human beings?

And why such unbelievable punishments for eating, drinking and having sex? According to John of Patmos, Christians are condemned for eating food sacrificed to idols, but according to Jesus, Peter and Paul, all food is clean. Paul said that he could eat food offered to idols with a clear conscience. Jesus said that it is what comes out of our mouths (words) that we should worry about, not the food we ingest. Among Christians, only the Judaizers that Paul opposed so vehemently believed certain foods were "unclean." Obviously, John of Patmos was a Judaizer. There is no reason to worry about food being offered to idols, because the "gods" represented by the idols are not real. So John of Patmos was a superstitious man, if he believed that offering food to a nonexistent "god" made it "unclean."

That John is a Judaizer is clear, because even if a church is doing well, it must continue doing works to be saved. According to John, salvation is not by grace, but depends on works, eating the right things, not having the wrong kind of sex, etc. This is clearly illustrated in these verses:

Revelation 20:12-13—And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done.

So grace had nothing to do with salvation, according to John. The only thing that mattered was works.

It is also important to note that Hades was not "hell," but the grave. This is also true for the Hebrew word Sheol. Sheol and Hades were not hell, but the grave or the abode of all the dead (not just the "wicked"). It makes no sense to say that God sent people to "hell" only to judge them and decide that they were righteous, after all. So Bibles such as the KJV are obviously wrong when they translate Sheol and Hades as "hell." Job asked to be hidden from suffering in Sheol; King David said God would be with him if he made his bed in Sheol (i.e., if he died and was placed in the grave); the sons of Korah said God would redeem them from Sheol; and Israel himself said that he and Joseph would be reunited in Sheol. Obviously, they were not talking about a place of eternal suffering that could never be escaped. They were talking about the grave: a place where there would be no more suffering. But Christians have been terrified of a place called "hell" for centuries because of a Bible they fail to understand. There is no reason to believe in a place called "hell" as a revelation of an all-knowing God, because the God of the Bible never mentioned "hell" or suffering after death to his best human friends: Adam, Eve, Abel, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob/Israel, Joseph, Moses, David, Solomon, or a long line of Hebrew prophets (the prophets said even Sodom would be restored in the end). Nor did Paul ever mention a place called "hell" in his epistles, the earliest-written Christian texts. Nor did the word "hell" appear in any of the early Christian sermons recorded in the book of Acts (ostensibly the self-recorded history of the early church). When Peter spoke directly to the men who had murdered Jesus forty days before Pentecost, he spoke of the "restitution of all things to God, spoken of by all the Holy Prophets since the world began," but he never mentioned anyone going to a place called "hell" for any reason. The only Sheol/Hades references in the book of Acts are two quotations of David saying that his soul would not remain in Sheol (the grave). The early Christians were clearly using the resurrection of Jesus to claim that verses in the Hebrew Bible that prophesied a resurrection had been fulfilled. They claimed that this proved that Jesus was the Messiah. But there was nothing in the Hebrew Bible about a place called "hell" where people suffered after death. So while most Christians today assume that the Jews and early Christians believed in a place called "hell," this was obviously not the case. Because Sheol and Hades did not mean "hell," people like John of Patmos actually created a new, nameless place where human beings would be tortured after death. Later, it seems Sheol, Hades and this nameless "lake of fire" became confused, but if any of the parts of the Bible that prophesied the Messiah and a resurrection and a peaceful kingdom came from God, there never was a "hell" or a "lake of fire" for anyone to fear. Ironically, according to the Jewish historian Josephus, among the Jews only the Pharisees believed in a place of suffering after death. So even more ironically, it seems John of Patmos may have been a Pharisee, one of the sworn enemies of Jesus.

And here's another area of disagreement: the Bible clearly teaches that human beings die only once, but John spoke of a "second death," which Christians were in danger of. If there is a second death, why didn't God or Jesus or any prophet or apostle ever mention it anywhere else in the Bible?

John said that Jesus would turn his back on Christians if they grew cold or even lukewarm, but this refutes the promise of Jesus never to leave or forsake Christians, "even to the ends of the earth."

John’s "God" is evil and unjust, a monster. For instance, John heard all the creatures of the earth praise God, after which he turned around and destroyed them.

John’s "God" made ridiculous mistakes. For instance, all the grass was destroyed by fire, but then later God "forgot" that the grass had been destroyed and told the giant locusts not to harm the grass.

John said Jesus had "paps" (female breasts). Nowhere else in the Bible is God or the Messiah described as being a hermaphrodite, although some pagan "gods" had such attributes.

John said Jesus would search the hearts and kidneys ("reins") of believers. Kidneys, really? That is a concept not found anywhere else in the Bible that I can remember.

John obviously believed that the earth was flat, with corners, and that the stars were tiny pinpoints of light. He said he saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth. We know that his earth was flat because he said that every eye would see Jesus when he descended from the clouds. That can only happen on a flat earth. And John obviously believed that this would happen in his own lifetime, because he said that the people who had "pierced" Jesus would see him return. The people who had pierced Jesus were the Roman soldiers who crucified him. John may have written his original text while living in Jerusalem as it was being besieged by the Romans (circa  AD 70). If so, John was understandably full of hatred for the Romans and wanted Jesus to return and destroy them. In John's vision, which seems to have been wishful thinking, the people who had murdered Jesus would see him return to judge the "Beast" (the Roman emperor) and "Babylon" (the Roman empire).

His hatred of the Romans probably led John to say they would be tortured with fire and brimstone "in the presence of the Lamb and Holy Angels." But Jesus had asked God to forgive his murderers because they didn’t know what they were doing. How can these two very different visions of Jesus be reconciled? And how can anyone believe Jesus and the Angels are going to torture human beings, in heaven? So much for hell being "separation from God."

While most Christians now believe that Revelation forecasts future events, it seems clear that the early Christians believed Jesus would return to their generation:

Mathew 16:28―"I tell you the truth, there are some standing here who will not experience death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom."

Luke 9:27―"I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God."

Mark 13:30―I tell you the truth, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.

Mark 14:62―[Jesus speaking to his accusers said] "You will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Power and coming with the clouds of heaven."

Revelation also says four times that God has seven spirits. This is not mentioned anywhere else in the Bible and conflicts with Bible verses that mention "the" (singular) spirit of God.

John also got the names of the twelve tribes wrong, leaving out Dan and Ephraim, but including Joseph. Joseph's sons were generally considered separate tribes in their own right because they were allotted tribal territories within Israel, but if Joseph’s sons are included there are fourteen tribes rather than twelve (or thirteen if Joseph is not counted). It seems highly unlikely that an all-wise God would have forgotten the names of the twelve tribes of Israel! But it's easy for human beings to make mistakes, when they think there are twelve tribes but there are actually fourteen.

John said the things he described must soon take place because the time was near. And in a way he was right, because Jerusalem was destroyed in AD 70 by the Romans, and the Jews who lived went into Diaspora. So their world really did end. But even if he was right about the timing, John was wrong about the victors.

In John's book, the churches are judged collectively, not as individuals, and it is not faith in Jesus that saves the churches, or the grace of God, but works.

The early church fathers knew the writer of Revelation was not the writer of the Gospel of John, because Revelation is a poorly written book. Ancient church fathers who denied that the author of John also wrote Revelation included John Chrysostom, Cyril of Jerusalem, Denis of Alexandria, Eusebius of Caesarea, and Gregory Nazianzen. For example, Eusebius wrote of Revelation: "The phrasing itself also helps to differentiate between the Gospel and Epistle[s of John] on the one hand and the book of Revelation on the other. The first two are written not only without errors in the Greek, but also with real skill with respect to vocabulary, logic and coherence of meaning. You won't find any barbaric expression, grammatical flaw, or vulgar expression in them. ... I don't deny that this other author [John of Patmos] had revelations ... but I notice that in neither language nor in style does he write accurate Greek. He makes use of barbaric expressions and is sometimes guilty even of grammatical error ... I don't say this in order to accuse him (far from it!), but simply to demonstrate that the two books are not at all similar."

Eighteen hundred years ago, Dionysius (Bishop of the Patriarchy of Alexandria) stated that Revelation was not written by the same person who wrote John's Gospel and Letters. He compared the writing styles and found John of Patmos to be unlike any other New Testament writer.

Tom Harpur describes Revelation's Greek style as "barbarous."

Martin Luther believed Revelation contradicted much of the content of the Gospel of John and the synoptic Gospels, so he relegated it to an appendix in his German translation of the Bible.

John of Patmos contradicts John the Apostle at nearly every turn. And we should remember that Revelation was doubted by many early Christians and was not generally accepted as part of the New Testament canon until AD 508. Some Christian sects still do not include it in their Bibles. Therefore criticism of Revelation is not new.

And if the number of the beast is so important, why do different texts have different numbers: 666 and 616?

The early Church father Irenaeus knew of several occurrences of the 616 variant. The testimony of Irenaeus is important, because he was a disciple of Polycarp who according to his followers was a disciple of the apostle John.

In May 2005, it was reported that scholars at Oxford University using advanced imaging techniques had been able to read previously illegible portions of the earliest known record of Revelation (a 1,700 year old papyrus), from the Oxyrhynchus site, Papyrus 115 or P115, dating one century after Irenaeus. The fragment gives the Number of the Beast as 616 (χ ι ϛ), rather than the majority text 666 (χ ξ ϛ). The other early witness Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C) has it written in full: hexakosiai deka hex (lit. six hundred sixteen). Significantly, P115 aligns with Codex Alexandrinus (A) and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (C) which are generally regarded as providing the best testimony to Revelation.

Dr. Paul Lewes in his book, A Key to Christian Origins (1932) wrote: "The figure 616 is given in one of the two best manuscripts, C (Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus, Paris), by the Latin version of Tyconius (DCXVI, ed. Souter in the Journal of Theology, SE, April 1913), and by an ancient Armenian version (ed. Conybaere, 1907). Irenaeus knew about it [the 616 reading], but did not adopt it (Haer. v.30,3), Jerome adopted it (De Monogramm., ed. Dom G Morin in the Rev. Benedictine, 1903). It is probably original."

Professor David C. Parker, Professor of New Testament Textual Criticism and Paleography at the University of Birmingham, thinks that 616, although less memorable than 666, is the original. Dr. Ellen Aitken said: "Scholars have argued for a long time over this, and it now seems that 616 was the original number of the beast. It's probably about 100 years before any other version."



THOMAS JEFFERSON LETTER ABOUT REVELATION

Thomas Jefferson
TO GENERAL ALEXANDER SMYTH MONTICELLO
January 17 1825

DEAR SIR,

I have duly received four proof sheets of your explanation of the Apocalypse with your letters of December 29th and January 8th; in the last of which you request that so soon as I shall be of opinion that the explanation you have given is correct I would express it in a letter to you. From this you must be so good as to excuse me because I make it an invariable rule to decline ever giving opinions on new publications in any case whatever. No man on earth has less taste or talent for criticism than myself and least and last of all should I undertake to criticise works on the Apocalypse. It is between fifty and sixty years since I read it and I then considered it as merely the ravings of a maniac no more worthy nor capable of explanation than the incoherences of our own nightly dreams. I was therefore well pleased to see in your first proof sheet that it was said to be not the production of St John but of Cerinthus a century after the death of that apostle. Yet the change of the author's name does not lessen the extravagances of the composition and come they from whomsoever they may I cannot so far respect them as to consider them as an allegorical narrative of events past or subsequent. There is not coherence enough in them to countenance any suite of rational ideas. You will judge therefore from this how impossible I think it that either your explanation or that of any man in the heavens above or on the earth beneath can be a correct one. What has no meaning admits no explanation and pardon me if I say with the candor of friendship that I think your time too valuable and your understanding of too high an order to be wasted on these paralogisms. You will perceive I hope also that I do not consider them as revelations of the Supreme Being whom I would not so far blaspheme as to impute to Him a pretension of revelation couched at the same time in terms which He would know were never to be understood by those to whom they were addressed. In the candor of these observations I hope you will see proofs of the confidence esteem and which I entertain for you.

The Writings of Thomas Jefferson By Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Adgate Lipscomb, Albert Ellery Bergh, Richard Holland Johnston, Thomas Jefferson memorial association of the United States



MARK TWAIN QUOTES ABOUT THE BIBLE

It [the Bible] is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies.—Mark Twain, Letters from the Earth

The two Testaments are interesting, each in its own way. The Old one gives us a picture of these people's Deity as he was before he got religion, the other one gives us a picture of him as he appeared afterward.—Mark Twain, Letters from the Earth

The Christian's Bible is a drug store. Its contents remain the same; but the medical practice changes...The world has corrected the Bible. The church never corrects it; and also never fails to drop in at the tail of the procession—and take the credit of the correction. During many ages there were witches. The Bible said so. the Bible commanded that they should not be allowed to live. Therefore the Church, after eight hundred years, gathered up its halters, thumb-screws, and firebrands, and set about its holy work in earnest. She worked hard at it night and day during nine centuries and imprisoned, tortured, hanged, and burned whole hordes and armies of witches, and washed the Christian world clean with their foul blood. Then it was discovered that there was no such thing as witches, and never had been. One does not know whether to laugh or to cry.....There are no witches. The witch text remains; only the practice has changed. Hell fire is gone, but the text remains. Infant damnation is gone, but the text remains. More than two hundred death penalties are gone from the law books, but the texts that authorized them remain.—Mark Twain, "Bible Teaching and Religious Practice"

When one reads Bibles, one is less surprised at what the Deity knows than at what He doesn't know.—Mark Twain, Notebook

If Christ were here there is one thing he would not be—a Christian.—Mark Twain, Notebook

There has been only one Christian. They caught him and crucified him, early.—Mark Twain, Notebook (1898)

I bring you the stately matron named Christendom, returning bedraggled, besmirched, and dishonored, from pirate raids in Kiao-Chou, Manchuria, South Africa, and the Phillipines, with her soul full of meanness, her pocket full of boodle, and her mouth full of pious hypocrisies. Give her soap and towel, but hide the looking glass.—Mark Twain, speech, "A Salutation from the 19th to the 20th Century" (December 31, 1900)

The so-called Christian nations are the most enlightened and progressive ... but in spite of their religion, not because of it. The Church has opposed every innovation and discovery from the day of Galileo down to our own time, when the use of anesthetic in childbirth was regarded as a sin because it avoided the biblical curse pronounced against Eve. And every step in astronomy and geology ever taken has been opposed by bigotry and superstition. The Greeks surpassed us in artistic culture and in architecture five hundred years before Christian religion was born.—Mark Twain, from Albert Bigelow Paine, Mark Twain, a Biography (1912)

Most people are bothered by those passages of Scripture they do not understand, but the passages that bother me are those I do understand.—Mark Twain

I am plenty safe enough in his hands; I am not in any danger from that kind of a Deity. The one that I want to keep out of the reach of, is the caricature of him which one finds in the Bible. We (that one and I) could never respect each other, never get along together. I have met his superior a hundred times—in fact I amount to that myself.—Mark Twain, letter to Livy (July 17, 1889)

To this day I cherish an unappeasable bitterness against the unfaithful guardians of my young life, who not only permitted but compelled me to read an unexpurgated Bible through before I was 15 years old. None can do that and ever draw a clean sweet breath again this side of the grave.—Mark Twain, letter to librarian Asa Don Dickinson (November 21, 1905)

Blasphemy? No, it is not blasphemy. If God is as vast as that, he is above blasphemy; if He is as little as that, He is beneath it.—Mark Twain, from Albert Bigelow Paine, Mark Twain, a Biography (1912)

Nevertheless we have this curious spectacle: daily the trained parrot in the pulpit gravely delivers himself of these ironies, which he has acquired at second-hand and adopted without examination, to a trained congregation which accepts them without examination, and neither the speaker nor the hearer laughs at himself. It does seem as if we ought to be humble when we are at a bench-show, and not put on airs of intellectual superiority there.—Mark Twain, "Thoughts of God"

If I were to construct a God I would furnish Him with some way and qualities and characteristics which the Present lacks. He would not stoop to ask for any man's compliments, praises, flatteries; and He would be far above exacting them. I would have Him as self-respecting as the better sort of man in these regards. He would not be a merchant, a trader. He would not buy these things. He would not sell, or offer to sell, temporary benefits of the joys of eternity for the product called worship. I would have Him as dignified as the better sort of man in this regard. He would value no love but the love born of kindnesses conferred; not that born of benevolences contracted for. Repentance in a man's heart for a wrong done would cancel and annul that sin; and no verbal prayers for forgiveness be required or desired or expected of that man. In His Bible there would be no Unforgiveable Sin. He would recognize in Himself the Author and Inventor of Sin and Author and Inventor of the Vehicle and Appliances for its commission; and would place the whole responsibility where it would of right belong: upon Himself, the only Sinner. He would not be a jealous God—a trait so small that even men despise it in each other. He would not boast. He would keep private His admirations of Himself; He would regard self-praise as unbecoming the dignity of his position. He would not have the spirit of vengeance in His heart. Then it would not issue from His lips. There would not be any hell—except the one we live in from the cradle to the grave. There would not be any heaven—the kind described in the world's Bibles. He would spend some of His eternities in trying to forgive Himself for making man unhappy when he could have made him happy with the same effort and he would spend the rest of them in studying astronomy.—Mark Twain, Notebook

To trust the God of the Bible is to trust an irascible, vindictive, fierce and ever fickle and changeful master; to trust the true God is to trust a Being who has uttered no promises, but whose beneficent, exact, and changeless ordering of the machinery of His colossal universe is proof that He is at least steadfast to His purposes; whose unwritten laws, so far as the affect man, being equal and impartial, show that he is just and fair; these things, taken together, suggest that if he shall ordain us to live hereafter, he will be steadfast, just and fair toward us. We shall not need to require anything more.—Mark Twain, from Albert Bigelow Paine, Mark Twain, a Biography (1912)



IF HE COULD FORESEE THE FUTURE, WHY DID THE BIBLICAL GOD MAKE SO MANY MISTAKES?

The Bible makes little sense because it claims that its “god” was all-wise and knew the future before it happened, and yet he made mistakes. A “god” who knew the future could have foreseen, for instance, that Saul would be a terrible king. He could also have foreseen that David would be an even more terrible king. David was clearly not the "man after God’s own heart," if Jesus is the example. Rather, David was the Jewish Hitler. He killed every woman when he "smote the land." He ordered the slaughter of the lame and blind when Jerusalem was taken from the Jebusites because he "hated" the handicapped. Jesus, of course, had compassion for the handicapped. David tortured people in brick kilns (ovens), shades of the Nazis! And David never repented, because with his dying breath he commanded the assassination of Joab, ostensibly for having shed innocent blood. But it was David who had offered Joab the captaincy of his armies for murdering the handicapped. David was the Jewish Hitler, and the antithesis of Jesus.

1 Samuel 27:9 — "And David smote the land, and left neither man nor woman alive..."

2 Samuel 5:8 — "And David said on that day, Whosoever getteth up to the gutter, and smiteth the Jebusites, and the lame and the blind that are hated of David's soul, he shall be chief and captain. Wherefore they said, The blind and the lame shall not come into the house."

2 Samuel 12:31 — "And he [David] brought forth the people that were therein, and put them under saws, and under harrows of iron, and under axes of iron, and made them pass through the brick-kiln: and thus did he unto all the cities of the children of Ammon. So David and all the people returned unto Jerusalem."

1 Chronicles 20:3 — "And he [David] brought out the people that were in it, and cut them with saws, and with harrows of iron, and with axes. Even so dealt David with all the cities of the children of Ammon. And David and all the people returned to Jerusalem.

Another example can be found in the book of Job, where Satan persuades God to murder Job's children in order to "test" his faith. But a God who is all-wise and can foresee the future doesn't need to murder anyone, much less children, to know what will happen. The Bible is a collection of badly-told fairy tales, and in their telling of tall tales the authors of the Bible often made their "god" seem worse than the Devil. I read the Bible from cover to cover at age eleven, then wrote this  epigram to express my conclusion:

If God
is good
half the Bible
is libel.
—Michael R. Burch

Later, as an adult, I read the Bible from cover to cover again. I also studied many books written by Christian authors like C. S. Lewis, Billy Graham and Watchman Nee. And I came to exactly the same conclusion. No one can make the biblical "god" seem in any way to be "good." The "god" of the Old Testament was diabolical, a serial murderer of multitudes of men, women, children, infants, babies, unborns and animals. But the "god" of the New Testament was infinitely worse, because he would either cause or allow billions of human beings to suffer for all eternity for the "sin" of failing to guess which earthly religion is the "correct" one.



100+ BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS

Who caused King David to take a census to count the fighting men of Israel, which caused God to become so enraged that he slaughtered 70,000 men who had played no part in the decision, and was prepared to wipe out Jerusalem, greatly increasing the death count, before finally repenting of the evil  he was doing? (2 Samuel 24:16 KJV calls what God did "evil")
 
God caused David to take the census that enraged God enough to slaughter 70,000 men. (2 Samuel 24:1)
Satan caused David to take the census, meaning that God and the Devil are the same being if the Bible is inerrant and everything it says is true. (1 Chronicles 2 1:1)

Who was the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary and the earthly father of Jesus?
 
Jacob (Matthew 1:16)
Heli (Luke 3:23)

Jesus descended from which son of David?
 
Solomon (Matthew 1:6)
Nathan (Luke 3:31)

Which son of Zerubbabel was an ancestor of Jesus Christ?
 
Abiud (Matthew 1: 13)
Rhesa (Luke 3:27)

But the seven sons of Zerubbabel were: Meshullam, Hananiah, Hashubah, Ohel, Berechiah, Hasadiah and Jushabhesed. (1 Chronicles 3:19, 20). The names Abiud and Rhesa do not agree, so there are three contradictions here.

Would Jesus inherit King David's throne?
 
Yes, said the angel. (Luke 1:32)
No, because Jesus was a descendant of Jehoiakim. (Matthew 1:11, 1 Chronicles 3:16).

Jehoiakim was cursed by God so that none of his descendants could sit upon David's throne. (Jeremiah 36:30)

Isn't it odd that the Bible was authored by an all-knowing God, and yet he didn't know his own parentage and ancestry? If an all-knowing, all-wise God authored the Bible, the last thing we would expect to see are errors relating to the Perfect Son of God and promised Messiah. But if human beings were making things up, we would expect such mistakes.

Was the life of the baby Jesus threatened by King Herod?
 
Yes, and thus Joseph fled with Mary and Jesus to Egypt and stayed there until Herod died. (Matthew 2:13-23)
No, none of the other gospels mention anything about Herod murdering babies.

Both the Jews and the Romans were literate people and the Roman rulers sent reports back to Rome. But there is not a single account of Herod mass-murdering babies outside the Bible, nor in any gospel other than Matthew. The Jewish historian Josephus wrote about Herod's misdeeds but didn't mention what would have been the worst of all. This was an obvious fabrication of the author of Matthew.

Did Jesus say anything secretly?
 
No (John 18:20)
Yes, Jesus spoke in parables to deliberately mislead the crowds that followed and trusted him, so they wouldn't be saved. (Mark 4:10-12, Mark 4:34, Matthew 13:10-11)

"And when he [Jesus] was alone, those who were about him with the twelve asked him concerning the parables. And he said to them, "To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables; so that they may indeed see but not perceive, and may indeed hear but not understand; lest they should turn again, and be forgiven." (Mark 4:10-12)

Robert Frost wrote a powerful poem, "Directive," about the confusion and despair he felt as a boy after reading this disturbing passage in the Gospel of Mark.

Were there twelve tribes of Israel, or thirteen, or fourteen? What are their names?

12 tribes: Asher, Benjamin, Dan, Gad, Issachar, Joseph, Judah, Levi, Naphtali, Reuben, Simeon, Zebulun (Genesis 49:1-28)
12 tribes: Asher, Benjamin, Dan, Gad, Issachar, Joseph, Judah, Levi, Naphtali, Reuben, Simeon, Zebulun (Duet. 27:12-13)
13 tribes: +Ephraim, +Manasseh, -Levi (Numbers 1:4-15)
14 tribes: if we add Levi to the list above, since Levi has always been a tribe of Israel
12 tribes: -Levi, -Manasseh (Numbers 13:1-15)
11 tribes: -Simeon, -Ephraim, -Manasseh (Deuteronomy 33:5-24)
12 tribes: -Levi, -Joseph (Ezekiel 48:1-27)
12 tribes: -Dan, -Ephraim (Revelation 7:4-8)

There were 12 tribes of Israel initially. When Joseph's sons Ephraim and Manasseh were treated as tribes there were 14, but because Levi received no land allotment and Joseph's was spit between his sons, there were 12 tribes as far as land divisions went. However, one would expect an all-wise, all-knowing God to be able to keep things straight and not forget to seal members of the tribes of Dan and Ephraim at the end of time!

Who was the twelfth disciple?
 
Thaddaeus (Matthew 10:1-4; Mark 3:13-19)
Judas the son of James (Luke 6:12-16)

Is the law of Moses useful?
 
Yes, because all scripture is profitable. (2 Timothy 3:16)
No, because a former commandment is set aside due to its weakness and uselessness. (Hebrews 7:18)
No, because Jesus, Peter and Paul all ignored the Mosaic dietary laws.
No, because Jesus declined to stone an adulteress to death as the law of Moses commanded.
No, because Jesus said it was okay to work on the Sabbath if animals or people were in need.
No, because Paul said Christians would lose their salvation if they were circumcised (Galatians 5:1-11).

Did Herod want to kill John the Baptist?
 
Yes (Matthew 14:5)
No, his wife Herodias wanted to kill him, but Herod knew John was a righteous man and kept him safe. (Mark 6:20)

Was John the Baptist the Elijah who was to come?
 
Yes (Matthew II: 14, 17:10-13)
No (John 1:19-21)

Did Herod think Jesus was John the Baptist?
 
Yes (Matthew 14:2; Mark 6:16)
No (Luke 9:9)

Did John the Baptist recognize Jesus before his baptism?
 
Yes (Matthew 3:13-14)
No (John 1:32-33)

Did John the Baptist recognize Jesus after his baptism?
 
Yes (John 1:32, 33)
No (Matthew 11:2)

Is it true that no man is righteous?
 
Yes (Romans 3:23, 1 Kings 8:46, 2 Chronicles 6:36; Proverbs 20:9; Ecclesiastes 7:20)
No, because true Christians cannot sin, being children of God. (Luke 2:52, 1 John 5:1, 1 John 3:1, 1 John 4:7, 1 John 3:9)
No, because Melchizedek means "King of righteousness." (Genesis 14:18-20)
No, because Job, Noah and Asa were "perfect" and "blameless." (Job 1:1, Job 2:3, Genesis 6:9, 1 Kings 15:14)
No, because Abel, Noah, Daniel, Lot and Joseph were called "righteous."

"Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God." (Genesis 6:9)
"There is none like him [Job] in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil." (Job 1:1, Job 2:3)

But then in the same book we have a contradiction: "If we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." (1 John 1:8-10) Thus all the other verses above from the same book are lies!

How many pairs of clean animals did God tell Noah to take into the Ark?
 
Two (Genesis 6:19, 20)
Seven (Genesis 7:2)

However, despite the second instruction, only two pairs of each animal went into the ark (Genesis 7:8-9). How then was Moses able to offer sacrifices when he left the ark, since that would have meant the extinction of the animals sacrificed? Also, what did the predators eat during their year on the ark, since every meal would have caused an extinction with just two of each animal?

Did Joshua and the Israelites capture Jerusalem?
 
Yes, Joshua defeated everyone he went up against, and he captured and hanged the king of Jerusalem. (Joshua 10:23-40)
No, the Jebusites were too strong to drive out and would not surrender Jerusalem until the time of King David. (Joshua 15:63)

"As for the Jebusites the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the children of Judah could not drive them out." (Joshua 15:63)

What was the name of King Abijah's mother?
 
Michaiah, the daughter of Uriel of Gibeah (2 Chronicles 13:2)
Maachah, the daughter of Absalom (2 Chronicles 11:20)

But Absalom had only one daughter, whose name was Tamar (2 Samuel 14:27), so there are three contradictions here.

Did King David bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem before defeating the Philistines, or after?
 
After (2 Samuel 5 and 6)
Before (1 Chronicles 13 and 14)

Who was the father of Shealtiel?
 
Jechoniah (Matthew 1:12)
Neri (Luke 3:27)

Who was the father of Uzziah?
 
Joram (Matthew 1:8)
Amaziah (2 Chronicles 26:1)

Who was the father of Jechoniah?
 
Josiah (Matthew 1:11)
Jeholakim (1 Chronicles 3:16)

How many generations were there from the Babylonian exile until Christ?
 
Matthew says fourteen (Matthew 1:17)
But a count of the generations reveals only thirteen (Matthew 1:12-16)

Who was the father of Shelah?
 
Cainan (Luke 3:35-36)
Arphaxad (Genesis II: 12)

Jesus rode into Jerusalem on how many animals?
 
One, a colt (Mark 11:7, Luke 19:35)
Two, a colt and an ass (Matthew 21:7)

How did Simon Peter find out that Jesus was the Christ?
 
By a revelation from heaven (Matthew 16:17)
His brother Andrew told him (John 1:41)

Where did Jesus first meet Simon Peter and Andrew?
 
By the sea of Galilee (Matthew 4:18-22)
On the banks of river Jordan (John 1:42, John 1:43)

When Jesus met Jairus was Jairus's daughter already dead?
 
Yes (Matthew 9:18)
No (Mark 5:23)

Did Jesus allow his disciples to keep a staff on their journey?
 
Yes (Mark 6:8)
No (Matthew 10:9; Luke 9:3)

Who was high priest when David went into the House of GOD and ate the consecrated bread?
 
Abiathar (Mark 2:26)
Ahimelech, the father of Abiathar (I Samuel 1:1, 22:20)

According to the Gospel of John, what did Jesus say about bearing his own witness?
 
If I bear witness to myself, my testimony is not true. (John 5:31)
Even if I do bear witness to myself, my testimony is true. (John 8:14)

"Do I contradict myself? Very well then, I contradict myself!"

When Jesus entered Jerusalem did he cleanse the temple that same day?
 
Yes (Matthew 21:12)
No, he went to Bethany to spend the night and returned the next morning to cleanse the temple (Mark I 1:1-17)

The Gospels say Jesus cursed a fig tree. Did the tree wither at once?
 
Yes (Matthew 21:19)
No, It withered overnight (Mark 11:20)

Did Judas kiss Jesus?
 
Yes (Matthew 26:48-50)
No, Judas could not get close enough to Jesus to kiss him (John 18:3-12)

Did Jesus die before the curtain of the temple was torn?
 
Yes (Matthew 27:50-51; Mark l5:37-38)
No, Jesus said his last words after the curtain was torn (Luke 23:45-46)

But how would anyone be able to correlate what happened on the cross with what happened in the temple with such precision? Also, there is no mention in any extra-biblical writings of the temple curtain being torn, despite its great significance.

Where was Jesus at the sixth hour on the day of the crucifixion?
 
On the cross (Mark 15:23)
In Pilate's court (John 19:14)

When Paul was on the road to Damascus he saw a light and heard a voice. Did those who were with him hear the voice?
 
Yes (Acts 9:7)
No (Acts 22:9)

When Paul saw the light he fell to the ground. Did his traveling companions also fall to the ground?
 
Yes (Acts 26:14)
No (Acts 9:7)

Did the voice spell out on the spot what Paul's duties were to be?
 
Yes (Acts 26:16-18)
No, the voice told Paul to go to Damascus where he will be told what he must do. (Acts 9:7, 22:10)

When the Israelites dwelt in Shittin they committed adultery with the daughters of Moab. God struck them with a plague. How many people died in that plague?
 
24,000 (Numbers 25:1 and 9)
23,000 (1 Corinthians 10:8)

How many members of the house of Jacob came to Egypt?
 
70 souls (Genesis)
75 souls (Acts 7:14)

What did Judas do with the blood money he received for betraying Jesus?
 
He bought a field (Acts 1:18)
He threw the money into the temple and left; the priests used it to buy a field to bury strangers (Matthew 27:5)

How did Judas die?
 
After he threw the money into the temple he hanged himself. (Matthew 27:5)
After he bought the field he fell, burst open and his bowels gushed out. (Acts 1:18)

Why is the field called the Field of Blood?
 
Because the priests bought it with the blood money. (Matthew 27:8)
Because of the bloody death of Judas there. (Acts 1:19)

Who is a ransom for whom?
 
The Son of Man came to give his life as a ransom for many. (Mark 10:45, 1 Timothy 2:5-6)
The wicked is a ransom for the righteous, and the faithless for the upright. (Proverbs 21:18)

What was the exact wording on the cross?
 
This is Jesus the King of the Jews (Matthew 27:37)
The King of the Jews (Mark 15:26)
This is the King of the Jews (Luke 23:38)
Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews (John 19:19)

Jesus saw a tax collector and called him to be a disciple. What was his name?
 
Matthew (Matthew 9:9)
Levi (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27)

Was Jesus crucified in the daytime before the Passover meal or in the daytime after?
 
After (Mark 14:12-17)
Before the feast of the Passover. Judas went out at night and the other disciples thought he was going out to buy supplies to prepare for the Passover meal (John 13:29-30). When Jesus was arrested, the Jews didn't enter Pilate's judgment hall because they wanted to remain clean to eat the Passover meal (John 18:28). When Pilate's judgment was pronounced against Jesus, it was about the sixth hour on the day of Preparation for the Passover (John 19:14).

Did Jesus pray to The Father to prevent the crucifixion?
 
Yes (Matthew 26:39, Mark 14:36, Luke 22:42)
No (John 12:27)

In the gospels which say that Jesus prayed to avoid the cross, how many times did he move away from his disciples to pray?
 
Three times. (Matthew 26:36-46, Mark 14:32-42)
One time. (Luke 22:39-46)

Matthew and Mark agree that Jesus went away and prayed three times. What were the words of the second prayer?
 
Mark does not give the words but he says that the words were the same as the first prayer. (Mark 14:3 9)
Matthew gives us the words, and we can see that they are not the same as in the first prayer. (Matthew 26:42)

What did the centurion say when Jesus die4?

"Certainly this man was innocent." (Luke 23:47)
"Truly this man was the Son of God." (Mark 15:39)

When Jesus said "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken Me?" in what language did he speak?
 
Hebrew (Matthew 27:46)
Aramaic (Mark 15:34)

When Jesus entered Capernaum he healed the slave of a centurion. Did the centurion come personally to request Jesus for this?
 
Yes (Matthew 8:5)
No, he sent some elders of the Jews and his friends. (Luke 7:3,6)

When did Adam die?
 
Adam was told that if and when he eats the forbidden fruit he would die the same day. (Genesis 2:17)
Adam ate the fruit and went on to live to a ripe old age of 930 years. (Genesis 5:5)

What is a human lifespan?
 
God said the life-span of humans will be limited to 120 years (Genesis 6:3)
Many people born after that lived longer than 120 years: Arpachshad (438 years), Shelah (433 years), Eber (464 years), etc. (Genesis 11:12-16)

Apart from Jesus did anyone else ascend to heaven?
 
No (John 3:13)
Yes, Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. (2 Kings 2:11)

Who Carried Jesus's Cross?

Jesus gets help from Simon of Cyrene. (Mark 15:21, Matthew 27:31-32, Luke 23:26)
Jesus carries his cross the whole way to Golgotha. (John 19:17)

Was Jesus crucified between two thieves?

No, because the Romans never crucified thieves.
No, because the two men aren’t described as thieves. (John 19:18)
Yes, two thieves are mentioned, but there is no conversation with them. (Mark 15:27)
Yes, and both thieves taunt Jesus. (Matthew 27:44)
Yes, one thief taunts Jesus and is criticized by the other, who gets a free ticket to heaven. (Luke 23:39-42)

In the last case, Jesus promises the second thief that they would be together in Paradise that day, although John and Acts say Jesus did not ascend to heaven until 40 days after his resurrection.

Did both thieves mock Jesus?
 
Yes (Mark 15:32)
No, one of them mocked Jesus, the other defended him. (Luke 23:43)

Did Jesus ascend to Paradise on the day of the crucifixion?

Yes, he told the thief who defended him, "Today you will be with me in Paradise." (Luke 23:43)
No, he told Mary Magdalene two days later, "I have not yet ascended to the Father." (John 20:17)

What were the last words of Jesus before he died?
 
"Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit!" (Luke 23:46)
"It is finished!" (John 19:30)
"My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (Mark 15:34, Matthew 27:46)

Was there an earthquake when Jesus died?

No (Mark, Luke, John)
Yes. (Matthew 27:51-53)

Matthew has a penchant for making fantastical things up. In his account, at the moment Jesus dies, a massive earthquake strikes and it's like a Zombie movie with dead people rising from their graves. But the other gospels don't mention such a freakish event and it defies the biblical claim that human beings only die once. And of course no earthquake and no resurrection of the walking dead were mentioned in any historical records.

What happened at the grave, and after?

What happened at the grave, and after? All the accounts differ drastically. The only commonality is the empty grave and the presence of Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Jesus, but what the women do is different in every account, so it's not that great a commonality. My educated guess is that the two Marys may have found an empty grave, but no one knew what had happened, no one saw or talked to Jesus, and the rest was fabricated by people too far apart to compare notes and keep their "big fish" stories straight. The fact that Jesus said something different in each case says worlds. If the resurrected God told you important things, don't you think you would remember what he said and report it accurately?

The oldest version of Mark ended with Mark 16:1-8 — Mary Magdalene [did not see or speak to Jesus, told no one], other women [Mother Mary, Salome], disciples [none], time [dawn], stone [already rolled away], Roman guards [none], angels [none, just one young man], result [told to go to Galilee by the young man]

The greatest discrepancy here is that this account seems the most honest: The grave was inexplicably empty; no one saw or spoke to Jesus; the women told no one because they were afraid; there were no angels; there were no Roman guards and why would there be? The original version of Mark ends with a huge question mark: what did the empty grave mean, if anything?

The expanded version of Mark verses 16:9-20 — Mary Magdalene [did not see or speak to Jesus at the grave, he appeared to her], disciples [Jesus appeared to two disciples as they were walking; then to the eleven; he chided the eleven for their disbelief and told them strange things such as to handle poisonous snakes and drink poison; Jesus did not impart the Holy Spirit; he was "received" into heaven and sat at the right hand of God, but how would anyone know where he sat?]

The "expanded" version of Mark is truly weird with the addition of snake handling and drinking poison. And how would anyone know where Jesus sat in heaven? Seems very iffy to me: the "big fish" story growing by leaps and bounds.

Matthew 28:1-20 — Mary Magdalene [did not see or speak to Jesus at the grave, he appeared to her on her way to tell the disciples], other women [Mother Mary, no Salome], disciples [none], time [dawn], stone [rolled away by an earthquake, the only account in which the stone is seen being rolled away], Roman guards [their only appearance is in Matthew 27:62], angels [one], result [Jesus tells the women to meet him in Galilee and the women tell the disciples; there is no ascension or Jesus being received into heaven and no giving of the Holy Spirit; also no talk of handling serpents and drinking poison]

The additions of the angel, the Roman guards, and the stone being rolled away via an earthquake caused by the angel, seem like embellishments by someone who is trying to convince other people that there was more going on than just an empty grave. But things will get stranger...

Luke 24:1-53 — Mary Magdalene [did not see or speak to Jesus at all], other women [Mother Mary, Joanna, no Salome but other unnamed women], disciples [none initially, but Peter ran to the grave by himself], time [dawn], stone [already rolled away], angels [two], result [the women told the eleven; Jesus appeared to two disciples as they were walking; then to the eleven; he allowed his hands and feet to be examined and ate meat to prove he was not a ghost but material; no talk of handling poisonous snakes and drinking poison; Jesus did not impart the Holy Spirit; he instructed the disciples to go to Jerusalem rather than Galilee; Jesus was "carried up" into heaven at Bethany but there was no mention of sitting at the right hand of God]

Assuming the same person wrote Luke and Acts, the major difference here is the prominence of Peter and Jerusalem as twin focuses of the early Christian church. I will guess that this account was written later than the ones above. By this time the myth of the "ascension" has appeared. If it had actually happened, how could it not have been mentioned in the older accounts? One may forget minor details, but not a human being soaring off into the heavens. The "big fish" continues to get bigger.

John 20:1-31 — Mary Magdalene [spoke to Jesus, at first thinking he was the gardener, and Jesus said he was not yet ascended meaning his promise to be with the thief on the cross in Paradise on the day of the crucifixion was untrue], other women [none], disciples [none initially, but Peter and John ran to the grave], time [still dark], stone [already rolled away], angels [two], result [Jesus did not appear to two disciples as they were walking; Jesus appeared to the disciples but Thomas was not there so it was not the eleven; he later appeared eight days later to the eleven with Thomas; there was no talk of handling poisonous snakes and drinking poison; Jesus imparted the Holy Spirit with his breath; he did not instruct the disciples to go to Jerusalem or Galilee; Jesus was not "carried up" into heaven; there was no mention of Jesus sitting at the right hand of God; Jesus would later have breakfast with some of his disciples including Peter and John at the shore of Lake Tiberias, a scene that does not appear in any of the other accounts]

Here there is a clear effort to give John prominence over Peter. Now we have Jesus proving his materiality, so by that time this account was written that  had probably become a point of contention: was Jesus flesh and blood or a spirit? We now have Jesus magically imparting the Holy Spirit. This is the only account where Jesus appears twice to the assembled disciples, apparently so he can prove that he's not a ghost to doubters. We can see how the embellishments continue, with theological points being made.

Acts 1: 1-15 — This account differs the most radically from the others post-resurrection because Jesus spends 40 days preaching and teaching in Jerusalem "of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God" but no one bothers to record a single word he said! If you spent 40 days with the resurrected God, wouldn't you be sure to record what he said and communicate it faithfully? By this time, according to Acts 1:15 there were around 120 disciples. So there was presumably quite a crowd of witnesses when Jesus left the earth for the last time from Mount Olivet, soaring into the clouds like Superman, with two angels preaching a sermon that he would return "the same way." But obviously it never happened because the eleven primary disciples were there, along with many other witnesses, and yet none of the other authors of the New Testament books knew anything about Jesus spending 40 days in Jerusalem or soaring into the clouds like Superman. And because the author of Acts is presumed to be the author of Luke, it is especially suspicious that the author of Luke knew nothing about these strange goings-on.

The Occam's Razor here is that this account was either written or amended long after the fact. Nothing here is believable.

1 Corinthians 1:4-8 — This account is hard to swallow because it says the order of post-resurrection appearances was: first Cephas (Peter), then the twelve (but Judas Iscariot was dead!), then by "above five hundred brethren at once" (but Acts 1:15 says there were around 120 disciples the last time Jesus was seen), then by James, then by all the apostles, then by Paul. 

One might guess that by the time this epistle was written the Jerusalem church had 500 members or more. But in any case Paul knew nothing about angels at the grave or the various ascensions, so it seems obvious that the other accounts were "updated" after Paul wrote his epistles.

The following are answers to questions about specific contradictions relating to the resurrection...

Was Jesus's body wrapped in spices before burial in accordance with Jewish burial customs?
 
Yes (John 19:39-40)
No, Jesus was simply wrapped in a linen shroud. The women bought and prepared spices later. (Mark 16: 1)

When did the women buy the spices?
 
After the Sabbath was over. (Mark 16:1)
Before the Sabbath. (Luke 23:55-24:1)

At what time of day did the women visit the tomb?
 
While it was still dark. (John 20:1-31)
Toward the dawn. (Matthew 28:1)
When the sun had risen. (Mark 16:2)

Why did the women go to the tomb?
 
To anoint Jesus's body with spices. (Mark 16:1, Luke 23:55-24:1)
To see the tomb, no mention of spices. (Matthew 28:1)
For no specific reason, as the wrapping with spices had been done before the Sabbath. (John 20:1)

Where was the stone when the women arrived at the tomb?
 
Already rolled back. (Mark 16:4, Luke 24:2, John 20:1)
As the women approached the tomb, an angel descended from heaven, rolled away the stone, then conversed with the women. (Matthew 28:1-6)

Did anyone tell the women what happened to Jesus body?
 
Yes, a young man in a white robe. (Mark 16:5)
Yes, but two men in dazzling apparel described as angels. (Luke 24:4, 24:23)
Yes, but one angel: the only angel to roll back the stone. (Matthew 16:2).
No, Mary Magdalene met no one and returned not knowing were Jesus's body was. (John 20:2)

When did Mary Magdalene first meet the resurrected Jesus and how did she react?
 
Mary and the other women met Jesus on their way back from their first and only visit to the tomb. (Matthew 28:9)
On her second visit to the tomb Mary met Jesus just outside the tomb. (John 20:11-17)

How many disciples did Jesus appear to after his resurrection, when the disciples were assembled?
 
Twelve (1 Corinthians 15:5)
Eleven (Matthew 27:3-5, Acts 1:9-26, Matthew 28:16, Mark 16:14, Luke 24:9, Luke 24:33)
Ten because "Doubting" Thomas was absent at the first appearance of Jesus to his assembled disciples. (Luke 24:9)

What was Jesus's instruction for his disciples after his resurrection?
 
"Tell my brethren to go to Galilee, and there they will see me." (Matthew 28:10)
"Go to my brethren and say to them, I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." (John 20:17)

When did the disciples return to Galilee?
 
Immediately, because when they saw Jesus in Galilee some doubted. (Matthew 28:17)
After at least 40 days because the disciples were still in Jerusalem. (Luke 24:33-49, Acts 1:3-4)

To whom did the Midianites sell Joseph?
 
To the Ishmaelites. (Genesis 37:28)
To Potiphar, an officer of the Egyptian Pharaoh. (Genesis 37:36)

Who brought Joseph to Egypt?
 
The Ishmaelites bought Joseph then took him to Egypt. (Genesis 37:28)
The Midianites sold him in Egypt. (Genesis 37:36)
Joseph said to his brothers, "I am your brother, Joseph, whom you sold into Egypt." (Genesis 45:4)

Does God change his mind or repent?
 
Yes, the word of the Lord came to Samuel: "I repent that I have made Saul King." (1 Samuel 15:10-11)
No, because "God is not a man, that he should repent." (1 Samuel 15:29, in the same book and chapter!)
Yes, the Lord repented again that he had made Saul King over Israel (1 Samuel 15:35, just six verses later)

The three quotes above are all from the same chapter of the same book! Other Bible verses say God repented:
 
"The Lord was sorry that he made man." (Genesis 6:6)
"I am sorry that I have made them." (Genesis 6:7)
"And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do to his people." (Exodus 32:14).

The Bible says human magicians can do the impossible:

Moses and Aaron converted all the available water into blood. (Exodus 7:20-21)
The pharaoh's magicians did the same. (Exodus 7:22)

The second feat was impossible, since there would have been no water left to convert into blood.

Who killed Saul?
 
Saul took his own sword and fell upon it.... Thus Saul died... (I Samuel 31:4-6)
An Amalekite slew him (2 Samuel 1:1-16)

Who will bear whose burden?
 
Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. (Galatians 6:2)
Each man will have to bear his own load. (Galatians 6:5)

Where was Jesus three days after his baptism?
 
After his baptism, the spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. And he was in the wilderness forty days. (Mark 1:12-13)
On the first day after his baptism, Jesus selected two disciples; on the second day he went to Galilee and selected two more disciples; on the third day he was at a wedding feast in Cana. (John 1:35; 1:43; 2:1-11)

When Jesus walked on water how did the disciples respond?
 
They worshipped him, saying, Truly you are the Son of God. (Matthew 14:33)
They were utterly astounded, for they did not understand about the loaves, but their hearts were hardened. (Mark 6:51-52)

In the census of King David how many fighting men were found in Israel?
 
800,000 (2 Samuel 24:9)
1.1 million (1 Chronicles 21:5)

How many fighting men were found in Judah?
 
500,000 (2 Samuel 24:9)
470,000 (1 Chronicles 21:5)

Due to his wrath over the census he caused (2 Samuel 24:1), God sent his prophet Gad to threaten David with how many years of famine?
 
Seven (2 Samuel 24:13)
Three (1 Chronicles 21:12)

How old was Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem?
 
Twenty-two (2 Kings 8:26)
Forty-two (2 Chronicles 22:2)

How old was Jehoiachin when he became king of Jerusalem?
 
Eighteen (2 Kings 24:8)
Eight (2 Chronicles 36:9)

How long did he rule over Jerusalem?
 
Three months (2 Kings 24:8)
Three months and ten days (2 Chronicles 36:9)

The chief of the mighty men of David lifted up his spear and killed how many men at one time?
 
800 (2 Samuel 23:8)
300 (1 Chronicles 11:11)

When David defeated the King of Zobah, how many horsemen did he capture?
 
1,700 (2 Samuel 8:4)
7,000 (1 Chronicles 18:4)

How many stalls for horses did Solomon have?
 
40,000 (1 Kings 4:26)
4,000 (2 chronicles 9:25)

In what year of King Asa's reign did Baasha, King of Israel die?
 
In the 26th year (1 Kings 15:33-16:8)
He was still alive in the 36th year (2 Chronicles 16:1)

How many overseers did Solomon appoint to build the temple?
 
3,600 (2 Chronicles 2:2)
3,300 (1 Kings 5:16)

Solomon built how many baths?
 
2,000 (1 Kings 7:26)
Over 3,000 (2 Chronicles 4:5)

Of the Israelites freed from Babylonian captivity, how many were the children of Pahrath-Moab?
 
2,812 (Ezra 2:6)
2,819 (Nehemiah 7:11)

How many were the children of Zattu?
 
945 (Ezra 2:8)
845 (Nehemiah 7:13)

How many were the children of Azgad?
 
1,222 (Ezra 2:12)
2,322 (Nehemiah 7:17)

How many were the children of Adin?
 
454 (Ezra 2:15)
655 (Nehemiah 7:20)

How many were the children of Hashum?
 
223 (Ezra 2:19)
328 (Nehemiah 7:22)

How many were the children of Bethel and Ai?
 
223 (Ezra 2:28)
123  (Nehemiah 7:32)

Ezra 2:64 and Nehemiah 7:66 agree that the total number of the whole assembly was 42,360. Yet the numbers do not add up to anything close. The totals from each book are:
 
29,818 (Ezra)
31,089 (Nehemiah)

How many singers accompanied the assembly?
 
200 (Ezra 2:65)
245 (Nehemiah 7:67)

CLOSING THOUGHTS
by Michael R. Burch

Religion was a big part of my family's life — we had missionaries, pastors and Sunday School teachers, including my mother, in our extended family — but I ended up being the black sheep.

Why?

I was a true believer until I read the Bible from cover to cover at age eleven and was dumbfounded that anyone could consider the biblical god "good." I wrote this epigram, my first poem, to express my conclusion:

If God
is good
half the Bible
is libel.
—Michael R. Burch

Many years later as an adult in my mid-forties, I read the Bible from cover to cover again, then at the behest of my mother studied numerous books by Christian apologists like Watchman Nee, C. S. Lewis, G. K. Chesterton, Billy Graham, Lee Strobel and Josh McDowell, only to arrive at the same conclusion. Only more so.

Why?

The Bible says trees grew before the sun was created, that a solid-but-transparent “firmament” in the sky holds back rainwater like a dam, and that stars are tiny pinpricks of light that can fall to earth. Is it a book of science or ancient superstitions? The Bible commands slavery, sex slavery, infanticide, matricide, ethnic cleansing, genocide and the ghastly stoning to death of children for non-sins and misdemeanors. Is it a book of ethics and morality or primitive voodoo? The Bible according to orthodox theology says billions of souls will go to an infinitely cruel and purposeless hell for guessing wrong about which religion to believe. Are Christians wise to believe in such an evil, unjust god?

Surely those who believe in Christ should "rightly divide the word" and give Jesus the benefit of the doubt by not attributing the Bible's satanic verses to him as part of the Trinity. Nothing can be more contrary to both faith and reason, than to claim God is perfect in love, compassion, mercy, wisdom and justice, yet to maintain that he authored commandments to, for instance, stone rape victims to death. If God is good, how is that not blasphemy?

For me the Bible's most inspired passage is Paul's epiphany on Divine Love in 1 Corinthians 13. In his epiphany Paul says that if God is not Divine Love, he is nothing, and all the words of the Bible are so much useless noise: clanging gongs and tinkling cymbals. And Paul tells us that Divine Love thinks no evil, holds no record of wrongs, bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things, never gives up and never fails. Such love is incompatible with racism, sexism, homophobia, religious intolerance, cherry-picking people to be saved, and with hell.

Christians should use Paul's epiphany as a litmus test, and disregard all biblical commandments contrary to it.

Paul's description of Divine Love in 1 Corinthians 13 is the gold standard, so why settle for less? And why accuse Jesus Christ, if you are going to name your religion after him, of being an atom short of Divine Love?

After all, to fall an atom short of Infinity is to fall infinitely short.

Related Pages

Donald Trump: 666 Mark of the Beast

There is no "hell" in the Bible!
What did Jesus teach about Hell?
How many times is "hell" mentioned in the Bible?
Is there a word meaning "hell" in the Hebrew language?
Was "hell" in the Original Hebrew Bible?
Is "hell" mentioned in the Old Testament?
Is "hell" mentioned in the New Testament
Is the word "hell" in the Bible at all?
Why is "hell" not Biblical?
Hell is not in the Bible!

Is the Bible infallible, or the inerrant word of God?
Is the Bible the Word of God?, The Bible's Satanic Verses
Is the Garden of Eden story true?
Is the Bible an Extraordinary book?

John of Patmos: Boom or Bust?
Bible False Prophecies

www.thereisnohell.com
www.tentmaker.org

The HyperTexts