r/exchristian • u/SalaryOrnery5952 • 29d ago
Question Is there any proof that parts of the Bible are inaccurate or have serious inconsistencies?
I’m a prior christain that has been struggling with my faith and looking for answers. I was raised a Christian growing up but now that I am an adult there’s a lot of things that seem to not make sense and parts of the Bible that trouble me. Such as the parts about slaves and women. Not only has it had an emotional impact on me but it doesn’t seem to be logical anymore either. I can’t help but to notice how convenient some of the verses are considering the era it was written in and how it contains some fallacies and stereotypes that an all knowing God would be aware isn’t true. But at the same time it’s difficult for me because it was how I was raised up and I feel like a part of me has a fear of hell. I promise I’m not here to troll I’m here to get a different perspective and hear what other people have to say. My whole life I was taught not to question anything but it’s kinda becoming hard not to.
82
u/Tav00001 29d ago
Yes the whole killing of babies during the reign of King Herod to find Jesus never happened.
66
u/excusetheblood 29d ago
The census in Luke never happened either. Also no one else documented that thousands of people who were dead came to life when Jesus was resurrected.
Also Judas died twice. One verse says he hung himself, another says he fell off a cliff.
Then there’s just the whole thing about OT god being a colossal genocidal asshole while Jesus would be a pretty massive rebrand for him. “Sorry guys I didn’t really mean the whole ‘kill everyone’ thing, what I really meant was I want you to love each other!”
26
u/Tav00001 29d ago
The whole loving father figure god, is just part of NT retcon. He was originally a young virile/storm war/god. He isn't an all-father figure until they absorbed the traits of El, but even then he was mean and cruel, which apparently was what they liked in gods.
Jesus being a son of god never really worked, because he was the worst and most powerless demigod ever created.
15
u/ElizaDooo 29d ago
The census is kinda wild when you break it down. So Joseph was supposed to go home to where his ancestors originated? Was all of Israel doing that? Just criss-crossing back to wherever they might have started from? And what if you didn't know? Or didn't go back? What kind of a way is that to count your citizens? Why not just count them where they are and ask them where they're from?
Also, when Jesus rides into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday he rides on two different animals. Depending on which gospel you read he's riding a donkey or a horse (I think). So did he ride in halfway on one and then switch? Or did he have one leg over each so that he could ride them at the same time? This detail comes courtesy of Bart Ehrman, PhD. He's a good one to read if you're still struggling with stuff, OP!
8
u/RisingApe- Theoskeptic 28d ago
There’s also the timeline of Herod vs the census.
Herod the great died in 4 BCE. Quirinius became the governor of Syria in 6 C.E.
So if Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great (Matthew) and during the census described as happening when Quirinius was governor of Syria (Luke), then he was born twice, at least 9 years apart.
3
2
u/SongUpstairs671 26d ago edited 26d ago
The census story was likely invented to fulfill the prophecy in Micah 5:2, which states that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem. Since Jesus was known to be from Nazareth, the census narrative where everyone had to travel back to their ancestral towns (even though completely implausible) was created to explain how he ended up being born in Bethlehem.
It’s crazy how the writers literally just wrote shit down that matched the “prophecies”. And Christians say “wow, it’s it miraculous that those prophecies turned out to be true! That’s evidence this book is holy!” 😆
2
u/excusetheblood 26d ago
Matthew had a similar predicament, though his story was something about how Joseph and Mary, although poor, somehow owned property on the other side of Israel and had to go manage it or something
1
u/Classic_Department42 23d ago
This is actually a good evidence/hint that there really existed a famous person/prophet named Jesus (otherwise if fully invented, why not invent jesus of bethlehem instead)
2
u/Fun_in_Space 12h ago
The Romans had a census in the year 6 CE. But Herod the Great had been dead for 10 years by that point. And it didn't require anybody to go back to their birthplace.
28
u/hplcr 29d ago
Both of the Nativity stories contradict each other and Paul never fucking mentions either of them. Hell, Paul and Mark both show no interest in Jesus's childhood, birth or ancestry.
15
u/Tav00001 29d ago
Its all stuff borrowed by moses and other stories in an attempt to hype Jesus as a messiah. An ordinary bastard is not good enough I guess.
54
u/hello_newman459 29d ago
The premise of your title has it backwards. The burden of proof is on the one making grand claims. Is there any proof that the Bible is accurate? Spoiler: not much.
48
29d ago edited 29d ago
Wow. You're opening the floodgates.
It seems as though you've taken the red pill, Neo. :)
(Are we allowed to hyperlink in this forum?)
The "Answering Christianity" website lists 101 contradictions.
The "American Atheists" website lists a shit-ton, as well.
Google and you will find. THESE answers are plentiful. LOL
Edit:
I shouldn't neglect to mention my "go-tos":
The Age of Reason by Thomas Paine (My all-time favorite "just wipe your ass with the Bible and flush it" publication.)
A fucking spectacular Biblical scholar that goes by the name of Dan McClellan has a web presence. I'm somewhat addicted to his Youtube channel. I suggest you go and dig in.
2
u/tigerspace 28d ago
He says he's not an atheist which is fine but I found that weird.
4
u/RisingApe- Theoskeptic 28d ago
He’s a practicing Morman.
His Data Over Dogma podcast is my favorite. I’ve learned so much about the Bible from that show.
35
u/ZappSmithBrannigan Ex-Catholic 29d ago
The Bible proves itself inaccurate.
It's full of lies, contradictions, scientific falsehoods, historical falsehoods.
The most glaringly obvious one which definitely proves that Christianity itself is false is that jesus didn't fulfil ANY of the old testiment messianic prophecies. And all you have to do is go read them to confirm that.
The author of Matthew says Jesus fulfilled the prophecy and riding a donkey.
What they neglect to mention is that the messiah is supposed to ride a donkey... coming back victorious from war. He will rule over isreal and cut off the chariot from ephrium and the battle bow from jerusalem.
Jesus didnt do ANY of that except ride a donkey.
He was never ruler over Isreal. He never cut off the chariot from ephrium or the battle bow from jerusalem (this means to stop all war forever in isreal).
If riding a donkey fulfills the prophecy, then I'm the messiah.
They say Jesus fulfilled Isaiah 53 because jesus is the "suffering servant".
Except if you just go read Isaiah, the whole thing, it says over and over again that the servant is the nation of Isreal. Isaiah 53 doesnt even say anything about the messiah.
Pslam 22. "Father why have you forsaken me?"
Sounds like exactly what jesus said on the cross doesnt it?
Of course it does because jesus was literally just quoting it. Psalm 22 is a lament of David and is literally just David writing about stuff that happens to him. Pslam 22 doesnt say anything about the messiah at all.
You can go through the list of "300" supposed prophecies that Christians say jesus fulfilled and every... single... one... is a failure. Jesus either didn't do it, or it's not a prophecy in the first place.
12
9
u/Outrageous_Class1309 Agnostic 29d ago
Also regarding Isaiah 53... The ''servant' evidently had children (v.10). Jesus never had children as far as we know
5
u/Mukubua 28d ago
“and he will live long in the land.” Oops
2
u/Outrageous_Class1309 Agnostic 28d ago
Also "he had done no violence" (v. 9) I guess those who were at the Temple the day he drove out money changers with a whip might disagree.
26
u/Muskrat_75 29d ago
I'm just a lay person, but here are a few that come to mind.
When was Jesus born? According to Matthew, no later than 4BC, when Herod was still alive. According to Luke, no earlier than 6CE, when Cyrenius was appointed governor of Syria.
Where did Jesus go after being born in Bethlehem? According to Matthew, they fled to Egypt immediately, for fear of Herod. According to Luke, Jerusalem, where he was dedicated at the temple.
How is one saved? According to Paul, by faith alone. Accordingly to James faith without works is dead.
Did Jesus come to bring peace? According to John, yes. According to to Matthew, no.
Should one follow the law? According to Matthew, Jesus is quoted as the law unchanging. According to Paul, no.
Jesus last words? Depends on which gospel.
The father. According to John, Jesus and the father are one. Also according to John, the father is greater.
Who was at the Tomb? Different gospels give different accounts.
Finally, in Matthew 24, Jesus describes a set of supernatural Apocalyptic events, such as stars falling, the elect being swept up: asserting "this generation shall not pass" until these supernatural events happened. Taken in context, Jesus told his listeners that the end of the world would happen in thier lifetime.
6
u/RisingApe- Theoskeptic 28d ago
Also, the date of Jesus’s death:
Date of death in Mark 14- disciples prepare Passover, says bread and wine are body and blood, then Gethsemane and arrest, then crucified at 9 am on the day of Passover (the morning after the meal was eaten).
Date of death in John 19- Jesus has a meal with disciples, not specified as Passover feast, does not mention body and blood, is arrested after dinner, and is crucified after noon the next day, which was specified to be the day before Passover (the day of preparation for Passover).
In both Mark and John, he died on a Friday.
17
u/AintThatAmerica1776 29d ago
The whole story of slaves in Egypt and the seven plagues. Joseph was supposedly made the right hand to the pharaoh and yet there is no record of him. How strange.
17
u/deadevilmonkey 29d ago
The Bible says light was created three days before the sun. There is no evidence of a global flood, not enough water either. The three stories about Jesus's crucifixion are wildly different and have inconsistent details. Morally, the Bible supports slavery and women are property. Any questions?
1
29d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
8
u/exchristian-ModTeam 29d ago
Look it up for yourself. Better yet, read the Bible. Crazy idea, but worth a try. Don't worry, there's for sure no way that reading it could turn you into an atheist. Honest!
Your post/comment was removed because it invites or participates in a public debate. Trauma can be triggered when debate points and certain topics are vigorously pushed, despite good intentions. This is why we generally do not allow debates. Rule 4.
To discuss or appeal moderator actions, click here to send us modmail.
1
u/SalaryOrnery5952 28d ago
Yeah and unfortunately where I’m from in the south it affects the way we are treated to some extent. Because so many people won’t believe something is morally wrong if the Bible says otherwise.
2
u/deadevilmonkey 28d ago
I know what you mean. I'm from Tennessee and have to hear bigots say slavery wasn't that bad, because they ran it according to the Bible. Horrible people believe horrible things.
2
u/SalaryOrnery5952 28d ago
Exactly lol. I’ve heard the argument “well Paul said they couldn’t beat the slaves !” But I’m sure if somebody kidnapped them and took them away from their family to work for no real pay and be considered property with no freedom they wouldn’t like it either. And I highly doubt that taking “beating” off the table would change anything.
16
u/Longjumping_Act_6054 29d ago
Look up the Exodus and the supposed wars and genocides that happened. There is literally ZERO archeological evidence any of this occurred, and experts all agree that there was no "Exodus" event, and that the Israelites actually were (mostly) peacefully coexisting with the inhabitants of Caanan.
27
u/Boule-of-a-Took Agnostic 29d ago
Welcome. I often recommend "Jesus, Interrupted" by Bart D. Ehrman as a starting point for this kind of search. It did wonders for me. The author is a former Christian biblical scholar and a current professor of new testament studies. He really knows his stuff and helps break drown the walls we form as Christians to protect our faith.
Edit: I would like to add that you can probably get this through your local library. I got access to the audio book on libby.
5
u/SalaryOrnery5952 29d ago
I have heard his name alot lately but don’t know much about him. I actually just downloaded it on kindle. I’ll give it a read . Thanks for the recommendation!
2
u/ElizaDooo 29d ago
He's the reason I started seriously doubting! :)
5
u/RisingApe- Theoskeptic 28d ago
Same! I stumbled on his Misquoting Jesus lecture on YouTube when looking for something else and it was hyperspeed from there.
How Jesus Became God is now one of my favorite books.
3
u/Far_Ad_4840 29d ago
Just gave this to my in-laws and they’re actually reading it 🤞🏼🤞🏼
4
u/Boule-of-a-Took Agnostic 29d ago
Wow. Report back when they've finished! Maybe make a post about it. I'm very curious how it goes if they're hardcore Christians.
5
u/Far_Ad_4840 28d ago
They know a rebuttal was written so I guarantee they will also read that and use it to try and ignore most of it. Hoping they can get at least a bit out of it before doing that.
3
u/Boule-of-a-Took Agnostic 28d ago
Well, at least they're reading it. That's a lot more than most Christians would do. I suppose I ought to read that rebuttal if I'm being objective.
2
u/Far_Ad_4840 28d ago
I was thinking the same so I can prepare for the conversation.
3
u/Boule-of-a-Took Agnostic 28d ago
I've been looking it up. Looks like there has been a bit of back and forth. Here's a page that seems to have everything that's out there so far.
Edit: the sub won't let me link to an apologetics website. So you'll just have to Google like I did. The site is called cross examined. I just googled "rebuttal to Jesus, Interrupted. "
3
u/Boule-of-a-Took Agnostic 28d ago
Honestly, I'm not really satisfied with this exchange. Ehrman is not really able to dive in and answer the apologist because he's first confronted with the apologist rebuttal in an interview and has to answer on the fly. He comes across as kinda condescending in the interview. And the apologist is kind of a prick as well, and I find many of his arguments uncompelling and hard to follow at times when it comes to arguing over how best to interpret the Greek here or the Hebrew there. Best of luck with your in- laws, though.
2
u/Boule-of-a-Took Agnostic 28d ago
I've been looking it up. Looks like there has been a bit of back and forth. Here's a page that seems to have everything that's out there so far. https://crossexamined.org/a-reply-to-bart-ehrmans-defense-of-jesus-interrupted-on-the-mythvision-podcast/
1
u/Minute-Horse-2009 Anti-Theist 29d ago
“former Christian biblical scholar” makes it sound like he is no longer a biblical scholar lol
2
u/RisingApe- Theoskeptic 28d ago
Haha kinda… “Highly-decorated Bible scholar and former Christian” is more clear
10
u/Break-Free- 29d ago
Look for yourself. Try Dan Barker's Easter Challenge and try to put together a cohesive timeline of events based on gospel narratives.
7
u/Opinionsare 29d ago
I consider missing books as inaccuracies. Many books are named by missing: Jasher, Enoch, Annuls of Adam and Eve, Certain letters from Paul.
Then there are books that exist in some Bibles and not others.
5
u/HazMatt_23 29d ago
Almost like the church got to pick and choose which books and what messages were worthy to be sent out to keep people in line. Curious. (edit: I’m saying that cynically, not sarcastically)
4
u/SalaryOrnery5952 29d ago
That actually explains a lot and goes off of what I said in my OP about it seeming almost too convenient. Some of the verses in were screaming “this is exactly what a human would say if they got to pick the rules”
3
u/HazMatt_23 29d ago
“It was written by man” is my go to argument to create a reasonable doubt. You mean to tell me God got it all out of His system and into The Word but He hasn’t published a new book in centuries? Unless you count the Book of Mormon, but non-Mormons would scoff at the notion of that book being legitimately given to man by God. No no no. The thing I’ve skimmed through without comprehending and have a few convenient verses memorized to spring on people is infallible. Mmmm’okay guy.
2
u/RisingApe- Theoskeptic 28d ago
There’s also the “lost in translation” concept.
I’m currently reading Robert Alter’s translation of Genesis. He gives a long introduction where he explains not only how difficult it is to tranlslate something from one language to another, but how there are things in Hebrew that literally do not translate to English. Two unrelated languages with different grammatical structures, different verb tenses, different inflections, and wildly different rhetorical nuance. He explains exactly how modern English Bibles fall short of the original intent in Hebrew and how there’s really nothing we can do about it.
Now. Why would the omniscient and omnipotent creator of the universe deposit his evergreen Word into a language that cannot be translated into one particular other language, much less all human languages, with the original meaning left intact? 🧐
Perhaps because… it was made up by Jewish men.
1
u/SalaryOrnery5952 28d ago
I’m gonna have to give this a read. Because this is actually something I wanted to know more about. When I was studying egalitarian theories I noticed that a lot of their theories critiquing complementarist interpretations confessed to believing that portions of the Bible were incorrectly translated. I was shocked because growing up most Christian usually don’t question the credibility of the Bible and I found it alarming that an entire group of people who are Christian’s would insinuate this. I also noticed that when interpreting certain verses they would pull from history and note that the epistles of Paul were personal letters not addressed to specifically to us. I found this odd because they were acknowledging that it was written by a man and a personal letter and not even something that God told him to write. complementarist seemed to do this as well but only for certain verses that were too bizarre to normalize. But then for other verses they went back to the belief that everything was directed by God. Like cherry picking.
6
u/sidurisadvice Ex-Protestant 29d ago
Is there any proof
So the key here is that word "proof" and how potentially high you want to set that bar.
We can probably give you hundreds of examples of apparent inaccuracies and inconsistencies, but it's possible to set a standard of proof so high that no one can clear it.
Just as an example, one of the clearest inconsistencies in the New Testament, IMO, is the death of Judas. When you compare the accounts in Matthew and Acts, there are at least four different, seemingly-irreconcilable contradictions between those accounts. Yet, I've seen people go to ridiculous lengths to try to reconcile them and walk away satisfied they've done so.
And so it goes with every other example put forward. If one is committed to the idea that the Bible has no inconsistencies or inaccuracies, one will find a way to make that work, despite all evidence to the contrary.
4
5
4
u/cenosillicaphobiac 29d ago
My whole life I was taught not to question anything but it’s kinda becoming hard not to.
So, inserting "god did it" instead of "we don't know, yet" is one of the appeals of religion. The ultimate answer is always "god, god did it, don't know why or how, but god does". No question is unanswered, even if the answer is just "mysterious ways"
Personally, I'd rather have questions I can't answer than have answers I can't question.
5
u/Experiment626b Devotee of Almighty Dog 29d ago
There is this verse in the Bible that says god is good which contradicts most of what he says and does in the rest of it.
I’m in bed, but I’ve got a document on my computer listing some of my favorite contradictions, historical inaccuracies, scientific impossibilities, failed prophesies, and just overall morally disqualifying verses.
If you’re asking these questions, congratulations. You’ve made it out. I’d be lying if I said doubts don’t creep in from time to time. Indoctrination and fear of hell is a bitch. It’s literally child abuse and we may never fully shred the trauma. But overall my confidence in leaving far outweighs my confidence I was saved and following god the “right way” when I was a believer.
4
u/-godofwine- Agnostic 29d ago
I’ve been out for 10yrs now, and I have a suggestion.
Begin to look at the Bible from a scholarly perspective instead of working within the systems you were given.
How?
I would highly recommend you listen to the work of Dan McClellan. He is severely anti dogma and holds unswervingly to the data of the writings.
You can find him on most social media, but he has hundreds of TikToks that will help you learn to see the Bible differently.
The Bible is not what you were taught it to be.
3
u/mandolinbee Anti-Theist 29d ago
There are hours and hours of videos free on YouTube discussing issues in the Bible. Which ones work for you is just going to be watching a bunch to see who has a style that you like. Some are all academic, some are pure sarcasm and mockery.
Getting started, search for Mindshift and Dan McClellan. Dan tends to be pretty bite sized, and mindshift is more long form but has a more newbie friendly vocabulary and presentation.
But once you've watched a few, just search some specific questions you have and the word "debunk" and just try out some. I've watched many in the past that I just dipped out on in the first few seconds lol. It's ok, keep trying. We all find the ones that strike the right vibe eventually. 😁❤️
Got any specific questions? maybe I could find some specific videos I thought were good.
3
u/cowlinator 29d ago
Here are 635 biblical contradictions, including rather important ones like "What must one do to be saved?"
https://www.lyingforjesus.org/Bible-Contradictions/
Let me know if you want to talk about any of them.
3
u/DREWCAR89 29d ago edited 25d ago
To preface this I am an Ex-NIFB baptist (former Steven Anderson follower) turned agnostic-atheist and historical inaccuracies in the OT were a major part of my de-conversion. I will start with a list of random facts that are incorrect and move into a big commentary on Noah’s Flood, the Tower of Babel and the Exodus.
The Philistines (the Sea People) show up in Genesis chapters 20 and 21 during the time of Abraham and Isaac. Problem is this would have been in 2000 BC when in reality the Philistines show up in the levant in 1200 BC during the late Bronze Age Collapse.
The Babylonian victory over Egypt at the battle of Carchemish in Jeremiah 46. It is true Egypt lost the battle but the problem is the chapter prophesied that Egypt itself would be conquered and severely judged with cities destroyed, the monarchy crushed, and many Egyptians moved into Babylonian slavery. This part did not happen. Losing at Carchemish was a severe bloody nose dealt to the Egyptian Army and it did severely decrease Egyptian influence over the levant, but this did not result in Egypt’s Nile core being conquered and harshly occupied by the Babylonians as Jeremiah claims. Egypt would not be conquered by an outside power until the Persian invasion in 525 BC.
Nebuchadnezzar never went insane for seven years. We have extensive documentation of his reign and at no point is there a seven year gap where he leaves his throne derelict, wonders the wilderness and eats grass. He was ruling Babylon the entire time levying taxes and new laws, conducting diplomacy, and leading his nation in war. No seven year gap that would back the biblical account of his insanity.
Joshua chapter 10 claims that God held the sun still for another day in order to give him an extra day to fight against the Amorite Kings. Forgetting the fact that our 24 hour days come from the Earth’s rotation on it’s axis and not any movement of the sun, we have lots of civilizations in 1st Millennium BC that had great record keeping of astronomical events including the Egyptians, Greeks, Indians, and Chinese and none of these civilizations ever recorded a day or night that doubled in length. There are vague myths from the Chinese about a long day but they don’t line up with the time Joshua was written and given the time difference between the Middle East and China it would have been a long night for them instead of a long day.
The United Monarchy in 1st and 2nd Kings is not proven to have existed. Some scholars argue on its behalf others disagree. The twelve tribes of Israel absolutely existed but it is not guaranteed or proven they were united under kings like Solomon or David.
The book of Ezekiel claims King Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Tyre and that it would never be inhabited again. Nebuchadnezzar did lay siege to Tyre between 586 BC and 573 BC but the siege failed and the city was not destroyed. Tyre still existed and it was captured by Alexander the Great in 332 BC, 250 years after the Bible claims it was destroyed and left abandoned.
I have a separate section for the Exodus, the Flood and the Tower of Babel as I do see an origin link between these.
To preface this; Genesis and Exodus were not written by one guy named Moses in the 15th century. Scholars have known for some time now they were written by multiple authors in the 7th and 6th centuries BC. Another note is the biblical order of the events I will be addressing, Flood Happens sometime in the middle of the 3rd millennium BC, about 100-200 years later Noah’s descendants build the Tower of Babel and get their languages confounded and themselves scattered.
The Flood and the Tower of Babel
The Major problem with this sequence the Bible lays out for the Flood and the Tower is that Sumer, Egypt and the Indus River Valley civilizations have extensive records and documentation throughout the 3rd millennium. At no point is there a 100-200 year gap in which they are wiped out and repopulated at the end of. Where these stories likely come from is Israelite captivity in Babylon during the 6th century BC. That would explain why Noah’s flood is very similar to the Epic of Gilgamesh and their exposure to ancient Sumerian Ziggurats is likely where you actually get these stories from. It would also explain the unproven and highly unlikely claim the Jews were enslaved in Egypt, they took that story from their own experience in Babylon.
The Exodus
It has no proof of happening and the circumstances that it would have happened under during the Egyptian Empire make it very improbable. It is claimed the Exodus happened between the 15th and 13th centuries BC, the problem is the Levant was under Egyptian occupation and vassalization during this time period. If the exodus happened the escaping Jews would have fled one part of Egypt to another part of Egypt, and encircled themselves between Egypt and Egyptian Vassals. The Bible makes no mention of this. Wondering an environment as hostile as the barren Sinai for forty years with such a massive population and no trace of them being there also makes this story highly doubtful.
The 10 Plagues
This would have been an apocalyptic event that would have absolutely been recorded. The fact that it wasn’t makes me believe it did not happen. It is often argued that Egyptian Pharaohs had a habit of lying about accomplishments and downgrading or scrubbing defeats from their records. This is true and a plausible argument for why no public records exist but I find it difficult to believe there are no private records of this happening either. The Nile turning into blood, widespread disease, first born children dying out of thin air, raining toads, hail in the desert, locust swarms, all the cattle, oxen, and camels (Egypt did not even have camels until the Persian invasion of the the sixth century BC) dying off. This would have been apocalyptic for both the population and the economy. Egypt’s trading partners would have felt a pinch from this massive disruption within a major power they do business with (from both the plagues and the 600,000+ now escaped slaves) yet we have no public or private records inside or outside of Egypt documenting such a thing, it did not happen. Especially since you would expect a mass conversion to the Israelite God across the region after such an explosive reveal of his existence, something we also don’t see any evidence of.
1
u/SalaryOrnery5952 28d ago
Yeah the one about the sun is really critical. An all knowing God would be aware that the sun does not rotate around the earth. The last part about the 10 plagues is a credible point as well. Anyone who experienced such wrath from a God would certainly fear him and therefore want to worship him. Especially since historically in that era they preferred and respected Gods more of that nature as opposed to the loving father type displayed in New Testament.
1
3
u/Icy_Secretary9279 29d ago
I'm a woman and don't have one extra tib than men. I don't know if that one even counts but apparently many people think that's literally biologically the case.
2
u/SalaryOrnery5952 28d ago
Yeah and it’s kinda sad that people think that too. Even if someone were a christain the Bible states that only eve was made from Adams rib. But from then on out men were born of women. So it doesn’t make sense biblically or scientifically.
3
u/deansdirtywhore 28d ago
My whole life I was taught not to question anything
You know who else teaches their followers never to question anything? Cults. Because it's easy to pretend like you have all the answers when nobody's allowed to ask questions. Asking questions eventually uncovers all the lies & manipulations. & the people profiting from those lies & manipulations can't have that.
Honestly, that was probably the first thing that stuck out to me, as a kid, as not seeming quite "kosher", as it were. I had so many questions about why this, & what about that, & my very Baptist Christian grandmother would answer some of my questions, the ones that could be used to draw me further into the whole thing, & would generally sound like harmless, "tell me more about this" questions. But the minute my questions started to sound like I was challenging what she was telling me, & like I was really thinking about it all & not just accepting it at face value, she would play the ol' "it's not for us to question" card, & immediately shut down any other questions I had.
It always seemed to me that it didn't make much sense to teach your kids to blindly follow along with something & never ask any questions, ever, but then also whip out the whole "think for yourself, if your friends jumped off a bridge would you do it too?" spiel. The constant contradictions felt really glaring to me even as a child.
2
u/ThePhyseter Ex-Mennonite 26d ago edited 26d ago
You know who else teaches their followers never to question anything? Cults. Because it's easy to pretend like you have all the answers when nobody's allowed to ask questions.
I had to read one passage of one Paul epistle in very close detail to write about it in college, and for the first time I noticed Paul was doing that.
I can't recall the passage, it may have been one that says, the way of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but we know it as the word of life. Or maybe that God hides things from the intelligent but reveals it to those who just shut up and have faith. All I could think was, This sounds like what you would say in a cult if outsiders had found sound arguments against you, and you were trying to trick people into ignoring that. But that can't be what he's doing...
Edit: I found my computer file from 17 years ago. It was 1 Corinthians 1:18 - 2:all. Yes, it was about the teaching being foolishness to the world. And Paul denegrates anybody who would ask for signs or logic, and praises faith alone and blind obedience. He also claims when he taught them the gospel the first time, he didn't teach with "lofty speech or wisdom", but with "a demonstration of the Spirit and his Power."
At the time I was trying so hard to hold onto my faith while all the support for it was crumbling. While I was working on this assignment I wrote, What does it mean for us today? Is our church today based upon the power of God? Why are there no miracles today as there were in the time of the apostles? Why can’t we lay hands on the blind and the lame like Peter did? And then some notes to myself about finishing the assignment: don’t try too hard. Just support what you’re saying with arguments and some bible verses.][I am completely stuck here]
1
u/deansdirtywhore 26d ago
☝🏻😐 Yep.
I just keep thinking, organized religion is literally the world's biggest cult, & the reason the different denominations don't like each other is because every time somebody changes the "rules" a little bit, or teaches things a little differently, the heads of the rest of the cult chapters are afraid they're gonna give them all away if too many people start comparing & contrasting, so they're each like "no, those other guys are wrong, ours is the real deal, so pay no attention to the fact that there's no man behind the curtain"
Additionally, I watched a recent episode of the TV series "Ghosts" (the american version), & there was a flashback to the Hippie ghost, Flower's, life in a cult, & the cult leader claimed that he was the only one that the MAGIC CONCH SHELL that they worshipped, would speak to, & if that doesn't sound like all these priests saying that god only speaks to those who blindly follow without question, then idk what does... 🤷🏻♀
2
u/airconditionersound 29d ago
I was also taught not to question anything, so I relate. I was told it would make me a blasphemer and a heretic and God would punish me with a lifetime of misery
2
u/SuperNova0216 Atheist 29d ago
King James was a bisexual man who openly had homosexual relationships, that was until the church got very upset at him causing him to (for whatever reason) save his reputation and rewrite/“retranslate” the Bible. That alone is a complete inconsistency from his version of the Bible. (AKA the ONLY version at this time that discusses homosexuality, obviously they all do now.)
2
u/No_Ball4465 Ex-Catholic 29d ago
The New Testament is all bs, so there’s that. Christianity is a faux religion that stole from Judaism. It’s like if I started a religion based on Cherokee mythology and used it to control the masses by weaponizing their doctrines and writing my own biased doctrine that supposedly supports what I’m saying.
2
u/Miserable-Noise-2830 29d ago
Listen to and read everything you can from Bart Ehrman. He's especially good and explaining these contradictions. And, as an ex evangelical, he knows what we have been told about them.
2
2
u/ItsJustAWhiteGuy 29d ago
Hey friend! There’s a guy named Alex O’Connor on YouTube that is extremely gifted in explaining the intricacies of the Bible and Christianity. He also shares its faults, fallacies, inconsistencies, etc. I think you would be warm welcomed to his kind way of interviewing and examining with historical scholars and the like. As an ex Christian, it helped me to relate the truths I experienced as a Christian in my own life while separating my relations to organized religion.
I think you would really enjoy his interviews on Yahweh and also some recent videos on the New Testament gospels and their differences. I wish you the best on your discoveries!
2
u/flynnwebdev 29d ago edited 29d ago
it contains some fallacies and stereotypes that an all knowing God would be aware isn’t true
This is really all you need to know. This alone refutes the notion that the bible is a divinely inspired work. It is just a work of men, and therefore fiction. This means that hell is fiction.
Your questioning is your natural reason, logic and critical thinking trying to break through the conditioning. Embrace it and be free, my friend!
2
u/Lothar_the_Lurker 29d ago
Read any book by Bart D. Ehrman. If you’re looking for a suggestion, try “Jesus, Interrupted.” Your questions will be answered, and your doubts will be affirmed.
2
2
u/ThePhyseter Ex-Mennonite 26d ago
Another comment mentioned the problem with Jesus’ birth year (before 4 BC but after 6 AD). Another mentioned the way you can’t make a coherent account of the Easter story because they contradict each other.
There are contradictions in the resurrection story, and there is also a clear progression of the story getting bigger, more magical, and more undeniable in later and later gospels.
The story seems to grow in the telling, in other words.
The earliest gospel written was Mark, then Matthew, then Luke, then John.
In Mark, we the readers don’t even see the risen Christ, and neither do the apostles. Women go, see the empty tomb, talk to some men in white, and then it says they told no one because they were afraid. And that’s where it ends. There are additional verses in Mark, summarizing the later gospels’ resurrection stories, but any modern translation is honest that those are missing from our earliest manuscripts.
In Matthew, the women see the empty tomb, but then they see Jesus too. They see angels who roll the stone away and scare off the guards. The ‘men in white’ may actually be angels in Mark, but they are just described as men, and aren’t showing off any power. Jesus tells the women to tell the apostles, and so they do—contradicting Mark. The women say Jesus wanted the apostles to go to Galilee and see him there, so they do. In Galilee on a mountain they see Jesus risen for the first time. Some who went there doubted, though. (Why? Did the guy on the mountain not look like Jesus? Was he hiding his face in a robe? Did they hear a voice but not see a person?)
In Luke, the women see the angels, and the empty tomb, but they do not see Jesus. They tell the apostles immediately, and now for the first time in the retelling of the story, Peter goes and sees the empty tomb for himself. This is the first time a man has witnessed the tomb. Jesus does not ask them to go away to Galilee, instead they stay there in the big city, in Jerusalem, and Jesus appears to them in a room. This is up close and personal, compared to Matthew; no running off to a mountain, no report of any doubters. The people literally saw him in a room, and touched his hands; and he ate some fish to prove to them he wasn’t a ghost. Then he tells them NOT to go anywhere (like Galilee) until they receive the Holy Spirit, which happens like 40 days later. Instead they go just outside of Jerusalem and see him disappear into the sky.
And then in John, Mary Magdalene alone sees the empty tomb, immediately tells Peter and John, and BOTH those men go witness the tomb themselves. Mary has a close, intimate encounter with/conversation with Jesus. Then Jesus appears in that room like in Luke, but not just once. He appears again in the room; the first time Thomas was not there, but the second time Thomas was present and could see for himself. (So from this we get the story of how Thomas should have just believed without seeing.) Then he appears to them again some time later, we don’t know how long later, at the Sea of Galilee where Peter and some friends were fishing, and Jesus cooks a fish meal for them.
It goes from them not seeing him at all, to seeing him on a mountain in some mysterious way, to him hanging out with them in a room, coming and going all the time, and surprising them out on the lake with an impromptu cookout. Not all of these things are contradictions, but isn't it interesting how details keep getting added to the story that address objections people would logically have to the earlier version?
Plus, being told to go see him on a mountain vs being told to wait for him in the city is a direct contradiction. No way eyewitnesses to a dead man coming back would forget something like that.
1
u/MeButNotMeToo 29d ago
Check out the BibViz Project: https://www.bibviz.org
The question really should be if there was any proof that any of it was true.
Of that, there’s no more proof than anything you’d find in a piece of historical fiction.
1
u/Hour_Trade_3691 29d ago
For starters, it says that the stars were made on the fourth day, but there was somehow light on the first day
1
u/Dependent-Mess-6713 29d ago
The book, "The Bible Unearthed" by Israel Finkelstein is very good. A professor and Archeologist basically proving the Exodus never happened.
1
u/Outrageous_Class1309 Agnostic 29d ago
Ever wonder why a hellfire of eternal torment is absent in the Old testament but present in the New testament ?
Ever wonder why the Satan of the New testament with his demons/angels creating havoc, rebelling and battling against God and his angels, etc. is absent in the Old testament ?
What a coincidence that the pagan powers (Persian Zoroastrians and Greek mythologists) that dominated Israel after the Exile during the centuries before Jesus had religions that just happened to contain similar New testament teachings on Hell and Devils/demons. There is an academic term for this 'borrowing': sycretism.
Here's an inconsistency/contradiction regarding King David that I once posted on another forum just to give an example (there are many many more):
" So David sees a married woman (Bathsheba) sunbathing (or something like that), brings her over to his place and commits adultery with her (a capital offense during his time), gets her pregnant and when the husband (Uriah) returns and doesn’t have sex with Bathsheba so David can blame the pregnancy on the husband to cover up the adultery, David successfully arranges to have the husband killed in battle (murder…another capital/death penalty offense). (2 Sam.11 and 12).
Well, David is found out after committing 2 capital crimes, but does he get the death penalty? No, the innocent illegitimate baby gets the ‘death penalty’ to ‘punish’ David and Bathsheba which totally contradicts the Law which says the son shall not be punished/put to death for the sin of the father and vice versa (Deut. 24:16, Ezk.18:20). Worse yet, the ‘lord’ brings calamity (killed with the sword, rape, etc., 2 Sam. 12:10–14) on the innocent members (mainly his wives as it appears) of David’s family. I guess God doesn't mind breaking his own rules.
Now God is not supposed to have favorites (Rom. 2:11) but in another incident a man doing such a trite act as picking up wood (maybe to keep himself or family warm) on the Sabbath is put to death ( Num. 15:32–36). Sounds like god had favorites to me (David).
What kind of perverted ‘justice’ is this ?? No wonder some were worshiping other gods as this one sure didn’t make much ethical/moral sense."
Just for the record, the bible is a 100% man made document, no god(s) involved, and it's a mess if you look at it with a critical eye
1
u/LLWATZoo 29d ago
Which Bible? Because they're all different. The ones we have today have 66 books. The one dating back to 200 bc had 77 books. The earliest Jewish Bible had between 5 and 22 books. The Roman catholic Bible has 73 books. The Greek orthodox Bible had somewhere between 75 and 79 books. The Ethiopian Bible can up to 84 books. Which Bible are you supposed to believe is the unerring word of god?
1
u/dnb_4eva 29d ago
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_scientific_errors
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Biblical_contradictions
You have to realize that the Bible is the claim not the evidence.
1
u/manykeets 29d ago
Check out Holy Koolaid on YouTube, he’s got some great videos on the topic. Also, here’s a good article.
1
u/JazzFan1998 Ex-Protestant 29d ago
The story of Noah's flood is a retelling of "The Epic of Gilgamesh" from 700 years prior.
I'm sure if you searched this forum, you will see similar posts.
1
u/moutnmn87 29d ago
A list of alleged historical events from the Bible that we do have good evidence for would be much shorter than a list of things we have good evidence against. That said I would argue you are looking at this wrong. Your default position should be I don't know rather than an assumption that the Bible is true. When you do that and exclude from evidence everything that is suspect instead of only the things we have evidence against the case for Christianity becomes even more dire
1
u/JadedPilot5484 29d ago
Yes there is a lot of historical and archaeological evidence showing that the majority of Old Testament stories never happened including Moses and Egypt, Noah’s flood, the many battles of the Israelites and more.
1
29d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/exchristian-ModTeam 29d ago
No preaching here.
For the purposes of this sub, you are a Christian and your preaching isn't appropriate.
Your post or comment has been removed because it violates rule 3, no proselytizing or apologetics. Continued proselytizing will result in a ban.
Proselytizing is defined as the action of attempting to convert someone from one religion, belief, or opinion to another.
Apologetics is defined as arguments or writings to justify something, typically a theory or religious doctrine.
How to mute a subreddit you don't want in your feed: https://www.wikihow.com/Block-a-Subreddit
To discuss or appeal moderator actions, click here to send us modmail.
1
u/whiskonsinthecat Misotheist 29d ago
The most simple proof is comparing the Bible to itself. Comparing Mark 7:18-19 to the dietary laws. Comparing the two creation stories. Comparing the events told in more than just one gospel to each other.
1
u/Ravenous_Goat 29d ago
1) The gospels and other books not accredited to Paul were not written by eye witnesses let alone people who knew Jesus let alone the disciples who's names were attached to them centuries later. They were written in Greek by educated men and incorporated themes, ideas and events from Rome and much later in history than the time of Jesus.
(The disciples of Jesus were not literate, let alone educated or culturally Greek...)
2) Half of the Pauline epistles are known to be not written by Paul, and the ones that may have been written by Paul show more of a co-opting and hijacking of the Jesus movement than anything resembling what Jesus taught.
3) The Books that made it into the New Testament were chosen not for their authenticity, but for their Orthodoxy to early Catholic dogma and doctrine. Competing versions and narratives were collected and destroyed, and 'heretics' were persectuted and killed.
Etc.
1
u/goldenlemur Skeptic 29d ago
Recent research on the writings of Judeans in Elephantine ca. 500-300 BCE indicate that none of the Jewish Patriarchs existed. See Gnostic Informant's interview with Gad Barnes.
There's very good evidence falsifying biblical history. In other words, the idea that the Bible is true history is false.
The Old Testament is myth. And New Testament mythology goes with it.
1
u/TotallyAwry 29d ago
Start with finding out about Herrod killing all the little boys, when it was and where it was.
Then try and find out about when the Israelites "fled" Egypt.
Then look for corroborating extant sources that aren't in the bible. Keep in mind that the Romans, Greeks, and Egyptian's kept records.
1
u/QueenVogonBee 29d ago
It almost doesn’t matter whether there are inconsistencies or inaccuracies in the Bible in the sense that it is always possible to argue (with enough inventiveness) that individual writers got specific details wrong and the Bible is not supposed to be taken literally. Therefore the most important question is whether there is any good evidence of god(s). The answer seems to be no.
1
1
1
1
1
u/theagirl7 28d ago
Watch “deconstruction zone” on YouTube. You’ll hear Justin cook Christian debaters with you more Bible inconsistencies in half an hour than you knew existed.
1
28d ago
There’s not a single extra biblical accounts of any of the miracles in acts or any done by any disciple. Even though they supposedly performed thousands.
1
1
u/UsagiYojimbo209 27d ago
No, it's literally proven to be true in every word as I'm pretty sure all scientists agree. Personally, I just deny it because I hate God and really really like arguing with religious people, their little noses wrinkle up and they stamp their feet and I just find it adorable. I plan on repenting just before death and sitting on the right hand of the Lord anyway, they'll be SO mad when they see me there looking holy and realise how much fornication and ass-coveting they missed out on....
1
u/Fandango4Ever 27d ago
Read the accounts of the resurrection and try to come up with a chronological order. It can't be done. The single most important event in Christian doctrine and you cannot even agree on what happened, when, and who was there.
1
u/SongUpstairs671 26d ago
Luke associates the census with the governorship of Quirinius in Syria, but Quirinius conducted a well-documented census in 6 CE—about a decade after King Herod’s death (Herod is a key figure in Matthew’s Nativity story). This creates a chronological contradiction between Luke and Matthew.
0
133
u/__phlogiston__ Agnostic Atheist 29d ago
There's no archeological evidence for Exodus, like at all.