Why does the Bible contradict itself?

Question

it's funny how a christian can take the bible as pure truth and an inspiration from god, yet at the same time, will 'write-off' the contradictions because the bible was written by man, and by different points of view and it is generally agreed that the bible is not translated accurately.

how can you follow a book that has been so hacked-up over the centuries with translations and different meanings of words and mistakes 'made by men'?

a few contradictions

2 Kings 8:26 says "Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign..."
2 Chronicles 22:2 says "Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign..."


2 Samuel 6:23 says "Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death"
2 Samuel 21:8 says "But the king took...the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul"

happymrzot was under the impression that i am attacking him/the bible.

i fell away from the christian religion and am giving it a chance again with my curious questions.

with ppl like this christian, it's no wonder some ppl are turned away from jesus. it's such a turn off to be attacked by a christian cause yer not a christian.

Answer 1

The bible is 99% pure, however there still exist copyist errors which you most definitely have pointed out. The first is a numbering copyist error and the second, one of the daughters is actually Merab. However the christian faith does not rest on tiny pieces of data like these examples. All of the questionable material of the bible has absolutely no impact on the doctrine of Christianity--they are all very minute details such as the ones you have pointed out. The other 'supposed' contradictions out there commit several logical fallacies such as quoting out of context and juxtaposition, and do not look at hebrew or greek colloquialisms

Answer 2

2 Kings 8:26 Ahaziah was twenty-two years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem one year. His mother's name was Athaliah, a granddaughter of Omri king of Israel.

2 Chron. 22:2 Ahaziah was twenty-two [a] years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem one year. His mother's name was Athaliah, a granddaughter of Omri. Fn:(a) 2 Chronicles 22:2 Some Septuagint manuscripts and Syriac (see also 2 Kings 8:26 Hebrew forty-two. (New Int. Version)

2 Kings 8:26 Ahaziah was twenty-two years old when he became king, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Athaliah the granddaughter of Omri, king of Israel.

2 Chron. 22:2 Ahaziah was forty-two[a] years old when he became king, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Athaliah the granddaughter of Omri. Fn(a) 2 Chronicles 22:2 Or twenty-two (compare 2 Kings 8:26) (New King James Ver.)
-------------------------------------------------------------------
2 Sam. 6:23 And Michal daughter of Saul had no children to the day of her death.

2 Sam. 21:8 But the king took Armoni and Mephibosheth, the two sons of Aiah's daughter Rizpah, whom she had borne to Saul, together with the five sons of Saul's daughter Merab, [a] whom she had borne to Adriel son of Barzillai the Meholathite. (NIV)

2 Sam 6:23 Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no children to the day of her death.

2 Sam 21:8 So the king took Armoni and Mephibosheth, the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bore to Saul, and the five sons of Michal[a] the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite; 2 Samuel 21:8 Or Merab (compare 1 Samuel 18:19 and 25:44; 2 Samuel 3:14 and 6:23) (New King James Ver.)

I have used your two examples quotes each from two different versions of the Bible. The first are from the New International Version and the second sets are from the New King James Version. You will note that in both cases where there is a discrepancy, there is also a footnote.

The various versions of the Bible have been edited over the centuries and will, naturally, have discrepancies based on when the translation and editing occured and by whom.

This is no different than history text books. Two versions can report the same battle or historical event and there will be discrepancies, again based on editing factors. But those discrepancies are not material to the reporting of the event.

The Bible does not contradict itself. It must be read in context. If there are variations, those variatioins do not invalidate the Bible as a whole.

Answer 3

Maybe you need to understand the Bible. That would be my first suggestion.

2 Kings 8:26 He is 22 years old.
2 chronicles 22:2 He is 22 years old.

2 Sam 6:23 He had no children.
2 Sam 21:8 The King took 2 children of Rizpah.



You my friend need another Bible.

.

Answer 4

Do those two arguments of yours really change your ENTIRE perspective on the Bible. Even if Ahaziah's age was messed up or how many children Michal had does that make the whole Bible wrong?

Think of it this way. Let's say some old book says that George Washington was 38 when he became President and later in that same book it says that he was 42 when he became President. Does that mean George Washington was never President? Of coarse not! Same holds true with the Bible.

Answer 5

No. The bible does not contradict when it is taken into the full and correct context of the Old and New Testaments and if the person goes to the Catholic Church for interpretation.

The Catholic Church's interpretation of scripture has no contradictions because Jesus gave the Holy Spirit to the Church, to the Pope in particular, to be the great interpreter of sacred scripture and to teach infallibly in all matters of faith and morals.

The Holy Bible is a collection of books which are written by prophets and saints, and all books in the bible are inspired by the Holy Spirit as the written word of God. If there seems to be a contradiction, it's because that person does not understand what they are reading, not due to any contradiction of scripture.

Study the Catholic faith, and you will never have to be confused again about scripture or about any teaching on faith and morals.

Answer 6

Where did you get your information? From an atheist website? I suggest you read the bible for yourself before you go believing everything you hear.
For one both verses in first example say he is 22 years old.
For the second example, the in 2 Samuel 21:8 says "But the king took Armeni and Mephibosheth the twoson's of Aiah's daughter Rizpah, whom she had borne to Saul, together with 5 sons of Sauls daughter MERAB" ...NOT MICHAL

Answer 7

Good insight from the other answers but here is the bigger issue.

If there are inconsistencies, can a man derive truth that covers all of the inconsistencies?

In a word, yes. Only when viewed through the lens of LOVE does the Bible makes sense and is worthwhile. When viewed through the lens of (fill in your agenda) it is worthless. This is where the church has gone astray. It uses the Bible to justify the traditions handed down through time (it is a big book, try it, it is easy) and ignores the one overriding message that is there in every word - LOVE.

Answer 8

the problem with the bible isn't those minor inconsistencies, its the bigger ones, the ones the permeate the bible. i don't care about the "copy" errors. but i do care that the bible says we are to stone sinners and kill those who go against god by working on sunday, and yet it also says that we are to love the sinner. and for the one who is without sin to cast the first stone. how god can say that he loves all his children and wants the best for them, but at the same time he is willing to send these good moral people to hell for not believing his son is god. or sending a truly horrible human being to heaven simply because he accepts god at the last minute. didn't the rest of his life mean anything? or that god made man in his image but then had to kill everyone except noah because they were wicked, this seems to show that god himself his wicked, wtf?!?!

these are some of the biblical problems that i think are important. that i couldn't reconcile. the problems that the sisters (i went to a catholic school) told me were merit less and i would "see the truth if i opened my heart to jesus". uhhh, that seems to tell me i'm supposed to disregard the bible before jesus.

lol, catholics don't have all the answers. the thing that christians don't tell you is that the bible, just like god, jesus, and the whole theistic bunch, require faith. not reason, not logic, not evidence, but faith. if you believe that the bible is flawless and right, then for you it may be. if you think that it is flawless and right for everyone, you are sorely mistaken.

Answer 9

First off, I'm not sure what Bible you have, but it's not the right one. I personally looked up those verses in 3 different translations, and they match up.

As far as the accuracy of the Bible....it is extremely accurate, and is used by both Christians and hard-core atheists alike when refering to customs of the time. And it has not been scared by centuries of mistranslation. In fact, the Dead Sea Scrolls, which were dated pre- 500 A.D., there were so few differences from our most recent copies that historians (regular, non-Christain historians) called it astounding. And those extremely few errors did not interfere with the meaning of the text.

Answer 10

You've put a smile of enlightenment on my face. For that you will suffer the most excruciating hell for turning me away from Jesus. These paradoxes have caused me to question my own faith.

I'm just kidding, I've lost the faith many years ago. I'll see you in hell on earth, because earth is the only place heaven and hell exists. Good job sultan of Satan! Haha, wonderful.

I fully agree.

Might I add, that it is a Christian doctrine to believe EVERYTHING in the bible, or nothing at all. If you don't believe all of the bible to be truth, then you are not a true Christian. I knew, I used to be one.

Answer 11

The bible contradicts because it's a book compiled by committee from fables told by word of mouth, and put together by a cult in Italy about Palestine, a country none of them had visited.

It has also been riddled with mistranslations from ancient languages (like that of ancient Persia) where the fables first started, then adapted into Aramaic, Greek, Latin and then into modern languages, usually by groups that has personal and political agendas (eg. Martin Luther and his jew-hating, William of Orange and his attempts to control the British isles, etc.).

Calling the bible a "pure book" is like calling a sausage "pure meat".