Chapter 2
Christian theology declares that the Bible is the flawless Word of God and that its authority is fully beyond reproach. I claim that the Scriptures are a work of man, not of God.
If there is indeed a God, He is not capable of making mistakes. And yet, there are errors in the Bible. As I demonstrated in An Epiphany, one such error is found in the book of Genesis.
“You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive.” (Ge 6:19, 20)
And then, in the next chapter of Genesis, Noah was told to take seven of every kind of bird.
“Take with you seven of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, and also seven of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth.” (Ge 7:2, 3)
Any rational person (devout Christians excluded) must be willing to admit that there is indeed a contradiction in the biblical text above. So then, why do such discrepancies exist?
There are eight primary factors that I know of which contribute to scriptural incongruencies. At this time, I shall only discuss one of those factors.
Scholars have been able to demonstrate that the ancient Israelites themselves had two (or three) separate versions of the Flood. One such version had been recorded by the priests in Israel, while another one (or two) was recorded by priests in Judah. The priestly versions conflicted significantly enough to cause strife between the castes. In an effort to satisfy both groups, an editor literally cut and pasted the original texts while including additions that blended them in an acceptable fashion. In many passages, it is plain to see that the editor included information from as many as three priestly traditions.
Every living thing that moved on the earth perished—birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; men and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds of the air were wiped from the earth. (Ge 7:21-23a)
I do not believe that a sane man, having educated himself about the many discrepancies inherent in the Bible, can continue to rightly insist that the Bible is the true and perfect Word of God. If some of the Bible is defective, then as a whole, it is not perfect. Should a man fear admitting this fact?
As Richard Elliot Friedman puts it, “we are now at a point at which our discoveries concerning the Bible’s origins can mean an enhanced understanding and appreciation of the Bible in its final, developed form.”
Is enhanced understanding and appreciation something to fear?
For those who are used to indulging in blind faith, nothing could be more threatening.
If a man admits that his holy book is indeed blemished, then he might be forced to ask himself whether or not it contains moral advice and theological principles which have been unintentionally manipulated according to the socio-historical biases of its authors, editors, and scribes.
So then, let’s have a look at some of the Bible’s advice.
Logic would suggest that getting one’s sister-in-law pregnant would be considered sinful. Luckily, that’s not the case.
Then Judah said to Onan, “Lie with your [dead] brother’s wife and fulfill your duty to her as a brother-in-law to produce offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so whenever he lay with his brother’s wife, he spilled his semen on the ground to keep from producing offspring for his brother. (Ge 38:8, 9)
Clean up in aisle 3! Someone please get a mop!
By reading between the lines and using a little imagination, it’s obvious to see that Onan wasn’t literally dumping his load on the ground. He was pulling out and shooting all over sister-in-law’s titties. What guy hasn’t dreamed of doing that?
Unfortunately for Onan, busting a nut on his sister-in-law’s fun bags was considered a hell-worthy sin. Who’d a thunk?
What he did was wicked in the LORD’s sight; so he put him to death also. (Ge 38:10)
How much does that suck? This makes one think that the typical Catholic pull-out method might not be such a good idea. On the upside, God encourages a man to have sexual relations with his dead brother’s wife. Surely that would help with the grieving process after losing one’s brother … or husband.
