“In like manner, if I let myself believe anything on insufficient evidence, there may be no great harm done by the mere belief; it may be true after all, or I may never have occasion to exhibit it in outward acts. But I cannot help doing this great wrong towards Man, that I make myself credulous. The danger to society is not merely that it should believe wrong things, though that is great enough; but that it should become credulous, and lose the habit of testing things and inquiring into them; for then it must sink back into savagery.” -William Kingdon Clifford, The Ethics of Belief (1877)

Before engaging in a debate with an educated or intellectual opponent, there are a few questions you should consider asking:

1. Is knowledge accessible to someone without his degree/level of education?
2. Is knowledge accessible to persons of other faith or to persons of no faith? (If the opponent is religious.)
3. What would cause him to change his mind about his beliefs or ideas?

The answers to these questions will help you to know if discussion will be productive. If the answer to the first or second question is “no,” conversation will be futile if you do not hold the same title or degree as your opponent. He will attempt to teach you, but will not be open to a meaningful exchange of ideas.

If he does not provide at least one concrete, testable answer to the third question, conversation will be futile. A reasonable person will allow his mind to be changed by facts and truth. An ideologue will maintain his belief in spite of evidence to the contrary.

The third question is equally useful when beginning a dialog with an uneducated opponent. Discussion is meaningless unless each party recognizes the possibility of error and is willing to alter his position to fit the facts.

Finally, you should answer each question above for yourself. Do your answers reveal you to be a seeker of truth or an ideologue?

In a continuing quest for the truth I have spent a great deal of time over the last several months discussing Biblical contradictions with Christians. During our conversations, the Biblical defenders adopt one of three positions. Some refuse to acknowledge that the Bible contains contradictions even when presented with proof. Others acknowledge contradictory passages as problematic and attempt to provide explanations to reconcile them. A third group acknowledges the contradiction but maintain that they do not affect their belief and are therefore irrelevant. It is this third group and their approach that I wish to examine today.

The Bible contains (at least) three different types of content:

1. Statements of fact that can be tested.
2. Statements of fact that cannot be tested.
3. Statements of doctrine that are to be accepted and believed.

The first type includes historical events such as large-scale population events and the reigns of various kings. These events can be cross-checked using historical and archaeological data. Miracles and supernatural events are the second type of content, statements of fact that cannot be tested. Archaeological data cannot confirm such events, and there are no extant historical accounts that attest their historicity. Finally, statements regarding the existence of heaven and hell, the soul, and the eternal state of man are doctrinal statements that readers are expected to accept at face-value.

Most Biblical contradictions are found in the first category of content. They deal with natural events that can be tested and verified such as genealogies or the reigns of kings. Because these matters are usually unrelated to the bigger matters of faith, some Christians feel that they can be safely dismissed. One such believer put it this way:

“My thought is that we could all spend time going over every word over and over and miss our calling which is to Love God with all our heart soul and mind and love our neighbor as ourselves.” –Amy S., 6/19/09

This approach is flawed because it fails to verify the authenticity of the Bible. It accepts the Bible’s vaunted status as “God’s Word” without subjecting it to the type of reason that we apply to all claims of the supernatural. When we encounter a person claiming the ability to channel the dead or predict the future, we are naturally skeptical. We either reject their claims out-of-hand, or demand proof.  By nature of the Bible’s claim to be the Word of God, it is reasonable to expect it to prove itself in the mundane matters of history. It is only by proving of the historical accuracy of the Bible that Christians are confident in its doctrinal predictions for the future.

Let me say that again: The only way a Christian can expect the Bible to be right about the future is by knowing it is right about the past.

It is for this reason that Biblical contradictions matter. Since the Bible has internal errors regarding matters of historicity, it cannot be regarded as authoritative in its future predictions. By choosing to ignore such problems, many Christians are trusting a house that lacks a firm foundation.

– George Cummins

This post will provide a list of books that helped me remove the blinders of Christian fundamentalism and accept a more realistic view of the Bible.

The Bible

Preachers have often said that the Bible is its own best commentary, and I agree. I began to question my faith when I found unanswerable contradictions in the pages of the Bible itself. You can find the contradictions in many places, including:

• Matthew 1
• II Kings 8:25-26 vs. II Chronicles 22:1-2
• Matthew 10:10 vs. Mark 6:9
• I Chronicles 21:11-12 vs. II Samuel 24:13
• I Samuel 8:4 vs. I Chronicles 18:4
• Ezra 2:65 vs. Nehemiah 7:67
• Mark 14:12-Mark 15:25 vs. John 19:14-16
• Matthew 27:6-9 vs. Zechariah 11:12

Available at http://www.blueletterbible.org

How to Read the Bible

Author: James Kugel

This book explains the two primary methods of  Biblical interpretation, and reveals how (and why) modern conservative Christians choose the wrong one. A great guide to understanding the minds and methods of the people who created and preserved the Bible.

Available at Amazon.com and Google Books

What Did the Bible Writers Know, and When Did They Know It

Author: William G. Dever

This book is heavy reading, but the result is worth the effort. Dever is a world-renowned archaeologist, and has been conducting digs in Palestine for many decades. His insights into the physical world of ancient Israel help to put the Biblical story in context.

Available at Amazon.com

Misquoting Jesus

Author: Bart D. Ehrman

The book’s subtitle says everything you need to know: “The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why.” This is a must-read book for those who want to know if the Bible is the preserved word of God.

Available at Amazon.com and Google Books

Biblical Archaeology Review

Publisher: Biblical Archaeology Society

BAR is a bi-monthly magazine written by archaeologist and scholars which attempts to “bring the ancient world to life.” The publication provides current information on the findings of modern archaeology and examines those findings against a background of scripture.

Available at http://www.bib-arch.org

A More Sure Word

Author: R. B. Ouellette

When I first began to discuss the Biblical contradictions with Bible believers, Pastor Jim Talbert of Derby, Kansas recommended this book to me. He said that I would find the answers to many Biblical contradictions within its pages. I purchased and read the book, and found that it contained not a single reference or answer to any Biblical contradiction. It did, however, help to reveal the mindset of the fundamentalist defenders of the faith.

The book is primarily a defense of the KJV-only position. The author writes: “The position of this book is simple: The King James Bible is the right translation for English-speaking Christians to use because it is a literal translation of the correct and pure Greek and Hebrew texts.”

Then, on the same page, he makes this stunning statement: “I must plead guilty to circular reasoning. My position on the Bible did not start with manuscript evidence, study of books written on the translation issue, or other scholarly offerings. It started with the Word of God.” (By which he means the King James version of the Bible.) He goes on to say: “I want a Bible that is available and trustworthy. I do not have the access nor the time to compare thousands of manuscripts to determine God’s Word. For that matter, neither does the rest of Christendom!”

These statements are eye-opening to me. R.B. Ouellette wrote an entire book dedicated to proving that the King James translation is better than the other English translations, but did not take the time to actually study any of the manuscripts on which the controversy is based. He clearly does not need facts to support his position. By using circular reasoning, his thinking can lead him to only one place: his original starting point. Finding the truth is not his primary goal; his focus is on defending his own position. I have found that this type of reasoning is commonly used by those who defend the accuracy of the Bible.

Available at: Amazon.com and Striving Together Publications

There are many, many more books that have been helpful to me. This list will provide a good starting point, and I will be happy to make specific recommendations if you need something different.

– George Cummins

Joram had two sons, and both were named Ahaziah.

The two Ahaziahs had some pretty remarkable parallels in their lives. They were both crowned king when their father Joram died. Both were terrible kings, following in the footsteps of their most villainous predecessor.

Both Ahaziahs were close friends and allies of a neighboring king who we will call Joram II. Both went into battle with Joram II against a foreign king named Hazael. In each case, Joram II was fatally wounded in the battle, and went home to die. Both Ahaziahs went separately to see Joram I, and unexpectedly, both Ahaziahs were murdered during the visit. Even more shocking: They were both murdered by a man named Jehu.

In all the parallels between the two Ahaziahs, there is only one recorded difference between the two: One Ahaziah assumed the throne when he was 22 years old, and the other when he was 42 years old.

Same father. Same mother. Same name. Same throne. Same friend. Same battle. Same death. Yet two different people.

Make sense so far?

You see, the elements of this story are found in the Bible. In fact, the same story is told twice, in two different places. One account, in II Kings 8, describes the Ahaziah that began to reign when he was 22 years old. The other account, in II Chronicles 22, describes exactly the same story, with the exception that Ahaziah began to reign when he was 42 years old.

You may read the accounts and think that the Bible was describing the same Ahaziah, and that a simple mistake was made in his age (22 versus 42). In fact, the Bible itself gives no indication that there were two separate Ahaziahs. However, for a fundamentalist Christian, Biblical mistakes are an impossibility. Therefore, they are required to invent a story like the one above to explain away this obvious error. This story was given to me, in fact, by one such Christian. It makes far more sense for him that “Joram had two sons named Ahaziah” than to assume that his sacred book may have a minor typographical error.

As long as he applies this sort of nonsensical approach to the Bible, a believer will always feel secure in his belief. If, however, he decides to subject his belief to the type of reasonable analysis that is required in the rest of his life, perhaps he will begin to understand the error of his belief.

– George Cummins

Over the past few years I have been involved in many discussions with Christians, many of whom at one time considered me a brother. As we discussed the path I have taken and as I presented my questions to them, one phrase was uttered again and again:

“You think too much.”

They feel that I have arrived at my present state of non-belief as a direct result of over-thinking the situation. They imply that if I would just think less and believe more, all the problems with the faith would go away.

Apparently, Christianity is best swallowed with as little thinking as possible.

Too much thinking and studying tends to reveal the “rough edges” of the system. Many Christians, when presented with evidence that would tend to prove their belief wrong, are content to ignore the facts and press on with a smile. In many of my conversations, I have come away with an overwhelming sensation that Christians tend to hold to the oft-clichéd position: “Don’t bother me with the facts; my mind is made up.”

I have collected some of the quotes I received, and I present them below for your consideration.

Learning can be harmful to your belief

“Once people decided they don’t need God and separate themselves from Him, that’s when people die. Learning has nothing to do with it.” Darveiye Flemming, 2/17/10

“In all of that reading and studying, you have become belligerent against the God who loves and saved you.” Heidi Drahos, 2/17/20

The facts are not very important

“In all honesty I wonder if God doesn’t allow a lot of these apparent numerical contradictions, just to see if we are willing to be obedient to him.” Bekah Keppel, 9/29/09

“I don’t think you have a problem with seven or three, I think you have a problem trusting God.” Bekah Keppel, 9/29/09, responding to an apparent contradiction between II Samuel 24 and I Chronicles 21.

“And if you have logical arguments based on human reason or science. Save them.” Darveiye Flemming, 2/16/10

“You have the idea God and the Bible just don’t line up with logic. Which is true.” Darveiye Flemming, 2/17/10

Non-believers wouldn’t understand

“As we well know, there is no understanding apart from Christ.” Lynn Snyder Capshaw, 2/17/10

If all else fails

“I must plead guilty to circular reasoning.” R.B. Ouillette, A More Sure Word

“You accuse me of circular reasoning – I confess. I believe God.” Pastor Jim Talbert, 9/23/09

The only thing I can conclude is that Christianity is not about truth, it’s about believing. “Just believe” they say, and the truth will be revealed to you. I say find the truth and don’t let your beliefs stand in the way.

– George Cummins

Vanessa and I have been selling soapnuts for several years. We acquired the business from my mom in 2007, and it has been doing fairly well. However, both Vanessa and I have grown painfully bored with packaging and shipping the product.

Recently, I discovered that Amazon offers fulfillment services. I can send our product to them and they will package and ship it for us. Hurray! I can’t wait to get the soapnuts boxed up and sent away to Amazon.

– George Cummins

I enjoy reading between the lines.

I like listening to people’s words and hearing not only what they say, but what they mean. Sometimes the words are not enough to tell the whole story and interpretation is required.

One of my favorite pastimes is listening to preachers because they are masters of interpretation. Their job is not simply to present the words of the Bible to eager Christian ears, but to interpret those words so that they are understandable to the listeners. On occasion, however, a preacher subtly changes a meaning while interpreting, causing his listeners to hear a message different than the one presented in the text.

Today my sister posted a message from her pastor, Dan Hudson of Pathway Church. The sermon’s purpose was to identify the cost of following Jesus. Pastor Dan used as his text Luke 14 and focused on the summary in verse 33:

“In the same way, any of you who does not give up everything he has cannot be my disciple.”

Here is Pastor Dan’s interpretation:

“Jesus wants everything. [...] It doesn’t mean you need to live in poverty. Don’t misunderstand that. But how much are you willing to give up?”

So for Pastor Dan, Jesus’ words can be interpreted to mean something considerably different than what Jesus said. Jesus said give everything up, or you can’t be a disciple. Pastor Dan says you just need to be “willing.”

That interpretation is undoubtedly gentler on the modern Christian and makes it easier to gain converts. But is the interpretation valid? Pastor Dan, is that what Jesus really said? Or is it what you wanted him to say?