http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20030525.htm Answering The AtheistMay 25, 2003 / Volume 3, Issue 21THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:Was Enoch the sixth or seventh from Adam? (Genesis 5:3-18; 1 Chronicles 1:1-2; Luke 3:37-38; Jude 14). Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:Notice, the Genesis, 1 Chronicles and Luke passages all agree that the lineage is:1) Adam2) Seth3) Enosh4) Cainan5) Mahalalel6) Jared7) Enoch. If the text in Jude 14 had declared there to be an additional person in this lineage, or if it had excluded one who is here listed, then we would have a contradiction. However, Jude wrote, "Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, saying, "Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints...." The questioner has determined this to be a contradiction by excluding Adam as one of the seven. On what basis is this done? Certainly not because Jude’s text requires it! As listed above, from Adam to Enoch are seven generations. That would make Enoch the "seventh from Adam". There is no contradiction.

Genesis 25:1

1 Chronicles 1:32

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20040208.htm Answering The AtheistFebruary 8, 2004 / Volume 4, Issue 6THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:Was Keturah Abraham's wife or concubine? Genesis 25:1 says "wife", but 1 Chronicles 1:32 says "concubine". Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:I'm interested to know what the questioner believes a concubine is. If I understand correctly what a concubine was, she would be a wife, but of secondary ranking. Though ranked lower than a man's primary wife (ie. Sarah), the concubine was still considered to be a wife. The word used for "wife" in Genesis 25:1 simply means woman (generally married). It has no inference to rank. Thus, even concubines were called wives (Genesis 37:2; Judges 19:3-5). Why would Keturah be referred to as a concubine, since Sarah had already passed on prior to Abraham marrying Keturah (Genesis 23:19). I cannot say. The Scriptures do not reveal such. Perhaps to Abraham, Sarah did and always would hold the distinction of being his primary mate, and no woman, not even Keturah could take her place. I'm not sure. However, the details are of no consequence. A concubine is still a wife. There is no contradiction.

Genesis 36:2, 14

Genesis 36:20

1 Chronicles 1:38

Genesis 36:24

1 Chronicles 1:40

1 Kings 4:31

1 Chronicles 2:6

1 Chronicles 6:33

1 Chronicles 15:17

1 Samuel 16:10-11

1 Samuel 17:12

1 Chronicles 2:13-15

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20071230.htm Answering The AtheistDecember 30, 2007 / Volume 7, Issue 52THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:How many sons did Jesse have, eight (1 Samuel 16:10-11) or seven (1 Chronicles 2:13-15)? Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:The questioner is right, the number reported in 1 Samuel 16:10-11 and 1 Chronicles 2:13-15 do not match. But rather than immediately conclude that it is a contradiction, let us consider the texts. 1 Samuel 16:10-11 reads, "Thus Jesse made seven of his sons pass before Samuel. And Samuel said to Jesse, 'The LORD has not chosen these. And Samuel said to Jesse, 'Are all the young men here?' Then he said, 'There remains yet the youngest and there he is keeping the sheep.' And Samuel said to Jesse, 'Send and bring him. For we will not sit down till he comes here.'" 1 Chronicles 2:13-15 reads, "Jesse begot Eliab his firstborn, Abinadab the second, Shimea the third, Nethanel the fourth, Raddai the fifth, Ozem the sixth, and David the seventh." Indeed, in 1 Samuel 16, seven sons had already been seen by Samuel, and David, the youngest, would be the eighth. And yet, in 1 Chronicles 2, David is listed as the seventh. How can this be? It is likely that one of Jesse's sons had died prematurely. He would have been alive at the time Samuel came to anoint a son of Jesse as king, but deceased thereafter. The absence of this one from the list may indicate that he had no offspring to perpetuate his name. My wife, when asked about her family will often say that she has one sister. She in fact had 2 sisters, but one is deceased. Depending on the nature of the conversation, she may or may not mention the deceased sibling. The same would be true, even of this record in the Bible. There is no contradiction.

2 Samuel 17:25

1 Chronicles 2:17

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20050522.htm Answering The AtheistMay 22, 2005 / Volume 5, Issue 21THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:Who was Amasa's father? 2 Samuel 17:25 identifies him as "Ithra the Israelite", while 1 Chronicles 2:17 says it was "Jether the Ishmaelite". Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:Both references speak of the same man, though a surface reading of the texts may lead one to believe that the record of 2 Samuel 17:25 and 1 Chronicles 2:17 are contradictory. The only difference between the names in the Hebrew language is that Ithra consists of one additional letter. This may be a copyist error, or perhaps he was known by both names. It was not uncommon for a person's name to be shortened, and for the individual to be known by either or both names. For instance, we read of Aquila and his wife Priscilla in Acts 18:2, 18, 26; Romans 16:3 and 1 Corinthians 16:9. In 2 Timothy 4:19, Paul refers to this woman as Prisca, obviously a shortened form of her name. Perhaps Jether is to Ithra what Prisca is to Priscilla. What shall we make of the fact that "Ithra" is referred to as an Israelite, while "Jether" is referred to as an "Ishmaelite"? Recall that Ishmael was the son born to Abraham by the slave woman, Hagar. It is possible that Amasa's father dwelt in the land of the Ishmaelites, and he was so designated for that reason, or perhaps he was an Ishmaelite by birth. If it is the former, then the reference to his being an Israelite is a statement of his nationality, if it is the latter, then it is the opposite, namely that he was a man of Ishmael who dwelt in the land of Israel. Either way, there are options whereby the texts need not be contradictory. There is no contradiction.

Annon

Chileab

Absalom

Adonijah

Shephatiah

Ithream

Annon

Daniel

Absalom

Adonijah

Shephatiah

Ithream

2 Samuel 12:15, 24

1 Chronicles 3:5

Shammuah

Shobab

Nathan

Solomon

Ibhar

Elishua

Nepheg

Japhia

Elishama

Eliada

Eliphalet

Shimea

Shobab

Nathan

Solomon

Ibhar

Nogah

Nepheg

Japhia

Elishama (listed twice!)

Eliada

Eliphelet (listed twice!)

Shammua

Shobab

Nathan

Solomon

Ibhar

Elishua

Elpalet

Nogah

Nepheg

Japhia

Elishama

Beeliada

Eliphalet

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20060423.htmAnswering The AtheistApril 23, 2006 / Volume 6, Issue 17THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:Which sons of David were born in Jerusalem, and which were born in Hebron? Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:We will begin with the sons born in Jerusalem. I am sure that the questioner believes that there is a contradiction since two of the children are not mentioned in 2 Samuel who are mentioned in the other texts. Also, perhaps the questioner believes the 1 Chronicles 3 text to be contradictory, since Elishama and Eliphelet are listed twice. Let us consider these questions. 2 SAM 5:14-16 1 CHR 3:5-8 1 CHR 14:3-7ShammuahShobabNathanSolomonIbharElishua------Nepheg JaphiaElishamaEliadaEliphalet ShimeaShobabNathanSolomonIbharElishamaElipheletNogahNepheg JaphiaElishamaEliadaEliphelet ShammuaShobabNathanSolomonIbharElishuaElpaletNogahNepheg JaphiaElishamaBeeliadaEliphaletFirst, regarding the two appearances of "Elishama" and "Eliphelet", it is not impossible for children born to different wives by the same husband to have the same name. That was the case among David's children born to him at Jerusalem. The first "Elishama" of 1 Chronicles 3 is the "Elishua" of the other two texts. The first "Eliphelet" of 1 Chronicles 3 is the "Elpalet" of 1 Chronicles 14. Of the two children not listed in 2 Samuel 5 (Eliphelet/Elpalet and Nogah), it is possible that these died in their childhood, and thus the author of 2 Samuel, unlike the author of 1 Chronicles, did not list them. Now, let us turn our attention to the children born to David in Hebron. The only difference between the two accounts is that in one, Chileab is listed, and in the other Daniel is listed. It is not uncommon for someone to be known by two different names. In the New Testament, Peter is also know as Simon and Cephas. It seems that such is the case here also. 2 SAM 3:2-5 1 CHR 3:1-4AnnonChileabAbsalomAdonijahShephatiahIthream AnnonDanielAbsalomAdonijahShephatiahIthreamThere is no contradiction.

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20060416.htmAnswering The AtheistApril 16, 2006 / Volume 6, Issue 16THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:The generations from David to the Babylonian captivity listed in 1 Chronicles 3:10-16 are different than Matthew 1:6-11. Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:The questioner is correct, the list given in Matthew 1 does not parallel that which can be found in 1 Chronicles 3. However, rather than automatically assume that a contradiction is present, would it not be better to first inquire if there is a plausible explanation for the difference? Sadly, the questioner's determination to find an error in the Bible fails to permit an honest investigation of the facts. 1 CHR 3:10-16 MT 1:6-11SolomonRehoboamAbiaAsaJehoshaphatJoramAhaziahJoashAmaziah AzariahJothamAhazHezekiahManassehAmonJosiahJehoiakimJoconiah SolomonRehoboamAbijahAsaJehoshaphatJehoram--------- UzziahJothamAhazHezekiahManassehAmonJosiah---JoconiahRegarding the omission of Ahaziah, Joash and Amaziah, there are at least a couple possible explanations. 1) Some have suggested that these names were excluded intentionally, for the sake of symmetry in the threefold division of generations from Abraham to Joseph (ie. 14 generations / 14 generations / 14 generations). 2) It is not uncommon in the passage of time, for errors in genealogical data to appear, both due to transcription error and incorrect oral instruction. Adam Clarke's Commentary reads, St. Matthew took up the genealogies just as he found them in the public Jewish records, which, though they were in the main correct, yet were deficient in many particulars. The Jews themselves give us sufficient proof of this.Though the writer (by inspiration of the Spirit) would be aware of the true ancestory, he did not see it necessary or even appropriate to take issue with the accredited genealogical table. The omissions are of no consequence to his argument, that Jesus was a direct descendant of David. Raising an objection to the commonly accepted ancestory would overshadow his argument. Regarding the omission of Jehoiakim, some have speculated that his father (Josiah's son) Jehoiakim was excluded because he was raised to the throne as nothing more than a puppet of the king of Egypt, and thereafter, became the puppet of the king of Babylon. His "reign" as king of Judah was pitiable. An alternative explanation can be found in Clarke's Commentary:"...these difficulties disappear, by adopting a reading found in many MSS. . And Josiah begat JEHOIAKIM, or Joakim, and JOAKIM begat Jechonias. For this reading, see the authorities in Griesbach. Are the lists of 1 Chronicles 3 and Matthew 1 different? Yes. Does this difference constitute a contradiction? On the surface, yes, but upon investigation, there are viable explanations. There is no contradiction.

Matthew 1:11

1 Chronicles 3:15-16

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20040912.htm Answering The AtheistSeptember 12, 2004 / Volume 4, Issue 37THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:Who was Zerubbabel’s faither? 1 Chronicles 3:19 says it was Pedaiah, but Ezra 3:2 and Nehemiah 12:1 say it was Shealtiel. Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:If the meaning of the Hebrew word ben were so specific as to mean one’s immediate and biological son, then certainly there would be a contradiction here. Of course, the most common rendering is son, but of the 4906 occurrences of the word, we find son (2978), children (1568), old (51), young (35), man (20), child (10), stranger (10), people (5), miscellaneous (92). Shealtiel and Pedaiah were brothers (1 Chronicles 3:18-19). Since in the genealogical listing, Zerubbabel is said to be Pedaiah’s son, he would thus be Shealtiel’s nephew. The question then, why do Ezra and Nehemiah speak of Zerubbabel as Shealtiel’s son? It has been suggested by some that though Zerubbabel was begotten of Pedaiah, that he was raised in the house of Shealtiel. There is no way to prove or disprove such a claim, but it is noteworthy that only in 1 Chronicles 3 is Pedaiah, the father of Zerubbabel referenced. Everywhere else, Shealtiel is identified as his father. Though circumstantial, it certainly gives credibility to the thought. Also, given the generic scope of the Hebrew word ben, it would not be out of the question for a man’s son, grandson, nephew, or other kin to be referred to as such. There is no contradiction.

Jeremiah 22:28-30

; one was an ancestor of Jesus.

1 Chronicles 3.17-18:

Matthew 1:12

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20071014.htmAnswering The AtheistOctober 14, 2007 / Volume 7, Issue 41THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:Did Jeconiah have any sons? Jeremiah 22:28-30 says that he did not, but both 1 Chronicles 3:17-18 and Matthew 1:12 says he did, and one was an ancestor of Jesus. Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:Both 1 Chronicles 3 and Matthew 1 indicate that Jeconiah had sons, and that he was an ancestor of Jesus. So, our focus must be on the words of Jeremiah regarding Coniah. Both Jeremiah 22:28 and 22:30 reveal that Jeconiah had children. The question is asked, "Why are they cast out, he and his descendants...?" And again, we are told, "...none of his descendants shall prosper..." Can a man have descendants if he has no children? NO! Now then, to the words which the questioner has latched to, "Write this man down as childless..." Why? Because he had no children? No, for the very verse in which this statement appears indicates that he had children. These words are intended to convey the disgrace which was brought upon Jeconiah; it was as though he had no children. The natural course was for a king's son to assume the throne after his father, but such would not occur. Instead, Judah's next king would be Zedekiah, not by succession, but by appointment of Nebuchadnezzar. There is no contradiction.

1 Chronicles 3:19

Ezra 3:2, Nehemiah 12:1

Haggai 1:1

Matthew 1:12

Luke 3:27

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20040912.htm Answering The AtheistSeptember 12, 2004 / Volume 4, Issue 37THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:Who was Zerubbabel’s faither? 1 Chronicles 3:19 says it was Pedaiah, but Ezra 3:2 and Nehemiah 12:1 say it was Shealtiel. Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:If the meaning of the Hebrew word ben were so specific as to mean one’s immediate and biological son, then certainly there would be a contradiction here. Of course, the most common rendering is son, but of the 4906 occurrences of the word, we find son (2978), children (1568), old (51), young (35), man (20), child (10), stranger (10), people (5), miscellaneous (92). Shealtiel and Pedaiah were brothers (1 Chronicles 3:18-19). Since in the genealogical listing, Zerubbabel is said to be Pedaiah’s son, he would thus be Shealtiel’s nephew. The question then, why do Ezra and Nehemiah speak of Zerubbabel as Shealtiel’s son? It has been suggested by some that though Zerubbabel was begotten of Pedaiah, that he was raised in the house of Shealtiel. There is no way to prove or disprove such a claim, but it is noteworthy that only in 1 Chronicles 3 is Pedaiah, the father of Zerubbabel referenced. Everywhere else, Shealtiel is identified as his father. Though circumstantial, it certainly gives credibility to the thought. Also, given the generic scope of the Hebrew word ben, it would not be out of the question for a man’s son, grandson, nephew, or other kin to be referred to as such. There is no contradiction.

Ezra 8:18

Genesis 46:11, 1 Chronicles 6:1, 16:16

1 Chronicles 23:6

1 Samuel 8:2

1 Chronicles 6:28

Joshua 21:23-24

1 Chronicles 6:66, 69

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20050501.htm Answering The AtheistMay 1, 2005 / Volume 5, Issue 18THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:What tribe was Aijalon from? Joshua 21:23-24 says Dan, while 1 Chronicles 6:66, 69 says Ephraim. Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:Indeed, in 1 Chronicles 6, the writer fails to distinguish between the cities which were given to the sons of Kohath from the tribe of Ephraim and the tribe of Dan. That doesn't mean that the writer intended to infer that the city of Aijalon belonged to Ephraim. It may simply indicate that the writer expected that his audience had enough knowledge of the region that it would not be necessary to include the description "from the tribe of Dan", as Joshua had formerly done. There is no contradiction.

Belah

Becher

Ashbel

Gera

Naaman

Ehi

Rosh

Muppim

Huppim

Ard

Bela

Ashbel

Shupham

Hupham

Bela

Becher

Jediael

Bela

Ashbel

Aharah

Nohah

Rapha

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20050626.htm Answering The AtheistJune 26, 2005 / Volume 5, Issue 26THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:Who were the sons of Benjamin? Genesis 46:21, Numbers 26:38-40, 1 Chronicles 7:6 and 1 Chronicles 8:1-2 do not agree. Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:In Genesis 46, Benjamin is said to have 10 sons: Bela, Becher, Ashbel, Gera, Naaman, Eri, Rosh, Muppim, Huppim and Ard. From the text in Numbers, we are told of only 5 sons of Benjamin: Bela, Ashbel, Ahiram, Shupham and Hupham. In this text, Ard and Naaman are identified as sons of Bela, and thus grandsons of Benjamin. In 1 Chronicles 7, only three sons of Benjamin are mentioned: Bela, Becher and Jediael. Shuppim and Huppim are listed as great grandchildren of Benjamin, through Bela's son Ira. Finally, in 1 Chronicles 8, there are 5 sons of Benjamin listed: Bela, Ahsbel, Aharah, Nohah and Rapha, with several others mentioned as grandchildren. First, it should be understood that the Hebrew word "ben" (translated son) is not exclusive to immediate relations. The word is used of not only an individual's sons, but also his grandsons. This being the case, it is certainly acceptable for grandsons to be listed as "sons of Benjamin". Why the varying numbers in the different accounts? It is possible that some writers intended only to list the prominent members of Benjamin's family, while others sought to be more extensive. It would seem to be fruitless to attempt to sift through Benjamin's lineage, or any other of which there may be some dispute, for those who oppose the Bible on such a basis as this, even if we could lay out the details of the genealogy accurately, would still no doubt be unbelieving. There is no contradiction.

2 Chronicles 7:14

Jeremiah 31:34

1 John 1:9

Joshua 24:19

1 Samuel 9:1

1 Chronicles 8:33, 9.39

1 Samuel 14:49

1 Chronicles 8:33

1 Chronicles 9:39

1 Samuel 31:4-6

1 Chronicles 10:4

2 Samuel 1:8-10

2 Samuel 21:12

1 Chronicles 10:14

1 Chronicles 10:6

2 Samuel 2:1-7

2 Samuel 21:1-14

1 Samuel 28:6

1 Chronicles 10:13-14

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20020526.htm Answering The AtheistMay 26, 2002 / Volume 2, Issue 21THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:We are told that Saul inquired of God, but God did not answer him (1 Samuel 28:6), but contrary then we read that Saul died because he did not seek guidance from God (1 Chronicles 10:13-14). Did he or did he not seek guidance from God? RESPONSE:It seems strange that the LORD would not answer Saul when he inquired of Him, but the reason is evident from the context of 1 Samuel 28. In the preceding chapters, he has busyed himself seeking the life of David. Now, with the Philistines gathered to war against him, he is compelled to turn to God, or is he? Were he truly repentant, God would have heard him and been a help to him, however, look at Saul's actions in verse 7, "....Saul said to his servants, 'Find me a woman who is a medium, that I may go to her and inquire of her.'..." His actions speak volumes. He approached the Lord in form (physically doing so), but not in spirit. And so, 1 Chronicles 10:13-14, in reference to this very event states, "So Saul died for his unfaithfulness which he had committed against the LORD, because he did not keep the word of the LORD, and also because he consulted a medium for guidance. But he did not inquire of the LORD; therefore He killed him, and turned the kingdom over to David the son of Jesse." There is no contradiction.

2 Samuel 23:8

1 Chronicles 11:11

2 Samuel 6:6

1 Chronicles 13:9

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20020609.htm Answering The AtheistJune 9, 2002 / Volume 2, Issue 23THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:Where did Uzzah die, at the threshing-floor of Nachon (2 Samuel 6:6) or at the threshing-floor of Chidon (1 Chronicles 13:9)? RESPONSE:Let us look at the two passages in question: 2 Samuel 6:6"And when they came to Nachon’s threshing floor, Uzzah put out his hand to the ark of God and took hold of it, for the oxen stumbled." 1 Chronicles 13:9"And when they came to Chidon’s threshing floor, Uzza put out his hand to hold the ark, for the oxen stumbled." It is not out of the ordinary for a person to have more than one name, and thus also be referred to by various names. For example Moses' father-in-law's name was Jethro (Exodus 3:1), but he was also known as Reuel (Numbers 10:29). Likewise, one of Jesus disciples was named Simon, but also named Peter (Mark 3:16). This one was also known as Cephas (John 1:42). Another spoken of in the New Testament had the name Joses, but was also called Barnabas (Acts 4:36). My name is William, but some folks call me Stewart (my last name), others call me James (my middle name). All are equally correct. In the case of Nachon, it appears he was also known by the name Chidon. There is no contradiction.

Joshua 2:11

Joshua 3:13

2 Kings 19:15

1 Chronicles 16:14

1 Chronicles 16:31

Ezra 5:11

Job 34:13

Psalm 47:2

Psalm 47:7

Psalm 59:13

Psalm 83:18

Psalm 96:10

Psalm 97:1

Psalm 97:5

Psalm 99:1

Isaiah 37:16

Isaiah 54:5

Micah 4:13

Zechariah 4:14

Zechariah 6:5

Matthew 11:25

Luke 10:21

Acts 17:24

Matthew 4:8-9

Luke 4:5-7

John 12:31

John 14:30

John 16:11

2 Corinthians 4:4

Genesis 17:19

Exodus 12:14, 17, 24

Leviticus 23:14,21,31

Deuteronomy 4:8-9

Deuteronomy 7:9

Deuteronomy 11:1

Deuteronomy 11:26-28

1 Chronicles 16:15

Psalm 119:151-2

Psalm 119:160

Ecclesiastes 12:13

Malachi 4:4

Matthew 5:18-19

Luke 16:17

Luke 16:16

Romans 3:28

Romans 6:14

Romans 7:4, 6

Romans 10:4

Galatians 3:13

Galatians 3:24-25

Galatians 5:18

Ephesians 2:15

Colossians 2:14

Deuteronomy 4:35

Deuteronomy 4:39

Deuteronomy 6:4

Deuteronomy 32:39

1 Kings 18:39

Isaiah 43:10

Isaiah 44:8

Isaiah 45:5-6

Isaiah 45:21

Isaiah 46:9

Mark 12:29

Mark 12:32

John 17:3

1 Corinthians 8:6

Genesis 1:26

Genesis 3:22

Genesis 11:7

Exodus 12:12

Exodus 15:11

Exodus 18:11

Exodus 20:3, 5

Exodus 22:20

Exodus 22:28

Exodus 23:13

Exodus 23:24

Exodus 23:32

Exodus 34:14

Numbers 33:4

Deuteronomy 3:24

Deuteronomy 5:7

Deuteronomy 6:14-15

Deuteronomy 10:17

Deuteronomy 28:14

Joshua 24:2

Joshua 24:14

Judges 11:24

1 Samuel 6:5

1 Samuel 28:13

1 Chronicles 16:25

Psalm 82:1

Psalm 82:6

Psalm 86:8

Psalm 96:4

Psalm 97:7

Psalm 135:5

Psalm 136:2

Jeremiah 1:16

Jeremiah 10:11

Jeremiah 25:6

Jeremiah 46:25

Zephaniah 2:11

John 10:33-34

1 John 5:7

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20030302.htm Answering The AtheistMarch 2, 2003 / Volume 3, Issue 9THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:How many Gods are there? Some passages state there is only one (Deuteronomy 4:35; Deuteronomy 6:4; Isaiah 44:8; Isaiah 45:5-6; Mark12:29), but others indicate there are several (Genesis 1:26; Genesis 3:22; Exodus 12:12). Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:There is one true God, which the first set of passages listed above, along with many other reveal. We will return to who this one true God is in just a moment, but for the present, let us consider Exodus 12:12, and other texts such as it. The Lord says, "...against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment." These ‘gods' are manmade gods, conceived in the mind of man and who exist and reign only in the mind of those who are deceived. The Egyptians had a variety of gods, as did the Greeks and the Romans. Often their gods were based upon nature, and blessings would come from appeasing their gods in various forms. Of those who served such ‘gods', Paul wrote, "...who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever." (Romans 1:25). As regards the one true God, texts such as Genesis 1:26 infer that there is a plurality. Indeed, there are three persons who are one God. To aid in understanding this concept, please refer to the diagrams available. It is important to understand, God is a form of being, not necessarily the description of a specific person (though it is also used in this fashion). There is no contradiction.

Leviticus 25:17

Deuteronomy 4:10

Deuteronomy 6:2

Deuteronomy 6:13, 10:20

Deuteronomy 6:24

Deuteronomy 10:12

Deuteronomy 14:23

Deuteronomy 28:58

Deuteronomy 31:12

Deuteronomy 31:13

Joshua 4:24

Joshua 24:14

1 Samuel 12:14

1 Samuel 12:24

2 Kings 17:39

1 Chronicles 16:25

Nehemiah 5:9

Job 28:28

Psalm 19:9

Psalm 25:14

Psalm 33:8

Psalm 33:18

Psalm 34:9

Psalm 96:4

Psalm 103:11

Psalm 103:13

Psalm 103:17

Psalm 111:10

Psalm 112:1

Psalm 115:13

Psalm 128:1

Psalm 147:11

Proverbs 1:7

Proverbs 3:7

Proverbs 9:10

Proverbs 10:27

Proverbs 14:2

Proverbs154:33

Proverbs 22:4

Proverbs 23:17

Proverbs 24:21

Ecclesiates 3:14

Ecclesiates 5:7

Ecclesiastes 12:13

Isaiah 8:13

Hosea 3:5

Malachi 2:4-5

Jeremaih 5:22

Matthew 10:28, Luke 12:5

Luke 1:50

Romans 3:10-18

2 Corinthians 7:1

Ephesians 5:21

Colossians 3:22

Hebrews 10:31

1 Peter 2:17

Revelation 14:7

Revelation 15:4

2 Timothy 1:7

1 John 4:8

1 John 4:18

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20070121.htm Answering The AtheistJanuary 21, 2007 / Volume 7, Issue 3THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:Should we fear God? There are several texts which say yes (Leviticus 25:17; Deuteronomy 4:10; 6:2, 13, 24; 10:12, 20; 31:12-13; Joshua 4:24; 24:14; 1 Samuel 12:14, 24; 2 Kings 17:39; 1 Chronicles 16:25; Job 28:28; Psalm 19:9; 25:14; 33:8, 18; 34:9; 96:4; 103:11, 13, 17; 111:10; 112:1; 115:13; 128:1; 147:11; Proverbs 1:7; 22:4; 24:21; Ecclesiastes 5:7; 12:13; Isaiah 8:13; Jeremiah 5:22; Matthew 10:28; Luke 1:50; 12:5; 2 Corinthians 7:1; Ephesians 5:21; Colossians 3:22; Hebrews 10:31; 1 Peter 2:17; Revelation 14:7; 15:4), but there are others which say no (2 Timothy 1:7; 1 John 4:8, 18). Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:Should we fear God? Absolutely. The questioner gave us an extensive (yet certainly not exhaustive) list of verses which say we should fear God. The Hebrew word from which fear is rendered in the Old Testament is yare', which Strong's identifies as "...to fear... to revere... to be afraid... reverence..." The Greek word from which fear is render in the New Testament is phobeo, which Strong's identifies as, "...to frighten... to be alarmed... to be in awe of... revere... afraid... reverence..." Should we approach God with reverence? Indeed. Is there reason to be in awe of the God of heaven? For sure! Ought some be frightened, even to terror, of the Lord? Yes, if they are not doing His will. But what shall we make of the texts which are listed as indicating that we should not fear God? Let us consider these. 2 Timothy 1:7 reads, "For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind." The text does not say that God has revealed that we should not fear Him. We have no need to fear the world; no need to "...be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord...", but rather are able to share "...in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God..." that others (ie. like Paul) endured. The text does not tell us not to fear (revere, stand in awe of, extend great respect toward) God. 1 John 4:8 reads, "He who does not love does not know God, for God is love." Yes? God is identified as love, but it appears that the questioner is doing the same here as many in the religious world do. They emphasize the love of God, to the exclusion of the justice of God. We must take into account all that the Scripture says about the character of God. Hebrews 12 likens God to our earthly fathers. In most cases, earthly fathers love their children, but, equally, they command fear of their children. Not terror or horror, but respect, awe, an appreciation for authority, etc.. Should it be thought odd that God, who loves us, also expects that we should fear before Him? 1 John 4:18 reads, "There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love." If we have love abiding in us, in what respect has fear been cast out from us? The contexts answers the question: "...we may have boldness in the day of judgment; because as He is, so are we in this world." (v 17). Those who love the Lord and walk in accordance with His commandments need not fear the coming judgment, for as God is holy and pure, they walk in holiness and purity. The text does not say, as the questioner suppose, to not fear God. There is no contradiction.

God is kind, merciful, and good.

Exodus 34:6

Deuteronomy 4:31

2 Samuel 24:14

1 Chronicles 16:34; Psalm 106:1, 107:1, 118:1, 136:1; Jeremiah 33:11

Psalm 25:8

Psalm 86:5

Psalm 100:5

Psalm 103:8

Psalm 145:9

Jeremiah 3:12

Jeremiah 33:11

Lamentations 3:33

Joel 2:13

Micah 7:18

Judith 13:21

2 Corinthians 1:3

James 5:11

1 John 4:16

God is love.

God is cruel, unmerciful, and evil.

Exodus 34:6-7

Numbers 25:4

Deuteronomy 7:16

1 Samuel 6:19

1 Samuel 15:2-3

Lamentation 2:2

Lamentations 2:17

Lamentations 3:43

Jeremiah 13:14

Jeremaih 16:3-7

Ezekiel 7:4, 9

Ezekiel 9:5-6

Micah 1:12

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20011104.htm Answering The Atheist--------------------------------------------------------------------------------November 4, 2001 / Volume 1, Issue 35 THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:Some Bible passages tell us that God is cruel, unmerciful, destructive and ferocious (Jeremiah 13:14; 1 Samuel 15:3). However, other passages say that God is kind, merciful and good (James 5:11; 1 Chronicles 16:34; Psalm 145:9; 1 John 4:16). Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:The questioner has proven that he is capable of removing a text from its context, and attempting to set it against other texts removed from their context. He has by no means proven that God is inconsistent in His character, nor that the Bible contradicts itself. Both Jeremiah 13 and 1 Samuel 15 deal with situations where a group of people were due judgment upon them for disobedience or evil conduct. The other texts mentioned (James 5:11; 1 Chronicles 16:34; Psalm 145:9; 1 John 4;16) express the Lord's goodness upon those who are obedient to His will. The apostle Paul wrote, "Therefore consider the goodness and severity of God: on those who fell, severity; but toward you, goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also will be cut off." (Romans 11:22) God's goodness is upon some, His severity upon others. Our conduct before Him is what determines which is upon us. There is no contradiction.

2 Samuel 8:4

1 Chronicles 18:4

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20020616.htm Answering The AtheistJune 16, 2002 / Volume 2, Issue 24THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:How many horsemen did David take, 7,000 (1 Chronicles 18:4) or 1,700 (2 Samuel 8:4)? RESPONSE:Let us look at the two passages in question: 2 Samuel 8:4 (YLT)and David captureth from him a thousand and seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen, and David destroyeth utterly the whole of the charioteers, only he leaveth of them a hundred charioteers. 1 Chronicles 18:4 (YLT)and David captureth from him a thousand chariots, and seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen, and David destroyeth utterly all the chariots, and leaveth of them a hundred chariots only. As has been stated previously, I fully acknowledge the possibility of copying errors by scribes. It would seem that such would be a fit explanation for the discrepancy between these two texts. It is interesting to note that in the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Hebrew text), 1 Chronicles 18:4 and 2 Samuel 8:4 agree. Translated to English, from the Septuagint, we find, "...a thousand chariots, and seven thousand horsemen..." How many horsemen? Was it 700, or 1,700, or 7,000? I cannot say. However, the discrepancy is minor and easily attributed to the copying process, not the inspired text. When a 'contradiction' deals with numbers, and is clearly the error of a scribe, the overall integrity of the inspired text surely remains intact. The very nature of the discrepancy renders it useless as a means to discount the Bible.

1 Samuel 22:20

1 Samuel 23:6

2 Samuel 8:17, 1 Chronicles 18:16, 24:6

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20040222.htm Answering The AtheistFebruary 22, 2004 / Volume 4, Issue 8THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:Was Abiathar the father (2 Sam 8:17; 1 Chr 18:16; 24:6) or son (1 Sam 22:20; 23:6) of Ahimelech? Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:I don't suppose the questioner considered that there could be two men with the name Ahimelech, one the father of Abiathar, the other the son of Abiathar? Ahimelech, the father of Abiathar, was murdered by Doeg, according to the command of Saul (1 Sam 22:9-23). His son, Abiathar seems to be the only one to have escaped the massacre. This Ahimelech, being dead, cannot be the same Ahimelech who is spoken of in 2 Samuel 8, 1 Chronicles 18, and other places. It would appear that Abiathar had a son, whom he named Ahimelech, perhaps as a tribute to his father, who died at the hands of ungodly men. There is no contradiction.

2 Samuel 10:18

1 Chronicles 19:18

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20050904.htm Answering The AtheistSeptember 4, 2005 / Volume 5, Issue 36THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:How many men did David kill? 2 Samuel 10:18 says 700 charioteers and 40,000 horsemen, but 1 Chronicles 19:18 says 7,000 charioteers and 40,000 foot soldiers. Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:First, let us deal with the description of the latter portion of men. 2 Samuel speaks of these as "horsemen", while 1 Chronicles calls them "foot soldiers" (NKJV). Are they on horses, or are they on foot? The Hebrew word from which translators have rendered "foot soldiers" is 'iysh. This word simply means men. The inference that they were foot soldiers rather than horsemen can be attributed to translator's interpolation of the word. So then, how many charioteers? 700 or 7,000? It is certainly possible that we are faced here with an error in the work of a scribe, as has been admitted on other occasions. However, consider a few alternatives: 1) Adam Clarke suggests, "It is very probable that, in former times, the Jews expressed, as they often do now, their numbers, not by words at full length, but by numeral letters; and, as many of the letters bear a great similarity to each other, mistakes might easily creep in when the numeral letters came to be expressed by words at full length. This alone will account for the many mistakes which we find in the numbers in these books, and renders a mistake here very probable. The letter zain with a dot above, stands for seven thousand, nun for seven hundred: the great similarity of these letters might easily cause the one to be mistaken for the other, and so produce an error in this place." 2) The Geneva Bible Notes suggests of the 700, "Who were the chief and most principal: for in all he destroyed 7,000, as in 1 Ch 19:18, or the soldiers who were in 700 chariots." What is the correct answer? I do not know. Regardless, there are certainly ways to explain the supposed contradiction. The overall integrity of the inspired text surely remains intact. The very nature of the discrepancy renders it useless as a means to discount the Bible.

2 Samuel 21:19

1 Chronicles 20:5

2 Samuel 24:1

1 Chronicles 21:1

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20020623.htm Answering The AtheistJune 23, 2002 / Volume 2, Issue 25THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:Who moved David to number the people, God (2 Samuel 24:1) or Satan (1 Chronicles 21:1)? RESPONSE:Let us look at the two passages in question: 1 Chronicles 21:1Now Satan stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel. 2 Samuel 24:1Again the anger of the LORD was aroused against Israel, and He moved David against them to say, "Go, number Israel and Judah." We are told that God does not tempt man to commit sin (James 1:13), however, Scripture often describes God as doing what He has permitted to be done. Such is the case here, as God allowed Satan to tempt David (see examples in Exodus 7:13; 1 Samuel 26:19; 2 Samuel 16:10; Psalm 105:25). By God's absence (for he was angry against Israel), and Satan's activity in provoking David to do evil, David was moved to number the children of Israel. Note, as we look at the case of Job, one might conclude that God brought turmoil upon Job, as Satan came before the presence of the Lord, asking that he might test Job (Job 1:6-12; 2:1-6). God permitted Satan to lay trial after trial upon Job, but consider what Job thought concerning the things which were upon him (Job 1:21; 2:9-10). Consider also the perspective of Job's friends (Job 5:17). Surely it is clear, God is at times spoken of as the cause of those things which He allows to take place. There is no contradiction.

2 Chronicles 2:17

2 Samuel 24:1-17

1 Chronicles 21:2

2 Samuel 24:9

1 Chronicles 21:5

2 Samuel 24:13

1 Chronicles 21:11-12

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20011007.htm Answering The AtheistOctober 7, 2001 / Volume 1, Issue 31THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:How many years of famine were threatened? In 2 Samuel 24:13, we read, "So God came to David and told him, and said unto him, shall seven years of famine come unto thee in thy land? or will thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue thee?..." However, 1 Chronicles 21:11 reads, "So God came to David, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, choose thee, either three years of famine or three months to be destroyed before thy foes, while that the sword of thine enemies overtaketh thee..." Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:Certainly, with a hurried look, 2 Samuel 24:13 and 1 Chronicles 21:11 seem to be contradictory. However, I would suggest that the questioner slow down and read the Scriptures more carefully (and in context), for these texts are in full agreement. David's choices of punishment for his sin before the Lord were:- 1 - three years of famine;- 2 - three months to be destroyed before his enemies;- 3 - three days of pestilence in the land. In the 1 Chronicles 21 account, these three choices are given to David. Notice, that the latter two choices are parallel in the 2 Samuel 24 account, but the first choice is different, both in the number of years mentioned and in the way the punishment is worded. The Lord there does not invite David to chose 3 years of famine, but rather asks, "...shall seven years of famine come unto thee in thy land?" In 2 Samuel 21:1, it is written, "...there was a famine in the days of David three years, year after year; and David enquired of the LORD. And the LORD answered, It is for Saul, and for his bloody house, because he slew the Gibeonites." Three years of famine had already occurred. Add to this the current year (the time which passed from 2 Samuel 21:1 to 2 Samuel 24:13), and then the three years of famine as recorded in 1 Chronicles 21:11, and you have seven years of famine. There is no contradiction.

God repents.

Genesis 6:6

Exodus 32:14

Deuteronomy 32:36

1 Samuel 15:11

1 Samuel 15:35

2 Samuel 24:16

1 Chronicles 21:15

Isaiah 38:1-5

Jeremiah 15:6

Jeremaih 18:8

Jeremaih 26:3

Jeremiah 26:13

Jeremiah 26:19

Jeremaih 42:10

Amos 7:3, 6

Jonah 3:10

God does not repent.

Numbers 23:19

1 Samuel 15:29

Ezekiel 24:14

Malachi 3:6

James 1:17

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20030622.htmAnswering The AtheistJune 22, 2003 / Volume 3, Issue 25THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:Does God repent? Several passages tell us that God does not repent (Numbers 23:19; 1 Samuel 15:29; Ezekiel 24:14; Malachi 3:6; James 1:7), and yet, so many more say that He does (Genesis 6:6; Exodus 32:14; Deuteronomy 32:36; 1 Samuel 15:11, 35; 24:16; 1 Chronicles 21:15; Jeremiah 15:6; 18:8; 26:3, 13, 19; 42:10; Amos 7:3, 6; Jonah 3:10). Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:Let us begin by establishing what “repentance” is. We so often link it with sin, and rightly so, as we are to repent of our sin, but the word simply means to be sorry and make a change. Can the Lord repent? Certainly, a list of verses has been supplied by the questioner. Thus, we’ll not address those, but rather the ones which are considered to be contradictory. In Numbers 23:19, Balaam speaking to Balak discusses the surety of God. He had received command by the Lord to bless the people of Israel, and far be it from him that he should not do as the Lord had said. The Lord would not repent of His command to Balaam, and allow the curse which Balak sought to be brought against the people. This does not say that God cannot repent, but rather acknowledges that in this particular situation, He would not. Likewise, in 1 Samuel 15:29, God had taken the kingdom of Israel from Saul’s hands, and it would not be returned to him. It is not that God could not choose to do so, but rather, He would not. In both cases, the steadfastness of God is compared to the variations of man. The writers did not say, nor should we understand it to mean that God cannot repent of a decision, but rather shows that He does not do so with the ease that man is changed. Of the text in Ezekiel, notice, it does not say that the Lord cannot repent, but simply that He will not. There is a huge difference between not being able to do something, and simply not doing it. Finally, of the texts in Malachi and James, in context, both these demonstrate to us the wonderful longsuffering which God has for man. Neither restrict the Lord from ever repenting of something He has decided to do. But how can one who does not change have a change of mind? Is it not His nature which is unchanging? A parents love for a child does not change, though they may make various decisions, and perhaps change their mind in some cases. It is no different with the Lord. He can be “unchanging” and still repent of that which He has thought to do. There is no contradiction.

2 Samuel 24:24

1 Chronicles 21:25

http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20041219.htm Answering The AtheistDecember 19, 2004 / Volume 4, Issue 51THE ATHEIST'S COMPLAINT:How much did David pay for the threshing floor? Did he pay fifty shekels of silver (2 Samuel 24:24) or did he pay six hundred shekels of gold (1 Chronicles 21:25)? Is there a contradiction? RESPONSE:According to 2 Samuel 24:24, David paid fifty shekels of silver, and in return received "...the threshing floor and the oxen..." In 1 Chronicles 21, the price paid was not merely for the threshing floor and the oxen, but for "...the place of this threshing floor..." (v 21). David not only bought the threshing floor and the oxen, but the entire property. The fifty shekels of silver was the price paid for the former, the six hundred shekels of gold for the latter. There is no contradiction.

The sons of Heman: Bukkiah, Mattaniah, Uzziel, Shebuel, and Jerimoth, Hananiah, Hanani, Eliathah, Giddalti, and Romamtiezer, Joshbekashah, Mallothi, Hothir, and Mahazioth

Bukkiah

Mattaniah

Uzziel

Shebuel

Jerimoth

Hananiah

Hanani

Eliathah

Giddalti

Romamtiezer

Joshbekashah

Mallothi

Hothir

Mahazioth

And of the sons of Heman; Jehiel, and Shimei...

Jehiel

Shimei

Genesis 14:19, 22

Exodus 9:29

Exodus 19:5

Deuteronomy 10:14

1 Chronicles 29:11

Psalm 24:1

Psalm 50:12

Psalm 89:11

1 Corinthians 10:26

Matthew 4:8-9

Luke 4:5-6

Psalm 115:16

1 Kings 6:1

Acts 13:17-18, 20-22

1 Chronicles 29:26-27