Yeah.<quoted text>ohh, ok.. Well here is a good place to start as well..
A popular contradiction skeptics love to exploit is one between 1 Kings 4:26 and 2 Chronicles 9:25.
1 Kings 4:26:
ÂAnd Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen.Â
2 Chronicles 9:25:
ÂAnd Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen; whom he bestowed in the chariot cities, and with the king at Jerusalem.Â
So, which is it? Forty thousand stalls or four thousand stalls? Finally, the skeptic has found an error in the Bible! YES!
Wawawa. Another failure by the skeptic.
This ÂerrorÂ is nothing more than a minor error by a scribe, not a contradiction.
Many critics of Christianity express hypocrisy to the principles of textual criticism when it comes to explaining claims of error in the Biblical text. They reject all explanations involving copyist error, even though they are of the same type used by textual critics in secular studies to resolve difficulties.
WeÂve already said that there is no evidence that this problem existed in the original text, do we have any evidence that it didnÂt exist in the original text? Yes.
Â The reading found in 2 Chronicles.
Â Archaeological data indicating that 4000 would be an appropriate number of stalls for a nation the size of ancient Israel, whereas 40,000 would be very excessive.
Â 4000 comports better with the number of horsemen.
Â There is sufficient explanation for a change. Eric Vestrup notes that there is a reasonable probability that a scribe copied incorrectly, for Â40″ is spelled aleph-resh-bet-ayin-yodh-mem with Â4″ being spelled aleph-resh-bet-ayin-heh , the only difference being the plural Â-imÂ ending in Â40″ while Â4″ has the singular feminine ending.
I saw that one and figured it was a transcription error.
Makes me wonder how many more there are and why your god would allow those kind of errors in his one and only guide book to heaven.
The stronger contradictions are the logical errors that weren't mere typos, like an all loving god of peace along with a jealous god of war.
No thanks. If I really wanted a god that ban, I'd look for a better one than yours. Yours makes people think really strange things. I see them in prayer halls and churches pretending to feel uplifted or something, and they just look phony and stupid.
Buddhism seems pretty cool, but I've seen people get all flaky over that, too.