Bible’s Anachronisms Prove It False

The bible is viewed by believers as perfect, inspired in it’s original by God, free from error, etc. etc. etc.  ad infinitum, ad nauseam. If it could be demonstrated that there is one incorrect  assertion in the Bible, then the aforementioned attributes of the Bible cannot be viewed as having any truth to them whatsoever.

If just one indispensable Christian doctrine is demonstrably invalid, then the whole edifice of Christian thought is without foundation and is likewise invalid.

There are still many differing opinions regarding the origin of the Bible, when it was written, and under what conditions; but it is fair to say that, outside fundamentalist circles, modern consensus suggests that the assembling and editing of the documents that were to constitute the Bible began in the seventh century BCE, some three centuries after David’s time. (The earliest actual material in our possession, part of the Dead Sea Scrolls, dates to the second century BCE at the earliest).

In particular, the account of Joshua’s conquest of Canaan is inconsistent with the archaeological evidence. Cities supposedly conquered by Joshua in the 14th century bce were destroyed long before he came on the scene. Some, such as Ai and Arad, had been ruins for a 1000 years.

The Truth Is

There are hundreds of  errors of fact,  impossible situations, contratictions and anachronisms in the Bible. This section of The Church of Truth’s doctrine will focus on the many anachronisms found in the Bible.

Genesis Proven to be written AFTER the time of Moses, the alleged author.

Here is what the perfect Bible says of the place of origin of Abrahm  that is, Abraham:

Tereh took Abrahm his son and Lot, the son of Haran, his grandson and Sarai his daughter-in-law, his son Abrahm’s wife, and he went forth from Ur of the Chaldeans to go into the land of Canaan; but when they came to Haran they settled there. Gen. 11:31

While this text purports to be from the hand of Moses, written sometime between 1400 and 1200 BCE, the Chaldeans did not occupy Ur until ca. 800 BCE. Hence, this document’s reference to Ur as “Ur of the Chaldeans” dates it as having been written after that time.

Camels are referenced BEFORE they were domesticated.

And the servant took ten camels of the camels of his master (Abraham), and departed; for all the goods of his master were in his hand: and he arose, and went to Mesopotamia, unto the city of Nahor. Genesis 24:10

It is the consensus of scholars that camels were domesticated after the time of Abraham and thus we have another case where the “perfect” bible is wrong.

Additional proof of this has been found. See Finding Israel’s first camels: Archaeologists pinpoint the date when domesticated camels arrived in Israel

Jericho Was In Ruins BEFORE Joshua Allegedly Concurred It.

The account of Joshua’s conquest of Canaan is inconsistent with the archaeological evidence. Cities supposedly conquered by Joshua in the 14th century bce were destroyed long before he came on the scene. Some, such as Ai and Arad, had been ruins for a 1000 years.

7 comments on “Bible’s Anachronisms Prove It False

  1. Mitchell Golden says:

    Such claims are no better than the fundamentalists, yet my comment will probably be ignored despite your alleged interest in truth. For starters, the text of Genesis does not make any authorship claims. Later traditions developed associating Moses with the books of the Pentateuch but to say that the text “purports” mosaic authorship is blatantly false. Do not equate modern interpretation of text with the texts themselves. Second, generalizing “believers” as people who believe every fact of the bible to be infallible and historically accurate shows great ignorance and prejudice. Many of the scholars whose work you are referencing are in fact believers who also believe that the bible is not directly handed down from the mouth of God. Third, while the texts are likely redacted and compiled after the time of David, you would be hard pressed to find scholars that believe that the compiled material do not contain much older source material. The Hebrew in some poetry can be dated to even the 10th century BCE and the cult of Yahweh is clearly older than that.

    Do not gallantly parade around with your imitation and quite amateur scholarship as if you fight for truth. You do not fight for truth as you skew data that you don’t even understand and only argue subjectively. Leave scholarship and “truth” to those who are truly objective.

    I would not be surprised if my comment is deleted in order to be “silenced,” but that doesn’t matter. These ancient texts don’t need defending. They have been studied long before us and will continue to be studied long after we are gone.

    • Nope – I am not going to ignore your comment and I would never delete it to “silence” you. I just saw it. I infrequently check the comments.

      This page was originally written over three years ago. I make no claim to “scholarship” (in spite of my PH. D. in Operations Research) for things on this website. It is a repository for my thoughts about religion, Jewish and Christian, in particular.

      You are tilting at windmills with your criticism of this page; it (this page) is not one I wish to spend time defending. It doesn’t appear as one of my main pages accessible from the home page. How did you even find it?

      If you respond to this comment, I will delete the page. I have no emotional attachment to its contents. My other pages prove my point much better. I just don’t want to delete it and have you think I did so to “silence” you.

  2. republibot3 says:

    Your concept of “if any of it is wrong, all of it is wrong,” is really only an issue for literalists, people who take every word literally true. The majority of Christian denominations – including all the big ones – do not do this. The majority of Christians don’t take every word literally, which, in fact, it would be hard for anyone to do anyway as the Bible frequently admits it is speaking in metaphores. So while your argument is logical, it only applies to a comparatively small minority of Christians, almost all of whom are in the US

    • If the Bible is the Word of God, then why is it wrong to believe that if one word is wrong, it must be all wrong. The almighty, omniscient, omnipotent God couldn’t/wouldn’t possibly tell a lie would he? Why would He want to mislead those who he loves?

      Everyone takes the parts of the bible that they believe literally. To not take Genesis literally is to lose foundation elements of Christianity. You lose creation (all right – few believe in a 6 day creation), Noah’s Ark, Jews in Egypt, 10 plagues, Exodus, 10 Commandments, the tower of Babel, Abraham, Jacob, Sodom and Gomorrah. All of these things were referenced by Jesus. He believed every jot and tittle of the Old Testament.

      Very few Christians will renounce the 10 commandments even though the don’t believe the 6 day creation story.

      Most of all, you lose the whole reason for Jesus – to free us from our sin. What sin? Why the sin of Adam and Eve. Without that bullshit, there is no reason for Jesus.

      So, people cherry pick which nonsensical bible stories they believe, they don’t take every one of them literally, but they take literally, those stories that support their belief.

      Are Christians and Jews not taught that the Bible is the Word Of God?And, since the Bible is the “word of God”, edited and supervised by the Editor In Chief, the Holy Spirit, shouldn’t every word of it be taken literally? Why not?

      re: metaphors…
      No where in any of the Pentateuch is there any indication that any of it is a metaphor. I don’t recall anywhere in the NT where Jesus prefaces his remarks with “…and I am speaking metaphorically here”. It is up to the listener/reader to interpret that what he is saying is metaphorical. That gets very dicey. A metaphor to one is truth to another – especially if God is saying it.

  3. Tom says:

    Both the dromedary (the seven-humped camel of Arabia) and the Bactrian camel (the two-humped camel of Central Asia) had been domesticated since before 2000 BC.

    • Not so according to recent research by archeologists of unbiased objectivity. See link above.

      • Uh, the link above takes the reader to a site that actually supports Tom! For example, from one of the footnotes: ‘However, there is now a growing body of scholars who believe that camel domestication must have occurred earlier than previously thought (prior to the 12th century BC) and that the patriarchal narratives accurately reflect this (e.g., Ripinsky 1984; Coote and Whitelam 1987: 102; Zarins 1992: 826; Borowski 1998: 112–18).’, Younker, ‘Bronze Age Camel Petroglyphs In The Wadi Nasib, Sinai’, Bible and Spade (13.75), 2000.
        After all, the site you linked to is called “Bible Apologetics”!

New Evidence? Comments?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s