There are not two accounts of the creation. Eastern peoples use repetition to tell a story with the second telling narrowing in on the first. Chapter 2 of Genesis isn't a second creation, it is just an Eastern mindset person (as Moses was) doing what Eastern people do. Retelling an event and centering in on the important things. Gen. 1 is about the creation of the universe and Gen. 2 is about the real purpose of the book, MANKIND AND HIS RELATION TO GOD. I hate it when lazy God-haters/self-worshipers are too lazy to do any research at all. But then they really don't want to know the truth because if they found out that they were not the false gods their mommies told them they were, their egos would implode. What is an Athiest??? Just an Agnostic with a god sized ego.

As some religious reviewers have already noted, context *is* critical!

That's why it's really difficult to understand why those reviewers didn't see or read the 80% or more of the text that put each of the examples quoted into perfect context, linguistically, culturally, textually, and temporally. That's inexcusable on their parts.

For those truly interested in serious (and a couple of not-so-serious) examples of the many tens of thousands of categorical biblical contradictions, this is a great little introduction.

You will probably need to understand a little of the background of the textual criticism... For example, the "usual suspects" are correctly identified, but without an understanding of the long history of biblical textual criticism, the names may not mean much to you.

Unfortunately, the reviewers with little or no understanding of the use of the word "criticism" in the context of the bible, are unfortunately not able to make meaningful arguments, as you may have noticed. This is unfortunate, because instead of learning something new about their holy book, they have just responded emotionally to material they clearly haven't understood. That means that instead of generating discussion and learning, the book is seen simply as an attack on their faith. And that's really sad.

Well worth the purchase price, and a great introduction to the field, although not as serious as it could be. Made me laugh out loud though!

Anybody can imagine contradictions without even trying... like, was Jesus a loaf of bread because He was called the Bread of Life? Learn to study verses that seem a contradiction with its context, and with some Bible commentaries on hand. The commentaries just might give you an angle or outlook you didn't see before. I have yet to find a single contradiction in the Holy Bible that didn't have at least one explanation for why it's not a contradiction.

I hate it when someone just wants to "prove" to others that their atheism is justified by twisting things around to fit their unbelief.

InPac wrote a retraction to the review on my article, stating he meant for it to go to another one (and pointing out he couldn't even see mine because it was defective). I don't know what happened to the retraction, but I can only assume he meant your article was the one the review was originally intended for, since mine deals with differences in translations and not with contradictions.

Even though I uploaded this book still I wouldn't give it 5 stars, But 4 stars.... Definitely, for you see this book was meant as a list of "contradictions", which are stated plenty therein....

Well, reading the Bible looking for fallacy will indeed induce fallacy but you, my friend, should realize that this principle works both ways.... That means if you read the bible believing it to be true (word of God) then you will induce infallibility.

Now, you are quick to criticize the age problem of Abram, overlooking the other brilliant examples stated in the book, this trait is specially found in "Christians", so I will assume you are a Christian.... Now, back to the problem at hand;
Terah lived 205 years and died in Haran,
Terah begat Abram when he was 70 years old,
Therefore Abram must be 135 years old when his father died,
The chapter ends there and the new chapter begins with "Now the lord...."
The old custom was for a son to bury his father, So it is rather logical to believe that Abram left Haran after his father died and was buried, instead of him leaving the old man on his own, plus, the phase "Fathers house" apples to the heritage acquired through lineage.... Until he (Abram) builds his own house the property (house) handed down by his father will be known as "Fathers house".
And for your argument about "writing style"..... "It's good to move in and out" you say. ......But the problem is, there is no reference of his father (Terah) after Chap 11:32 (where his death is mentioned).
It is common sense to assume that somewhere along the journey of Abram to "the blessed land" Bible should have been mentioned something like "And when Abram was doing 'so and so' his father died"..... If something like this was mentioned then the writing style could be said to "move in and out".

I don't know if you are well versed in the Hebrew tongue, Or you are just repeating what some "preacher" told you to believe, but I would refrain from commenting on that particular subject as I am not a scholar of Hebraic language.
And if you would still like to stick with the argument based on "Language barriers" and "Translation errors" then my answer is, How can you be sure of anything written in the Bible then??

Even though I am not the author of this book but I would still defend it, because you overlooked all the important points in this book, for example;
Bible says that the Devil is the greatest deceiver, and God wants to save each and every human being........ *BUT* it also says:
II Thessalonians 2:11-12 God sends delusions on people to make them believe false things and be damned.
Ezekiel 13:9. 14:9 The Lord deceives prophets (puts false words into their mouths) in order to get rid of them.
So judging by these verses I must conclude that God is also a deceiver, *BUT* lesser than Devil.

Have a good day my friend :)

I was hoping to see some real quality in this list...however it's not.

One of the most obvious flaws is it's based on translations...this means that apparent contradictions are likely to appear that aren't in the texts translated from; but it's more complicated when you're working with interrelated texts of different languages (Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek).

Yet this list in particular is one of the worst, by far, I've read. It's worse, even, than a Muslim guy's list I once read who purposely read the Bible for contradictions (which will induce fallacy).

A good example is Genesis 1 and 2; we read these with Englsih minds, and look at the "division" between these chapters...but in the Hebrew they're one account (undivided), meant to give different details.

Another example is the example the list gives about Abraham being only 75 after Terah died 135 years after Abraham's birth. While it says Terah was 70 and begot Abram, Nahor, and Heran in Gen 11 and Genesis 11 ends with details of how long Terah lived, Genesis 12:4 says when Abram left when he was 75 but that the departed from his father's house, and gives intimate Terah is dead: the writer was giving details afore other events...if the compiler of this list has ever study literature he or she would know this is a perfectly acceptable mode of writing: wholly linear writing as we're often used to today is boring and quaint; it's good to move in and out to provide details where appropriate rather than where they'd only be expected.

But more importantly is that Hebrew won't often correspond exactly to the English literary device...though this example actually does. An annoying but true thing about it is that Hebrew often gives some details and moves on...only to move back and give other aspects of times and events; sure, we might hate it...but by doing this it requires more than an infant's attention and concentration.