Major plot holes in the bible

[Kurtz]

As I'm reading the Bible I can't help but notice some major plot holes in it. Major ones in fact, and since it's one of the best selling books I can't help myself not to point some of them out.

First is the concept of Satan. If god is all knowing and all powerful and nothing is able to impose his will how does Satan exist? You'd think he could get rid of Satan pretty easily since he created the universe and Satan is part of the universe, don't you. What's he waiting for exactly?

Second is dinosaurs. Christians claim that the year is 7,000 years old right? But how come scientists have discovered dinosaur bones that date back millions of years? How do you Christians explain that? I'm having some major problems wrapping my head around that my self.

Anyways, That's just what I think. Feel free to post more Bible plot holes of your own.

[cfmonkey45]

Except of course that the Bible isn't a book, in the sense that Catcher in the Rye or Fight Club is a book. It's a Codex, or a collection of writings believed to be inspired or that elucidate moral or theological points, therefore the notion that there exists plot holes tends to be inaccurate at best, since there really exists no plot. However, the Books of Kings and Chronicles seem to draw from the Royal Histories, and many of the events they describe, for example, the Neo-Assyrian Conquest of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, or Sennacherib's campaign against Egypt and Judah, seem to have a relatively accurate historicity.

[Kurtz]

Maybe so but the stories they tell have some serious plot holes that don't seem to be addressed by many people. Why should I base my life around poor story telling? Would you want your kids raised thinking mediocrity is acceptable?

[CamilleBonparte]

Second is dinosaurs. Christians claim that the year is 7,000 years old right? But how come scientists have discovered dinosaur bones that date back millions of years? How do you Christians explain that? I'm having some major problems wrapping my head around that my self.

Wait, how is this a "bible plot hole"?

[Kurtz]

Wait, how is this a "bible plot hole"?

Because it's historically inaccurate. Maybe that was a better word for it, but it obviously doesn't make very much sense.

And here is another one. The Leviathan. How come we don't see those swimming around?

[Khassaki]

First is the concept of Satan. If god is all knowing and all powerful and nothing is able to impose his will how does Satan exist? You'd think he could get rid of Satan pretty easily since he created the universe and Satan is part of the universe, don't you. What's he waiting for exactly?

There is actually no reference to Satan or hell in any of the gospels of the new testament. One of the gospels refers to an underworld and the nashing of teeth, but satan and hell were all later additions to dogma that had no basis in the bible. Likewise purgatory - which was invented in the 14th century to give faithful soldiers who died without the last rites a way into heaven - was recently revoked by the current pope.

[MaximiIian]

Because it's historically inaccurate.

You mean people in the Bronze Age didn't know how to radiometrically date the Earth's lifetime, or knew that there were giant reptiles that roamed the world millions of years before?
Astounding. Do tell.

Likewise purgatory - which was invented in the 14th century to give faithful soldiers who died without the last rites a way into heaven - was recently revoked by the current pope.

Purgatory was part of Christianity quite a bit before the 14th century. And it was never revoked as part of Catholic dogma. Limbo, yes, but that's an entirely different thing.

[The Million Dollar Prons]

We are our own satan. God made us so we can know right from wrong, and when we opt to do wrong we try to put ourselves before God and live without Him. This is the sin of Lucifer, and whenever Satan is mentioned in the bible, it's usually figuratively in that sense, for example the Book of Job.

The second "plothole" is more of a problem with New Earth Intelligent Deisgn, but most Christians and Thelogians believe in Theistic Evolution. So it's not really a problem.

And here is another one. The Leviathan. How come we don't see those swimming around?

Okay look.

You need to understand that the bible is a question of 66(73 if you like apocrpytha like I do!) books. Some of them are meant to be historical records (1 and 2 Macabees for example). Some are meant to be wisdom (Proverbs, Wisdom, Wisdom of Sirach). Some are meant to be used to liturgy (Psalms). Some are Poetic, like Job.

How do we know Job is a poem? Well because we know how Hebrew Poetry worked. Even though Hebrew is not a very "beautiful" language (As Saint Jerome would attest ) it has a very unique style of poetry. I've heard it described as each verse starting with each letter of the alphabet (A is for A, B is for B, etc. etc.)

Now when something is a poem you're meant to look into the deeper context. You're not supposed to read a poem and think "Hm, God goes around beating up crocodiles, who knew?"

Also remember that the bible is the most studied and critiqued collection in the past 2,000 years. You probably won't be able to spot inacuracies that easily.

Once again I don't blame you for mistaking every book in the bible as 100% literal. For some reason most bibles do not have adequite introductions and footnotes, so I suggest using a study bible.


As for limbo, let's put that aside (drumroll, because when I was first taught about limbo it said that limbo was a verb that meant to put aside. Na mean? Haha funny right)

[Lord Rahl]

Maybe so but the stories they tell have some serious plot holes that don't seem to be addressed by many people. Why should I base my life around poor story telling? Would you want your kids raised thinking mediocrity is acceptable?

Others have already addressed this but I'll add to it.

You're acting like the Bible should be literarily (word?) and/or historically consistent compared to other literary works or academic histories. That's a terrible comparison to assume. The Bible is a collection of books (the Protestant Bible has 66 books while the Catholic Bible has 73 [I think]) written over thousands of years, written by an untold number of individuals, and none of them were intended to have literary or historical consistency to subsequent books (in the Bible), except for New Testament books, perhaps.

So, saying there are "plot holes" is ridiculous since there was never any sort of plot intended. I remember explaining this to someone else in another thread. The Million Dollar Prons does a very good job of explaining some differences between the different books in the Bible when referring to poetry. Is it really a surprise that a book (made of dozens of books) written over thousands of years has historical inaccuracies? No. Is it really a surprise that a collection of books written by an untold number of authors will have inconsistencies (even though they weren't written to be consistent) from book to book? No.

Now, for some reason you find all of this surprising, and maybe just need to be educated...or you don't and simply believe these points are an opportunity to undermine or bash Christianity.

[frank_garrett]

well the bible is really wierd and have alot of holes as its fictional but you actually read even more fictional book then the bible. you dont read the bible you read the the new testamens that was written by christian fanatics. and is all about god,satan,end of the world. its more like a fantasy book. it has no reality in it at all.

while the bible has fictional chapters too .it has also chapters that are historical . about the ancient israel tribes,the wars between them,diplomacy between kingdooms,all the conquests of the kingdom of david and solomon. so the bible is not fully fictional.

[Kurtz]

Others have already addressed this but I'll add to it.

You're acting like the Bible should be literarily (word?) and/or historically consistent compared to other literary works or academic histories. That's a terrible comparison to assume. The Bible is a collection of books (the Protestant Bible has 66 books while the Catholic Bible has 73 [I think]) written over thousands of years, written by an untold number of individuals, and none of them were intended to have literary or historical consistency to subsequent books (in the Bible), except for New Testament books, perhaps.

So, saying there are "plot holes" is ridiculous since there was never any sort of plot intended. I remember explaining this to someone else in another thread. The Million Dollar Prons does a very good job of explaining some differences between the different books in the Bible when referring to poetry. Is it really a surprise that a book (made of dozens of books) written over thousands of years has historical inaccuracies? No. Is it really a surprise that a collection of books written by an untold number of authors will have inconsistencies (even though they weren't written to be consistent) from book to book? No.

Now, for some reason you find all of this surprising, and maybe just need to be educated...or you don't and simply believe these points are an opportunity to undermine or bash Christianity.

Well you see I was always told the Bible was supposed to be taken literally and an accurate description of history.

[Lord Rahl]

So was I. Your point?

[Kurtz]

So was I. Your point?

What makes them wrong and you correct?

[Lord Rahl]

Now you're asking questions of spirituality or theology. That's a totally different discussion than Bible "plot holes" (unless you're changing your focus to something that can actually be discussed rather than taught.

[Kurtz]

Now you're asking questions of spirituality or theology. That's a totally different discussion than Bible "plot holes" (unless you're changing your focus to something that can actually be discussed rather than taught.

I have to applaud your effort to dodge the question but I still would like my question answered. What makes your opinion more valid than there's? After all you said many people have interpreted the Bible differently.

[Lord Rahl]

Well, if you insist on changing the basis of the thread's discussion then I will oblige.

What makes them wrong and you correct?

I wouldn't say that I'm necessarily "right" or that they're necessarily "wrong". I will say that if someone wants to assert the Bible as being a complete literal truth then they are wrong. This clashes with the idea of a literal interpretation of the Bible as well. So, if we're arguing historical accuracy or the necessity for literal interpretation of the Bible for "true" Christianity then I will say that I'm right. This does not, however, mean that I am "right" when it comes to spirituality. Spirituality is a personal belief and one that is much more of an ambiguous matter to find the "truth" (if there is one).

This does not have much to do with "plot holes" or Bible interpretation, however, as the discussion deals with literary and historical understanding of the Bible, not spirituality and/or theology, which is what you asked me.

[Kurtz]

Well, if you insist on changing the basis of the thread's discussion then I will oblige.




I wouldn't say that I'm necessarily "right" or that they're necessarily "wrong". I will say that if someone wants to assert the Bible as being a complete literal truth then they are wrong. This clashes with the idea of a literal interpretation of the Bible as well. So, if we're arguing historical accuracy or the necessity for literal interpretation of the Bible for "true" Christianity then I will say that I'm right. This does not, however, mean that I am "right" when it comes to spirituality. Spirituality is a personal belief and one that is much more of an ambiguous matter to find the "truth" (if there is one).

This does not have much to do with "plot holes" or Bible interpretation, however, as the discussion deals with literary and historical understanding of the Bible, not spirituality and/or theology, which is what you asked me.

But that doesn't prove that Satan doesn't exist. Where in the New Testament does it specifically say that there is no devil?

[Lord Rahl]

What does that have to do with what I just explained? I never said Satan doesn't exist for a fact. I don't believe it but I'm not claiming that belief to be the spiritual truth. I'm not even making the assumption of a non-existent Satan in this discussion.

Like I said, if you want to talk about supposed Bible plot holes through historical inaccuracies then you need to better understand the context of the Bible as a collection of many books (and all that brings with it). If you want to talk about Satan in the Christian belief then you're discussing theology. That's not what I'm arguing.

[♔DeusVult!♔]

Second is dinosaurs. Christians claim that the year is 7,000 years old right? But how come scientists have discovered dinosaur bones that date back millions of years? How do you Christians explain that? I'm having some major problems wrapping my head around that my self.

Anyways, That's just what I think. Feel free to post more Bible plot holes of your own.

Not really sure what this has to do with anything. The bible doesn't mention butterflies either. Is that now a major plot hole? If you want to talk about creationism, well I believe there is a thread on that somewhere around here. Short version is, not everything in the bible is supposed to be taken as literal truth. Genesis is one of these, but some people insist on saying it is literal, maybe because they feel threatened by science for whatever reason. As for Satan, I have always liked CS Lewis's explanation (though I don't think he addresses scriptural basis).

[Marcus Publius]

First is the concept of Satan. If god is all knowing and all powerful and nothing is able to impose his will how does Satan exist? You'd think he could get rid of Satan pretty easily since he created the universe and Satan is part of the universe, don't you. What's he waiting for exactly?

Well I was wondering the same thing.Maybe he decided to cut him some slack,because he was his top angel.And then Adam and Eve disobeyed his order not to eat from particular tree.And then he casted them out of heaven maybe he figured,well maybe I should let Lucifer to have his authority over people.They were to stupid and too gullible and believed the talking snake.And the the free will was given.And people learned to do whatever they want.Then 10 commandments were given to protect people from evil and keep then on the right path.And about waiting, If I remember right he's waiting the end of days then he will cast him in the fire of lake.I think that goes something like that.