Groan.
This site gives the distinct impression that the author is throwing a tantrum. "See! SEE! The Bible is wrong! There's this, this, and this that proves it!!!" Childish. If you want an intellectual debate, let's HAVE an intellectual debate. Not this immaturity.
The Bible is not a mathematical proof. It's a work of literature. God-inspired, yes. But it's presented with all the usual literary devices such as metaphors, hyperbole, and analogies.
Take a look at the false prophecies section, for example. Point by point refutation/dismissal of the first part of the list...
1. Adam's death could be spiritual, meaning he was cut off from God the instant he ate the fruit, or it could be referring to his physical death in the 1000-year "day" mentioned in one of Peter's epistles.
2. Did Cain stay in the city? Did he wander around before and after building the city? Insufficient evidence, especially considering the literary style of Genesis.
3. While the "deed" to the promised land belongs to Israel from God's perspective, Israel still has responsibility to secure it. The part of the land that Israel doesn't control is occupied (not owned) by trespassers.
4. 400 years is an approximation.
5. Incorrect reference point. Levi was the first generation to live in Egypt. This makes Moses the fourth.
6. Metaphor/hyperbole. Who can count the stars? Who can count the number of Jews that have lived on the Earth since Abraham? At the time God spoke this to Abraham, Abraham wasn't even able to have children.
7. Israel is a title. I assume that the Bible uses Israel to emphasize that Jacob did something spiritually significant, and Jacob to chronicle everyday stuff.
8. Context. In the previous verse, God promises to make Jacob into a great nation and bring him out again. This promise was passed down until Jacob's entire seed was eventually brought out of Egypt.
9. Not familiar enough with this one - someone else answer it.
10. God gives Israel the authority to cast them out, and he will go before them to cast them out if they have faith to go into battle. But as the Bible records, the Israelites were often too lazy to carry out their objectives to the fullest.
11. Perhaps God wrote through Moses. Or perhaps he was emphasizing the authority of what was to be written on the tablets. The President doesn't physically "write" his speeches, although he writes them vicariously.
12. This wasn't God's fault. It was contingent on Israel's obedience.
13. There's a difference between "couldn't" and "wouldn't". Again, Israel was either lazy or unmotivated or didn't have the faith to completely drive everyone out.
14. Israel hardly ever followed God's laws to the fullest.
15. This is to weed out the false prophets and preserve the integrity of Israel's spiritual leadership.
16. From God's perspective, why shouldn't they be?
17. Or perhaps reworded, or perhaps translated differently. Is every Bible translation is a "misquotation" since it doesn't use the original language?
18. Again, this was contingent on Israel's faith and obedience.
19. Same as above.
20. Same as above.
21. You don't have to live in something to possess it. Or this verse may refer to Ai the kingdom, not Ai the city.
22. Same as above.
23. Same as above.
24. Same as above.
25. Etc. This guy sounds like a broken record.
26. Etc.
27. Etc.
28. Etc.
29. This refers to the spiritual kingdom. Jesus came from Solomon's line, and Jesus is the fulfillment of this prophecy.
30. "In peace" does not mean peaceful. Josiah went to heaven, while many around him did not.
31. This was contingent on Zedekiah's and Israel's continued obedience. But they disobeyed God several verses later, and so he turned them over to the enemy.
32. This is a literary device, using hyperbole for its effect. This literary construction is found often in the Bible.
33. Perhaps reworded.
34. Perhaps reworded.
Etc., etc., etc. This is highly annoying - it's like swatting at mosquitos. Most Christians will be glad to answer honest inquiry, but sites like this are just examples of people refusing any explanation that doesn't conform to their prejudices.
