Foundational Considerations for Addressing Apparent Contradictions

When confronting Bible difficulties, the critic often begins with a philosophical assumption rather than an exegetical investigation. When someone approaches Scripture believing it is a merely human composition, fallible and inconsistent, every tension becomes a contradiction and every complexity becomes an error. The conservative evangelical interpreter, however, operates from the conviction that Scripture is the inspired and infallible Word of God, a record preserved with extraordinary accuracy in the Hebrew and Greek critical texts. Therefore, the task is not to force harmonization, but to seek the most coherent, contextually grounded explanation within the historical-covenantal setting revealed by God. Because Scripture interprets Scripture, the careful examination of parallel texts, linguistic patterns, and the progressive nature of revelation consistently dissolves claims of contradiction.

The following article examines several well-known objections raised by critics, presenting the critic’s claim, the relevant biblical text as provided, and an exegetically grounded response reflecting a conservative and historically informed hermeneutic.

Where Did Cain Obtain His Wife?

The Critic’s Objection

Genesis records that Adam and Eve had Cain and Abel, after which Cain killed Abel. The critic argues that since only three people appear to exist at this point, the question “Where did Cain get his wife?” exposes a flaw in the historical record.

The Text of Difficulty

Genesis 4:17 (UASV)

“Cain had sexual relations with his wife and she conceived and gave birth to Enoch; and he built a city, and called the name of the city Enoch, after the name of his son, Enoch.”

Answer to the Critic

The genealogies in Genesis are selective, not exhaustive. After describing the birth of Seth, Genesis states that Adam “became father to sons and daughters” (Genesis 5:4). Adam lived 930 years, providing vast opportunity for a large human population to emerge from his immediate descendants. Cain therefore either married a sister or, depending on chronology, a niece. Early human genetic integrity permitted close-kin marriage without biological consequences. As human imperfection increased after the rebellion of Adam, genetic instability accumulated, and lifespans diminished—from Adam’s 930 years to Shem’s 600, Arpachshad’s 438, and Abraham’s 175. By the time of the Mosaic Law, close-kin marriage was prohibited (Leviticus 18:9) because accumulated genetic defects made such unions dangerous. Nothing in the Genesis account contains a contradiction; the critic’s difficulty arises from assuming the absence of descendants not explicitly listed in early genealogical summaries.

Did God Harden Pharaoh’s Heart?

The Critic’s Objection

If God hardened Pharaoh’s heart, then Pharaoh cannot be responsible for his decisions. The critic views this as undermining moral accountability and exposing inconsistency in God’s dealings.

The Text of Difficulty

Exodus 4:21 (UASV)

“Jehovah said to Moses, ‘When you go and return to Egypt see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders which I have put in your hand; but I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go.’”

Answer to the Critic

The statement in Exodus 4:21 is prophetic, not causal. God reveals what Pharaoh will do in response to the signs and judgments, not what Pharaoh is irresistibly compelled to do. Hebrew idiom frequently attributes to God what He merely permits. The broader narrative emphasizes Pharaoh’s agency: Pharaoh hardens his own heart repeatedly (e.g., Exodus 8:15; 8:32; 9:34). Exodus records nineteen references to the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart; Jehovah is the explicit subject only once (10:1). The remainder emphasize Pharaoh’s responsibility or describe his heart as becoming hardened through his own obstinacy.

God’s actions—plagues, signs, warnings—expose Pharaoh’s rebellion, but do not produce it. When God reveals truth and a wicked individual chooses rebellion, the outcome is described as God “hardening” that person, meaning He allowed the individual’s character to manifest fully. This is consistent with the biblical portrayal of human freedom under divine foreknowledge. Pharaoh’s moral culpability is therefore intact, and Exodus presents a coherent historical and theological narrative.

Was The Bronze Serpent A Violation of the Second Commandment?

The Critic’s Objection

The second commandment forbids carved images. Yet Moses made a bronze serpent at Jehovah’s direction. The critic argues that this violates the commandment itself.

The Text of Difficulty

Numbers 21:9 (UASV)

“And Moses made a bronze serpent and set it on the standard; and it came about, that if a serpent bit any man, when he looked to the bronze serpent, he lived.”

Answer to the Critic

A carved image becomes an idol only when it becomes an object of worship or veneration. The bronze serpent was a sign, not a god; it conveyed God’s provision of healing, not an alternative deity. The second commandment forbids constructing images for worship, not images used for symbolic or instructional purposes.

Centuries later, Israel did transform this symbol into an object of veneration, at which point Hezekiah destroyed it:

2 Kings 18:4 records that the Israelites “had made offerings to it,” and therefore it was broken in pieces.

The serpent did not violate the commandment; Israel’s later misuse of it did. God’s people were often permitted objects that pointed to divine truths—ark cherubim, priestly garments, memorial stones—none of which violated the commandment because they were neither worshiped nor treated as divine.

Does Deuteronomy Contradict Itself Concerning the Poor?

The Critic’s Objection

Deuteronomy 15:4 states that there will be no poor in Israel, but verse 11 states that the poor will never cease to exist.

The Texts of Difficulty

Deuteronomy 15:4 (UASV)

“However, there will be no poor among you, since Jehovah will surely bless you in the land which Jehovah your God is giving you as an inheritance to possess,”

NET (for the critic’s quotation)

“There will never cease to be some poor people in the land…”

Answer to the Critic

Verse 4 expresses what should occur within the covenant community when the Israelites obey God’s commands. If they follow Jehovah’s instruction concerning generosity, debt release, and care for their brethren, no Israelite should remain destitute because the community would lift up anyone who fell into hardship.

Verse 11 acknowledges the reality of a fallen world: poverty will always appear because of sickness, poor harvests, economic misfortune, injury, or other hardships in an imperfect society. The Israelites were therefore commanded to respond with generosity.

There is no contradiction; verse 4 addresses Israel’s responsibility within the covenant, while verse 11 acknowledges the ongoing presence of need requiring continued obedience.

Did Joshua Take All the Land or Leave Much Unconquered?

The Critic’s Objection

Joshua 11:23 states Joshua took the whole land, yet Joshua 13:1 states that much remained to be possessed. The critic asserts that both statements cannot be true.

The Texts of Difficulty

Joshua 11:23 (UASV)

“So Joshua took the whole land, according to all that Jehovah had spoken to Moses…”

Joshua 13:1 (UASV)

“You are old and advanced in years, and there remains yet very much land to possess.”

Answer to the Critic

Israel’s conquest unfolded in two phases:

1. National Conquest Under Joshua

The coalition armies of Canaan were broken, their kings defeated, and their military power dismantled. This fulfilled the national objective.

1. Tribal Allotment and Local Occupation

Each tribe was responsible for fully occupying its allotted territory and removing remaining enclaves.

Joshua 11:23 speaks of the first phase: the military superiority of the Canaanites was crushed. Joshua 13:1 refers to the second: many local strongholds remained for individual tribes to address. Joshua did everything commissioned to him; the tribes did not complete theirs.

Because the remaining Canaanites posed no existential threat, the statement that “the land had rest from war” (Joshua 11:23; cf. 21:44) remains true. The critic’s objection fails because it misunderstands the structure of the conquest.

Has Anyone Seen God?

The Critic’s Objection

John 1:18 states that no one has seen God. Yet Exodus 24:10 says Moses and the elders “saw the God of Israel,” and Exodus 33:20 says no one can see God and live. The critic claims this is a direct contradiction.

The Texts of Difficulty

John 1:18 (UASV)

“No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, that one has made him fully known.”

Exodus 24:10 (UASV)

“and they saw the God of Israel…”

Exodus 33:20 (UASV)

“You cannot see my face, for no man can see me and live!”

Answer to the Critic

Scripture affirms repeatedly that Jehovah is invisible and cannot be beheld directly by human eyes. Moses could not see His “face” (Exodus 33:20). Christ is “the image of the invisible God” (Colossians 1:15) and the “exact representation of His nature” (Hebrews 1:3). Human beings therefore encounter God through manifestations that reveal His presence without disclosing His essence.

The appearances described in Exodus involve manifestations of divine glory, often through angelic representatives who carry God’s authority. Scripture frequently speaks of encountering God when the encounter is mediated by one of His angels:

• Exodus 3:2—“the angel of the Lord appeared,” yet verse 6 identifies the speaker as God.
• Acts 7:53, Galatians 3:19, and Hebrews 2:2 reveal that the Law was delivered by angels.
• Luke 2:9 associates “the glory of the Lord” with the appearance of an angel.

When Exodus 24:10 states that the elders “saw the God of Israel,” they beheld the appearance of His glory through an angelic representative, not His unmediated essence. Exodus 33:22–23 clarifies this when God tells Moses he will see His “back,” meaning a mediated manifestation.

Similarly, Jacob wrestled with a “man” who was clearly an angelic representative (Genesis 32:24–30). Manoah and his wife encountered an angel and said, “We have seen God” (Judges 13:3–22). Ancient Israelites commonly spoke of encountering God when they encountered His messenger.

John 1:18 therefore stands in complete harmony with the Exodus accounts: no human has ever seen God Himself, though many have seen His representative manifestations.

You May Also Enjoy

The Apostle John: His Most Challenging and Misunderstood Teachings Explained

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS