![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2020\/05\/RedSeaParting.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Ward Ricker<\/a>\u00a0is an atheist who (as so often) was formerly a self-described\u00a0\u00a0\u201cfundamentalist\u201d<\/span>. He likes to poke holes in the Bible and \u201cprove\u201d that it is a terrible and \u201cevil\u201d book, not inspired, hopelessly contradictory, etc. He put together a 222-page book called\u00a0Unholy Bible<\/em><\/a>\u00a0(2019): available for free as a pdf file. It contains 421 couplets of passages that he considers literally contradictory, and 256 more couplets of not technically contradictory but \u201cproblem\u201d passages (according to him). Ward wrote in his book:\u00a0\u201cI . . . am including here only what I consider to be the more firm\u00a0examples of contradictions. . . .\u00a0 I do not want to include examples that are \u2018weak\u2019 and will\u00a0be easily refuted. I have made my best judgment.\u201d\u00a0<\/span>Ward also wrote to me:<\/p>\n [M]any Bible critics (\u201catheists\u201d or otherwise) will use some pretty ridiculous arguments . . . I have screened out those bogus claims that some critics make and have published my own book . . . of contradictions that I and others have found in the Bible that are clearly contradictions.<\/span>\u00a0(letter to\u00a0National Catholic Register<\/em>\u00a0about one of my articles there; reproduced in\u00a0my first reply<\/a>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n He issued a challenge for anyone to take on his alleged contradictions. After\u00a0my first reply<\/a>, he wrote\u00a0a\u00a05 1\/2 page article<\/a>\u00a0suggesting in-depth dialogue.\u00a0I responded, explaining in depth<\/a>\u00a0why I thought dialogue between us would be unfruitful, for many reasons. He then accused me (among other things in his two replies) of\u00a0\u201chypocrisy\u201d<\/span>\u00a0that\u00a0\u201cknows no bounds.\u201d<\/span>\u00a0This is, of course, against my\u00a0discussion rules<\/a>, which forbids such rank insults, so he was promptly banned from my blog, and I replied: \u201cI was exactly right in my judgment that no dialogue was possible. It never takes long for the fangs to come out if they are there.\u201d<\/p>\n But I had already stated: \u201cI may\u00a0still\u00a0<\/i>take on several of your proposed contradictions, just so I can have opportunity to show how very wrong atheist contentions are (which is one thing Christian apologists do).\u201d This series represents that effort. Mr. Ricker can respond on his page as he sees fit. He can still see my posts. His words will be in\u00a0blue<\/span>. To search any of this series on my blog, paste \u201cWard\u2019s Whoppers #\u201d in the search bar on the top right of my blog page. He uses the King James Version for his Bible verses. I will use RSV in my replies.<\/p>\n *****<\/p>\n 42.<\/span> Vs:<\/span><\/p>\n Numbers 9: 14 And if a stranger shall sojourn among you, and will keep the passover unto the LORD; according\u00a0to the ordinance of the passover, and according to the manner thereof, so shall he do: ye shall have one\u00a0ordinance, both for the stranger, and for him that was born in the land<\/span><\/p>\n Q: Were \u201cstrangers\u201d (foreigners) allowed to eat the Passover?<\/span><\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n This is easily resolved, and is no contradiction at all (remember, I predicted that there would be many<\/em> like this \u2014 indeed, virtually all of the ones I refute: and so I am a prophet). Again, context is the solution and key. It\u2019s quite clear that the overall thought on this issue is: \u201ca stranger \/ foreigner who does not abide by our laws may not partake of the Passover, which is specifically our Hebrew \/ Jewish ritual.<\/p>\n On the other hand, any stranger \/ foreigner who decides to join us and abide by our laws and requirements (including circumcision for males), is welcome to partake.\u201d It\u2019s exactly analogous to a non-Catholic not being allowed to receive Holy Communion in a Catholic Church unless he or she has accepted all that the Catholic Church requires them to accept, to be a Catholic. Then they are more than welcome to the Table.<\/p>\n Ward (who likely found this in another atheist list that may have been around for hundreds of years) paid no attention to context once again. It\u2019s explained in the immediate surrounding text, with words similar to the Numbers passage above:<\/p>\n Exodus 12:48-49<\/strong>\u00a0\u201cAnd when a stranger shall sojourn with you and would keep the passover to the LORD, let all his males be circumcised, then he may come near and keep it; he shall be as a native of the land. But no uncircumcised person shall eat of it.\u00a0[49] There shall be one law for the native and for the stranger who sojourns among you.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Obviously, it\u2019s saying that strangers \/ foreigners who have no intention of abiding by Jewish law and custom, cannot eat the Passover meal, but those who do<\/em> that (essentially, converts to the Jewish faith) may, and will be treated no differently. This is utterly evident in the texts. So why is this force-fit into a trumped-up supposed \u201ccontradiction\u201d? These things are embarrassing and should make any atheist who \u201creasons\u201d in such a manner blush with shame. Yet it keeps happening. Hey, if atheists want to make these dumb allegedly rational \u201carguments\u201d I\u2019m more than happy as an apologist to shoot them down. No skin off of my back . . .\u00a0 I was bored and looking for a new project. Man, did I find<\/em> it!<\/p>\n For more about how the ancient Jews and the Old Testament viewed foreigners, and when and how they accepted them into their fold, see these excellent articles:<\/p>\n \u201cWhat the Bible Says About Our Illegal Immigration Problem\u201d<\/a>\u00a0(Ralph Drollinger, 9-27-16)<\/p>\n \u201cA Biblical Perspective on Immigration Policy\u201d<\/a>\u00a0(James R. Edwards, Jr., 9-16-09)<\/p>\n \u201cStranger and Sojourner (in the Old Testament)\u201d<\/a>\u00a0(International Standard Bible Encyclopedia Online<\/em>)<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n 43.<\/span> Vs:<\/span><\/p>\n Exodus 17: 5 And the LORD said unto Moses, Go on before the people, and take with thee of the elders of\u00a0Israel; and thy rod, wherewith thou smotest the river, take in thine hand, and go.<\/span><\/p>\n Q: Did Moses stretch his hand over the Red Sea or did he hit it with a stick?<\/span><\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n Oh boy! I feel like a professor of mathematics, forced to go and teach third-graders the times tables. You gotta have fun with this stuff to keep from crying or going nuts . . . What it does<\/em> definitely show over and over (and this is very valuable from the Christian apologetic standpoint) is how very desperate<\/em> atheists are to shoot down the Bible. Anything goes<\/em>, no matter how asinine or ludicrous. These two that I deal with in this article are among those that Ward considers (like all 421 he has selected)\u00a0\u201cclearly contradictions.\u201d Me: I consider them \u201cridiculous.\u201d<\/span><\/span>\u00a0You<\/em> be the judge.<\/span><\/span>\u00a0We simply go to context for the exceptionally simple solution:<\/span><\/p>\n Exodus 14:15-16\u00a0<\/strong>The LORD said to Moses, \u201cWhy do you cry to me? Tell the people of Israel to go forward.\u00a0[16] Lift up your rod, and stretch out your hand over the sea and divide it, that the people of Israel may go on dry ground through the sea.<\/p>\n Exodus 14:21\u00a0<\/strong>Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the LORD drove the sea back by a strong east wind all night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n We see then, that Moses, rod in hand (just like in the old 50s movie with Charlton Heston that we recently watched), lifted his hand up over the sea, causing it (by God\u2019s power, of course) to divide. 14:21 simply mentions that he raised his hand, without mentioning the rod again (because this was done five verses before). It\u2019s not<\/em> a logical contradiction. It would be like saying:<\/p>\n \u201cThe reporter at the press conference raised his hand to ask a question.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe reporter at the press conference raised his hand (with a pen in it) to ask a question.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I\u2019ve often seen reporters do that, because they are taking notes with their right hand (if they are right-handed) and then they raise their hands to be recognized: still holding the pen in it. Thus, the two statements do not contradict. Neither do Exodus 14:16 and 14:21: only in the fertile mind of desperately special pleading atheists who treat the Bible like a butcher treats a hog.<\/p>\n Exodus 14:21 is already understood as Moses holding his hand up with the rod in it, before we even get to another stupid alleged \u201ccontradiction.\u201d All Ward or any atheist who finds this slop compelling had to do was read the passage in context<\/strong><\/em> (a thing elementary to all research whatever). Now, some reader may think I am \u201cangry.\u201d I\u2019m not (I\u2019m very cool-headed at almost all times). I\u2019m what I would call \u201cintellectually disgusted\u201d at these unworthy atheist tactics. It\u2019s an embarrassment to all thinkers of any stripe, to have to point out how silly these things are. Atheists know better than this.<\/p>\n But because the first passage hasn\u2019t been read in context and understood, now we get an equally dumb suggestion that Exodus 17:5 \u201ccontradicts\u201d it. Wonders never cease (no pun intended). This<\/em> passage has nothing to do<\/em> with the other, and is referring to something completely different. It occurred after<\/em> the time of the parting of the Red Sea: in the \u201cwilderness.\u201d God, in talking to Moses, makes reference to \u201cthe rod with which you struck the Nile\u201d (\u201criver\u201d in the KJV above).<\/p>\n Is a \u201criver\u201d or, specifically, the Nile River, the same thing as the Red Sea now in an atheist\u2019s mind? Basic geography and landscape details are up for grabs, too, in the rush to make fools of Christians? Who<\/em>\u2018s the fool here? God was referring to what was described in the following passage:<\/p>\n Exodus 7:19-21\u00a0<\/strong>And the LORD said to Moses, \u201cSay to Aaron, `Take your rod and stretch out your hand over the waters of Egypt, over their rivers, their canals, and their ponds, and all their pools of water, that they may become blood; and there shall be blood throughout all the land of Egypt, both in vessels of wood and in vessels of stone.'\u201d\u00a0[20]\u00a0Moses and Aaron did as the LORD commanded; in the sight of Pharaoh and in the sight of his servants, he lifted up the rod and struck the water that was in the Nile<\/span><\/em>, and all the water that was in the Nile turned to blood. [21] And the fish in the Nile died; and the Nile became foul, so that the Egyptians could not drink water from the Nile; and there was blood throughout all the land of Egypt.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Ward ought to plead for mercy, retract and unpublish his book, and repent in dust and ashes (hopefully becoming a Christian again, too), so I can stop this series (as an act of charity). Otherwise, it\u2019s only going to get uglier and more laughable as we go on, with dozens more examples of \u201ccontradictions\u201d like the two above.<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n Photo credit:\u00a0<\/span><\/strong>amboo who?<\/a>\u00a0(6-23-12) [Flickr<\/a> \/ CC BY-SA 2.0<\/a> license]<\/p>\n ***<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Ward Ricker\u00a0is an atheist who (as so often) was formerly a self-described\u00a0\u00a0\u201cfundamentalist\u201d. He likes to poke holes in the Bible and \u201cprove\u201d that it is a terrible and \u201cevil\u201d book, not inspired, hopelessly contradictory, etc. He put together a 222-page book called\u00a0Unholy Bible\u00a0(2019): available for free as a pdf file. It contains 421 couplets of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":47858,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[124],"tags":[1043,258,522,1472,1473,525,524,11045,2637,1633,1387,11087,1386,535,4068,140,1722,11102,11099,11096,2532,11105,11093,11090,11044],"class_list":["post-47849","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-atheism-agnosticism","tag-anti-theism","tag-atheism","tag-atheist-biblical-exegesis","tag-atheists-the-bible","tag-atheists-theology","tag-bible-contradictions","tag-bible-difficulties","tag-bible-bashing-atheists","tag-biblical-inspiration","tag-biblical-skeptics","tag-exegesis","tag-foreigners","tag-hermeneutics","tag-holy-bible","tag-inerrancy","tag-infallibility","tag-moses","tag-moses-rod","tag-moses-staff","tag-parting-the-read-sea","tag-passover","tag-passover-foreigners","tag-sojourners","tag-strangers","tag-ward-ricker"],"yoast_head":"\n
\nExodus 12: 43 And the LORD said unto Moses and Aaron, This is the ordinance of the passover: There shall no\u00a0stranger eat thereof<\/span><\/p>\n
\nExodus 14: 21 And Moses stretched out his hand over the sea; and the LORD caused the sea to go back by a\u00a0strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided.<\/span><\/p>\n