Why the Bible Only Contradicts When You Read It All as One Book

Why the Bible Only Contradicts When You Read It All as One Book

This post addresses an article in which the author ridicules the Bible, claiming it is riddled with contradictions and therefore cannot be divinely inspired. Their critique stems not from malice, but from a deep misunderstanding of Scripture’s structure, purpose, and context. By treating the Bible as a single, undivided document—where every verse is assumed to apply equally to every person in every age—they fall into the common trap of contextual blindness. Their article mocks dozens of verses, pairing them as supposed contradictions, and uses these mismatches to dismiss the Bible’s credibility.

What follows is a corrective reply: each quoted “contradiction” is examined and rightly divided according to God’s dispensational blueprint—between prophecy and mystery, law and grace, Israel and the Body of Christ. Once this division is recognised, the confusion dissolves, and Scripture is revealed not as a flawed book, but as a perfectly ordered revelation of God’s truth, harmony, and eternal purpose.

You’re Right—It Doesn’t Add Up. But That’s Because You’re Missing the Key.

You wrote:

“The thing that primarily killed my faith is that I read enough of The Bible to realize that it teemed with contradictions and thus couldn’t possibly have been divinely inspired…”

That’s honest. And it’s a common conclusion—especially among those who were taught to treat the Bible as one seamless document, where every verse applies equally to every person in every age. But that’s not how the Bible presents itself. And once you learn to rightly divide it, the contradictions vanish.

Let’s start with your first example:

“Whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.” —Luke 12:10

“For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.” —Romans 10:13

You concluded:

“These two verses can’t be simultaneously true. They cancel out one another.”

They do—if you assume they’re speaking to the same audience, under the same covenant, with the same terms of salvation. But they’re not.

Luke 12:10 is spoken by Christ during His earthly ministry to Israel under the law. Romans 10:13 is written by Paul to Gentiles and Jews alike under grace. One is prophecy, the other is mystery. One concerns Israel’s rejection of the Holy Ghost in Acts 7, the other concerns the Body of Christ in the dispensation of grace. They don’t cancel each other—they belong to different programs.

This is the core issue: modern Christianity often fails to distinguish between God’s prophetic dealings with Israel and His mystery program for the Body of Christ. Without that division, the Bible becomes a tangled mess of contradictions. But when you rightly divide—between law and grace, Israel and the Body, prophecy and mystery—everything falls into place.

Let’s take another example you raised:

“In Leviticus, God lays down a bunch of laws and calls them ‘everlasting.’ Then in the New Testament, we suddenly hear this: ‘For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion to look for a second.’ —Hebrews 8:7 So God made a deal with the Hebrews that had faults in it? God is imperfect? It doesn’t compute.”

It doesn’t compute—unless you understand that “everlasting” in Leviticus refers to Israel’s covenantal system, which God will restore in the future millennial kingdom. Hebrews 8:7, meanwhile, is written to Hebrews living in the transitional period between law and grace, explaining why the old covenant was being set aside for the new. The fault wasn’t in God—it was in man’s inability to keep the law. That’s why grace was revealed through Paul, not Peter or the twelve.

You’re reading the Bible as one continuous, undivided book. But it’s not. It’s a library of progressive revelation, with distinct dispensations, audiences, and purposes. That’s why Paul writes:

“Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things.” —2 Timothy 2:7

“Rightly dividing the word of truth.” —2 Timothy 2:15

The Bible must be divided—not between Old and New Testaments, but between prophecy and mystery, law and grace, Israel and the Body of Christ. Without that division, you’ll see contradictions everywhere. With it, you’ll see perfect harmony.

You’re Seeing Contradictions Because You’re Ignoring the Blueprint.

Let’s look at another pair you cited:

“For by grace are ye saved through faith…not of works.” —Ephesians 2:8-9

“Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.” —James 2:24

You concluded:

“So which is it—faith or works?”

Again, the contradiction only exists if you assume one gospel, one audience, one program. But Paul and James are speaking to different groups, under different dispensations, with different purposes.

Paul is the apostle of the Gentiles (Romans 11:13), revealing the mystery of the Body of Christ—salvation by grace through faith alone. James is writing to “the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad” (James 1:1), addressing Jewish believers under the kingdom program, where faith was demonstrated by works. One is grace, the other is law. One is mystery, the other is prophecy. They don’t conflict—they’re contextually distinct.

This is why Paul warns:

“If ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.” —Galatians 5:2

But in Acts 21, James insists Paul purify himself according to the law. Why? Because James is operating under the prophetic program for Israel, while Paul is stewarding the mystery revealed to him alone (Ephesians 3:1-9). Two programs. Two audiences. No contradiction.

You also wrote:

“God actually changes his mind? ‘For I am the Lord; I change not.’ —Malachi 3:6 ‘And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.’ —Exodus 32:14”

This is a classic example of failing to distinguish between God’s unchanging nature and His relational dealings with man. Malachi speaks of God’s character—His holiness, justice, and covenant faithfulness. Exodus describes His response to intercession within a specific covenant context. It’s not a change in nature—it’s a change in action, based on the terms of the covenant with Israel.

Dispensational truth doesn’t flatten Scripture—it organises it. It doesn’t ignore difficult verses—it explains them. And once you see the divisions God Himself has built into His Word, the contradictions disappear.

Let’s take one more from your list:

“No man hath seen God at any time.” —John 1:18

“For I have seen God face to face.” —Genesis 32:30

John 1:18 refers to the full, unveiled glory of God the Father—no man has seen that. Genesis 32:30 refers to Jacob wrestling with a visible manifestation of God, likely the pre-incarnate Christ. Again, no contradiction—just a failure to distinguish between the persons of the Godhead and the nature of their appearances.

You’re not wrong to ask these questions. But you’re wrong to assume the Bible is one undivided book with one undivided message. It’s not. It’s a perfectly structured revelation, divided by audience, timing, and purpose. That’s why Paul tells us to rightly divide it.

The Bible Isn’t Broken—Your Lens Is.

Let’s revisit another example from your list:

“Thou shalt not kill.” —Exodus 20:13 

“Put every man his sword by his side…slay every man his brother…companion…neighbour.” —Exodus 32:27

You concluded:

“So which is it—kill or don’t kill?”

This is a textbook case of ignoring context and covenant. Exodus 20:13 is part of the moral law given to Israel. Exodus 32:27 is a judicial command issued by God in response to national apostasy—the golden calf incident. One is a general prohibition, the other is a specific judgment. They’re not contradictory—they’re covenantal. And they’re both part of Israel’s prophetic program, not the Body of Christ’s mystery program.

Here’s another pair you cited:

“Submit yourself to every ordinance of man…to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors.” —1 Peter 2:13

“We ought to obey God rather than men.” —Acts 5:29

You concluded:

“So which is it—submit to rulers or defy them?”

Again, the contradiction only exists if you ignore the context and timing. 1 Peter 2:13 is written to Jewish believers under the kingdom program, awaiting Christ’s return and instructed to live peaceably under Gentile rule. Acts 5:29 records a moment when the apostles were commanded to stop preaching Christ—a direct conflict with God’s commission. One is general submission, the other is specific obedience to divine instruction. They don’t clash—they reflect different circumstances under different dispensations.

This is why Paul warns:

“If ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.” —Galatians 5:2

But in Acts 21, James insists Paul purify himself according to the law. Why? Because James is operating under the prophetic program for Israel, while Paul is stewarding the mystery revealed to him alone (Ephesians 3:1-9). Two programs. Two audiences. No contradiction.

Let’s take one more:

“And it was the third hour, and they crucified him.” —Mark 15:25

“…about the sixth hour…they cried out…crucify him….Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified.” —John 19:14-16

You concluded:

“So which is it—third hour or sixth hour?”

This is a classic example of failing to account for differing time systems. Mark uses Jewish time reckoning (starting at sunrise), while John uses Roman time (starting at midnight). So the sixth hour in John is 6 a.m., and the third hour in Mark is 9 a.m.—both describing different moments in the same unfolding event. No contradiction—just a need to rightly divide the historical and cultural context.

Dispensational truth doesn’t flatten Scripture—it organises it. It doesn’t ignore difficult verses—it explains them. And once you see the divisions God Himself has built into His Word, the contradictions disappear.

You wrote:

“I used to believe in Santa Claus. The thing that killed my faith is that I read enough of The Bible…”

But what you read wasn’t the problem. How you read it was. You read it undivided. You read it as one continuous covenant. You read it as if every verse applied equally to every person in every age. That’s not how God wrote it.

The Bible must be divided—not between Old and New Testaments, but between prophecy and mystery, law and grace, Israel and the Body of Christ. When you do that, the contradictions vanish. The confusion lifts. And the Word becomes a perfectly ordered revelation.

You’re Not Wrong to Feel That Way—But You’re Missing the Bigger Picture.

You wrote:

“I now have a son. The idea that I would send him in my stead to be crucified for someone else’s [sins] doesn’t sound like love to me; it sounds like the ultimate punk move.”

That’s raw. And it’s understandable—especially when viewed through human logic. But again, the problem isn’t the verse. It’s the lens.

John 3:16 is not about a father outsourcing punishment. It’s about God manifesting Himself in the flesh (1 Timothy 3:16), stepping into His own creation, and bearing the full weight of sin so that we wouldn’t have to. The Son is not a separate victim—He is “the express image of [God’s] person” (Hebrews 1:3). The cross isn’t divine cruelty—it’s divine self-sacrifice.

But here’s the key: that verse belongs to Israel’s prophetic program. It’s part of the kingdom gospel, not the mystery revealed to Paul. The Body of Christ isn’t saved by believing Jesus died for the world—we’re saved by trusting that He died for our sins, was buried, and rose again (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). That’s the gospel of grace. And it was kept secret until revealed to Paul (Romans 16:25).

You also asked:

“If Adam and Eve were the original humans, how did the world populate itself without incest?”

That question assumes a modern moral framework applied retroactively. But Genesis describes a unique beginning, where God created a genetically perfect pair. The early generations married siblings—yes—but before the law was given, and before genetic corruption made such unions harmful. Again, context matters. Dispensational clarity resolves even these objections.

And finally, you wrote:

“Here are 30 more pairs of Bible verses that contradict one another…”

But every single pair you listed can be resolved by rightly dividing the Word. Some are historical variations (e.g., differing time reckonings). Some are covenantal (e.g., law vs. grace). Some are audience-specific (e.g., Israel vs. the Body). Some are literary (e.g., poetic vs. literal). None are contradictions when read in context.

The Bible is not a single, flat document. It’s a layered revelation. It contains prophecy and mystery. It speaks to Israel and to the Body of Christ. It operates under law and under grace. And unless you divide it as God instructs, you’ll see conflict where there is none.

But when you do divide it—rightly, dispensationally, contextually—it becomes the most coherent, powerful, and spiritually liberating book in existence.

You didn’t lose your faith because the Bible failed. You lost it because no one showed you how to read it.

Conclusion

I hope this exposition has helped you see that what once appeared as contradiction is, in fact, a call to deeper understanding. The Bible is not a chaotic blend of conflicting ideas—it is a divinely ordered revelation that must be rightly divided to be rightly understood. As 2 Timothy 2:15 exhorts, we are to “study to shew thyself approved unto God…rightly dividing the word of truth.” That division is not between Old and New Testaments, but between prophecy and mystery, law and grace, Israel and the Body of Christ. When you read Scripture through that lens, confusion gives way to clarity, and ridicule turns into reverence. If you’ve wrestled with these verses before, let this be your invitation to explore dispensational truth—not as a system, but as the key God Himself gave us to unlock the harmony of His Word.