ABC:Genesis 4

From BibleStrength

Verses 4-5

Don Morgan's list at Infidels claims this is a contradiction and makes the following comments (italicized).[1]

God's impartiality refers to His judgment of people without regard for their social status, race, religion, etc. (Revelation 20:12; Ephesians 6:9; Romans 10:12) People are judged according to their words and actions. Morgan deceptively excludes the parts of the passages which show this (Acts 10:35; Romans 2:6-10, 12-15) Cain's offering was rejected because it was a wrong action, not because God just didn't like Cain. This is evident from verse 7 (which Morgan also failed to mention). As God told Cain, "If you do well, won't you be accepted?" Thus God impartially treated both Cain and Abel on the basis of their actions.

Verse 15

Don Morgan's list at Infidels claims this is a contradiction and makes the following comments (italicized).[1]

First of all, it should be pointed out that Don Morgan deceptively excluded adjoining verses showing that God's attributes include BOTH angry vengeance and loving mercy. For example, Deuteronomy 5:9 was referenced, but not 5:10. Isaiah 42:13 was referred to but not verses 14 or 1-4. Exodus 20:5 was mentioned yet not 20:6. Exodus 15:3 was referenced not 15:13. Exodus 34:14 was brought up yet verses 6-7 noticeably unmentioned. I could keep going, but you get the idea.

This was likely to disingenuously portray the Old Testament as exclusively portraying God as vengeful, and the New Testament portraying God as loving (which is of course not accurate, cp. Rev. 19:11-21; 2 Th. 1:8; Rom. 2:7-8; 2 Pet. 3:5-7; Mt. 24:51; Mk. 9:43; Lk. 16:24) Bible critics like to misportray the Bible like this because they do not care about honesty or truth. God is good to those who do good, and even those who do evil God has shown longsuffering, sending blessings which they have not appreciated; while giving them time to repent.

God is a God of longsuffering patience who sends his rain on the just and the unjust, and is withholding judgment to give all people more time to repent.

In Jesus' case, He held His peace for thousands of years, was put to death and persecuted, but will ultimately execute justice in the Earth.

God can be both a God of love and of vengeance. Many great martial artists, who are ordinarily very peaceful, like Bruce Lee, are the most capable and deadly fighters imaginable. Inner peace, love, and patience also allows for unspeakable rage at injustice. As John Drysden once put it, "Beware the fury of a patient man." God's love of justice will ultimately necessitate punishing the wicked; indeed paradise for good people cannot exist so long as evil people are in it, for they will persecute the righteous and corrupt such a creation the way they have this one. People ask why God allows evil in this world, seemingly unaware that for God to remove evil from this world, He would have to remove all evil people who cause evil from it.

Concerning specific verses brought up showing God's fierce wrath, such as Numbers 25:3, many relate to the Israelite adoption of a Canaanite practice to sacrifice one's children alive to idols such Baal and Molech, burning them alive and then eating them. This was the main reason God had Canaanite nations destroyed, to stop the global spread of a horrific and immoral pagan practice of cannibalistic child sacrifice. For a discussion of the subject, see Destruction of Canaanites.

Verse 16: Can one hide from GOD? (Infidels)

Don Morgan's list at Infidels claims this is a contradiction and makes the following comments (italicized).[1]

The passage about Cain never contradicts the passage in Jeremiah, because it never suggests that Cain was able to hide from GOD, or remain unseen by GOD. It simply mentions Cain leaving GOD's immediate presence. GOD can choose to concentrate His presence more powerfully so that it is more evidently manifested, as He did on Mount Sinai. (Ex. 19:16-20) Just because Cain was able to leave GOD's immediate presence does not mean he was able to hide from GOD or be invisible to GOD.

Verse 22

The ReasonProject lists the following as a Bible contradiction with the headline "How many sons did Abraham have?"[2]

It is very odd first of all that Genesis 4:22 is included here as a contradiction, I can only assume the chart designer made a typo here as the passage is entirely unrelated. They must have intended another passage but I can't figure out which one.

Regardless, the usage of the word "son" each time was in reference to an heir. This is apparent throughout both the Old and New Testaments. Sarah, because she was originally infertile, made the somewhat ill-advised decision to ask her maid to bear Abraham's children, which she quickly recognized had been a mistake afterward. (Genesis 16:1-6) Abraham had multiple children, but only one he considered "son" in the sense of being an heir. The other sons of Abraham were not considered sons but servants. (Galatians 4:30, Genesis 21:10) Thus, Abraham sent the illegitimate children away with gifts but the overall inheritance went to Isaac alone. (Genesis 25:5-6, 24:36)

It should also be pointed out that James does not say Abraham had only one son, and the book of Hebrews uses the phrase "only begotten" (Greek word monogenes[3]) to reference inheritance specifically.

As for Genesis 22:2, at the time Abraham had only two children, Isaac and Ishmael, and Ishmael had been sent away with Hagar for mocking Isaac (Genesis 21:9-21), effectively disinherited. Thus in Genesis 22 God referred to Abraham having only one son, given the disassociation of the other, and the fact that Isaac alone was considered an heir, the other a servant. Paul in Galatians 4 points to all of this, drawing a distinction between two covenants, the Law and that of faith, as symbolized by Ishmael and Isaac respectively.

Verse 26

Don Morgan's list at Infidels claims this is a contradiction and makes the following comments (italicized).[1]

The Scofield Study Bible III makes some excellent points on this passage:

As pointed out by the Scofield, the key passage Exodus 6:3 can be translated from the original Hebrew as a rhetorical question, thus removing all claims of a contradiction here. Henry M. Morris of ICR concurs with this explanation: "The easiest resolution of the apparent contradiction is to regard the last clause as a rhetorical question (quite permissible in the Hebrew)– 'by my name JEHOVAH was I not (also) known to them?'"[5] The second possibility mentioned, that the expression "know Jehovah" referred to more than a simple awareness of His existence but rather an experiential relationship is argued by Apologetics Press apologist Eric Lyons.[6]


  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 Morgan, Donald. Bible Inconsistencies: Bible Contradictions? Internet Infidels.
  2. Marlow, Andy (2009). Contradictions in the Bible. Project Reason.
  3. Thayer and Smith. Greek Lexicon entry for Monogenes. The KJV New Testament Greek Lexicon.
  4. Scofield, C.I. (2006). The Scofield Study Bible III. pp. 92-93. Oxford University Press.
  5. Morris, Henry M. Exodus 6:3 Was I Not Known. Institute for Creation Research.
  6. Lyons, Eric (2006). Did the Patriarchs Know Jehovah by Name? Apologetics Press.