21 Question - 3: How do you explain alleged errors or contradictions in the Bible?


Before looking at some points to consider, it might be helpful to determine which camp I most relate to. One camp's approach to scripture is to believe this is God's word and if we have had experiences where God's word transforms our life, we are likely to approach the gospels with a hermeneutic (the interpretation of language, whether written or spoken) of trust that will seek plausible solutions to these contradictions. The other camp's approach to scripture is with a hermeneutic of suspicion, expecting to find contradictions, they will most likely be found. I believe I am in the first camp that approaches the scriptures with a hermeneutic of trust.

Let's consider the 4 gospels and the writers. Let's look at each of their presentations of Jesus.

- Matthew (the gospel of the Messiah) - offered the most structured. Scholars have identified Matthew as one who used abbreviation and omission. Looking at the story of the centurion in Matthew 8:5-13, Matthew reports the centurion coming to Jesus. From Matthew’s point of view, the centurion was speaking directly to Jesus through the elders. In the first century, there was no functional difference between a centurion telling you something face-to-face or through an emissary. However, Luke provides a different perspective to his account of the story (Luke 7:1-10)

- Mark (the gospel of the suffering Son of God) - offered the most dramatic

- Luke (the gospel of the Savior for all people) - offered most thematic

- John (the gospel of the diving Son who reveals the Father) - offered the most theological. 

If we can keep the intentions of the authors in mind, it becomes easier to understand why they focus on events differently. 

Scholars attribute said contradictions due to:

1. Paraphrasing and interpretation

2. Abbreviation and omission

3. Reordering of events and sayings

4. Reporting similar events and sayings

Information gleaned from Zondervan Academic

Words can be used in different senses. Let's consider Romans 4:2-3 and James 2:21-24

Romans 4:2–3 teaches that Abraham was justified by faith alone, not by works. However, James 2:21, 24 teaches that Abraham was justified by works and not by faith alone. Do we have a contradiction here? We do have A and not A at the same time, but the relationship differs. Romans 4 is teaching about justification before God; by faith alone Abraham was considered righteous before God. But James 2 is teaching about justification before men (James 2:18); by works (as a result of faith) Abraham was considered righteous before men. There is no contradiction here.

There is a really good study on the website AnswersInGenesis.org. Check out "Demolishing Supposed Bible Contradictions: Volume 1.

The writing touches on topics like:

Logical vs. Psychological Problems

The Challenge of Contradictions

Difference of Sense or Relationship

False Dilemma

Contextual Considerations

Fallacy of Sweeping Generalization

Translational Issues

Contradictions of Inference

Factual Contradictions and Begging the question

The law of non-contradiction - a problem for the non-Christian

Although I am not a biblical scholar and I lack many answers to questions, in most situations, talking through a given contradiction, I find there is no contradiction. The challenge is persuading a person of opposite belief or intent with regards to the accuracy of scripture. As mentioned earlier, if a person chooses to approach scripture with skepticism and deliberately looking for contradictions, they are sure to find them. As I think about this, it is as though the person isn't all that much different from a biblical time Pharisee. What I mean by this is the Pharisees paid a great deal of attention to outward ordinances and actions that would make them appear righteous, but they were not as concerned with actually being righteous in their hearts. For this Jesus referred to them as hypocrites. For us today, we should posture ourselves to allow the scriptures to change and transform us vice being critical of scripture and forcing it to bend to our own way of thinking.

After initially posting, I had the opportunity to learn a lot more with regards to current arguments about there being over 400,000 errors in the Bible. This can be explained without difficulty. The 400,000 errors are known as textual variants. A textual variant is most often a change in the text due to a spelling error or change for grammatical reasons. For example, in English, we would say "an apple" not "a apple". Change from "a" to "an" is a textual variant. 
Dr. James White, 
Baptist theologian, the director of Alpha and Omega Ministries, an evangelical Reformed Baptist Christian apologetics organization based in Phoenix, Arizona and a Christian scholar, contends there are about 1500-200 words of text that are relevant to be called into question, of which he argues that only 2 are debatable. These 2 differences are a result of how the King James bible was compiled verses most other versions.

Comments