Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!
  • Welcome to Talk Jesus Christian Forums

    Celebrating 20 Years!

    A bible based, Jesus Christ centered community.

    Register Log In

Isn’t the Bible Full of Errors?

Chad

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2004
Messages
17,078
Isn’t the Bible Full of Errors?

Perhaps you have had an experience similar to mine. Some years ago, a participant in an Internet discussion kept insisting that the Bible is full of contradictions. When I challenged him to post three contradictions, he posted over 40. I posted a reply to every one, but within 30 seconds he said my answers were nonsense. Later, I discovered that his list was pasted directly from a website.

The claim that the Bible has errors is frequently just an excuse for not believing. Few who make the claim have read the Bible and actually analyzed any alleged contradictions.

How should a Christian respond when he comes across an apparent contradiction? For this article, I have chosen to illustrate this topic by using three examples of alleged errors. They fall into the categories of false contradictions, mistranslations, and so-called scientific errors.

Law of Non-contradiction

Although a diverse group of human authors wrote the books of the Bible in differing styles over a long period of time, the Bible really has only one author—God. Since God is perfect, holy, and true, we know there are no real contradictions in His Word, no matter what it seems at first. So we must delve more deeply.

As one expert says, “If the Bible is truly from God, and if God is a God of truth (as he is), then ... if two parts seem to be in opposition or in contradiction to each other, our interpretation of one or both of these parts must be in error.”1

Many supposed discrepancies are noted when people place two passages in false opposition to each other. For instance, Ecclesiastes 7:29 says, “God made man upright.” But Psalm 51:5 says, “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity.”

If you look closely at the context, however, Ecclesiastes 7:29 is talking about Adam and Eve, who were originally created upright. In Psalm 51, King David is speaking of his personal situation, as a fallen descendent of Adam. Thus, there is no contradiction.

Mistranslation

Allegations against the Bible are often related to the challenges inherent in the work of translation. Most of these problems have a very simple explanation, if you do a little digging in commentaries or other study aides that deal with the original Hebrew and Greek. For instance, the book of Leviticus describes bats as “birds.” “And these you shall regard as an abomination among the birds; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, the vulture, the buzzard, ... and the bat” (Leviticus 11:13, 19).

If you have a good translation, you can often find clues by simply comparing the questionable word with other passages. In this case, the King James Version (KJV) uses the word fowls instead of birds, and the word fowls appears again in verse 20 to describe insects. Obviously, insects are not birds in the modern sense of the word, so you have to look at the Hebrew.

The Hebrew word is owph (Strong’s reference number 05775). Although “bird” is usually a good translation of owph, it can encompass anything that “has a wing,” a winged creature. It is therefore completely in order for the word to be used of birds, flying insects, and bats. It could presumably also be used of pteranodons (flying reptiles).

Scientific Errors

Critics commonly attack the Bible by appealing to the ideas of secular scientists. They seek to show how a Bible passage departs from modern scientific thought. For instance, Moses says insects have four legs, whereas we know they have six. Leviticus 11:20–23 says, “All flying insects that creep on all fours shall be an abomination to you. Yet these you may eat of every flying insect that creeps on all fours: those which have jointed legs above their feet with which to leap on the earth. These you may eat: the locust after its kind, the destroying locust after its kind, the cricket after its kind, and the grasshopper after its kind.”

In fact, we use the phrase “on all fours” in a similar manner. It refers to the action of the creature—walking around—rather than the complete inventory of the creature’s feet. In reality, the Bible is very precise in describing locusts and similar insects. Such insects do indeed have four legs with which to “creep” and another two legs with which to “leap.”

In most cases like these, you can point out the absurdity of assuming that the author forgot what a bird looks like or miscounted the legs on a grasshopper. Moses, trained in pharaoh’s court, was one of the most educated men of his day.

For that reason alone, an unbiased reader of the Bible would assume that the author had good reasons for his chosen words. As Christians, though, we know without question that the Author spoke the truth and knew what He was talking about.

Conclusion

The same methods apply for resolving most apparent errors. If we do not have an immediate explanation, then our starting assumption that the Bible is true must take precedence, and we just have to learn more. In every case, there is a logical explanation— we just have to clear up our own ignorance. The idea that God made an error is never a possibility.

Article: Answers in Genesis
 
Good Chad, I know when you read in part it seems to be contradiction, but when you read it whole, you realize it is not at all.
 
I simply ask them if they really want an answer or if they are just out to rattle some cages?

If they want an answer, then point them to Norm Geislers books,

Big Book of Bible Difficulties
When Critics Ask
When Skeptics Ask
When Cultists Ask
Making Sense of Bible Difficulties: Clear and Concise Answers from Genesis to Revelation


Commonly Misunderstood Bible Verses: Clear Explanations for the Difficult Passages (Paperback) by Ron Rhodes
 
Thank you for posting that Chad. My father use to help lead a youth group and years ago there was a falling out between him and another pastor. It deals directly with scripture interpretation. My father hasn't been back to church since and every time I speak to him about it, I sense an undercurrent of hurt and anger towards God. My father can quote scripture, he knows it by memory and he often challenges me. He believes that man altered the bible or that we don't read it or interpret it correctly. He's taken the Garden of Eden and mixed it with some other beliefs and has this bizarre view of it. I've finally given up trying to convince him. I get the sense he knows the right answer, but is fighting it. I've realized that my words are not doing any good, the best I can do is live the way I'm suppose to and let him see. The subjects you wrote on are subjects he attacks me about often. The worst part is that he use to cause me to doubt my own faith. I know better now but reading what you wrote is still nice to have locked away in my mind for future attacks.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
 
There is a seeming contradiction between Matthew 20:29-34, Mark 10:46-52 and Luke 13:35-43, whereby Matthew says that as Jesus was "going out of Jericho", he healed a blind beggar named Bartimaeus, whereas Luke says that Jesus was "getting near to Jericho", and Mark says that as he "came into Jericho". How can this be resolved ? Unknown to most, there were two cities of Jericho in Jesus day.

On this, Joseph P. Free writes: “Archaeology, however, has thrown additional light on this apparent discrepancy. Early in the twentieth century A.D., excavations were made at Jericho by Ernest Sellin of the German Oriental Society (1907-1909). The excavations showed that the Jericho of Jesus’ time was a double city . . . The old Jewish city was about a mile away from the Roman city. In the light of this evidence, it is possible that Matthew is speaking of the Jewish city which Christ had left, whereas Luke is speaking of the Roman, at which Christ had not yet arrived. Thus, on His way from the old to the new city, Christ met and healed the blind Bartimaeus.”—Archaeology and Bible History, 1964, p. 295.
 
I don't for a moment think that the Bible is full of errors; though some translations are more accurate than others; and there are contradictions between various translations. I personally have found the Jerusalem Bible to be the most accurate of the seven different translations I possess; though the footnotes, instead of confining their remarks to details concerning the translation, (Like most Bibles), delve deeply into interpreting the meaning of various passages; and altogether too frequently they get them wrong.
 
I used to struggle with many "contradictions" that others brought up to me, but now I have come to the conclusion that it's only a matter of time and diligent searching until the contradiction is settled
 
Here are some seeming contradictions that can readily be resolved.

▪ Where did Cain get his wife? (Genesis 4:17)

One might think that after the murder of Abel, only his guilty brother Cain and their parents, Adam and Eve, were left on the earth. However, Adam and Eve had a large family. According to Genesis 5:3, 4, Adam had a son named Seth. The account adds: “The days of Adam after his fathering Seth came to be eight hundred years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.” So Cain married his sister or perhaps one of his nieces. Since mankind was then so close to human perfection, such a marriage evidently did not pose the health risks that may imperil the offspring of such a union today.

▪ From how many men did Jesus Christ expel the demons who took possession of a large herd of swine?

The Gospel writer Matthew mentions two men, but Mark and Luke refer to just one. (Matthew 8:28; Mark 5:2; Luke 8:27) Evidently, Mark and Luke drew attention to only one demon-possessed man because Jesus spoke to him and his case was more outstanding. Possibly, that man was more violent or had suffered under demon control for a longer time. Afterward, perhaps that one man alone wanted to accompany Jesus. (Mark 5:18-20) In a somewhat parallel situation, Matthew spoke of two blind men healed by Jesus, whereas Mark and Luke mentioned only one. (Matthew 20:29-34; Mark 10:46; Luke 18:35) This was not contradictory, for there was at least one such man.

▪ What color was the garment Jesus wore on the day of his death?

According to Mark (15:17) and John (19:2), the soldiers put a purple garment on Jesus. But Matthew (27:28) called it “a scarlet cloak,” emphasizing its redness. Since purple is any color having components of both red and blue, Mark and John agree that the cloak had a red hue. Light reflection and background could have given different casts to the garment, and the Gospel writers mentioned the color that was strongest to them or to those from whom they got their information. The minor variation shows the individuality of the writers and proves that there was no collusion.

▪ Who carried Jesus’ torture stake?

John (19:17) said: “Bearing the torture stake for himself, [Jesus] went out to the so-called Skull Place, which is called Gol´go·tha in Hebrew.” But Matthew (27:32), Mark (15:21), and Luke (23:26) say that ‘as they were going out, Simon of Cyrene was impressed into service to bear the torture stake.’ Jesus bore his torture stake, as John stated. In his condensed account, however, John did not add the point that Simon was later impressed into service to carry the stake. Hence, the Gospel accounts harmonize in this regard.

▪ How did Judas Iscariot die?

Matthew 27:5 states that Judas hanged himself, whereas Acts 1:18 says that “pitching head foremost he noisily burst in his midst and all his intestines were poured out.” While Matthew seems to deal with the mode of the attempted suicide, Acts describes the results. Judas apparently tied a rope to the branch of a tree, put a noose around his neck, and tried to hang himself by jumping off a cliff. It seems that either the rope or the tree limb broke so that he plunged downward and burst open on the rocks below. The topography around Jerusalem makes such a conclusion reasonable.

If we encounter seeming discrepancies in the Bible, it is good to realize that people often say things that appear contradictory but are easily explained or understood. For instance, a businessman may correspond with someone by dictating a letter to his secretary. If questioned, he would say that he sent the letter. But since his secretary typed and mailed the letter, she could say that she sent it. Similarly, it was not contradictory for Matthew (8:5) to say that an army officer came to ask Jesus a favor, whereas Luke (7:2, 3) said that the man sent representatives.
 
Here are some seeming contradictions that can readily be resolved.

▪ Where did Cain get his wife? (Genesis 4:17)

One might think that after the murder of Abel, only his guilty brother Cain and their parents, Adam and Eve, were left on the earth. However, Adam and Eve had a large family. According to Genesis 5:3, 4, Adam had a son named Seth. The account adds: “The days of Adam after his fathering Seth came to be eight hundred years. Meanwhile he became father to sons and daughters.” So Cain married his sister or perhaps one of his nieces. Since mankind was then so close to human perfection, such a marriage evidently did not pose the health risks that may imperil the offspring of such a union today.

▪ From how many men did Jesus Christ expel the demons who took possession of a large herd of swine?

The Gospel writer Matthew mentions two men, but Mark and Luke refer to just one. (Matthew 8:28; Mark 5:2; Luke 8:27) Evidently, Mark and Luke drew attention to only one demon-possessed man because Jesus spoke to him and his case was more outstanding. Possibly, that man was more violent or had suffered under demon control for a longer time. Afterward, perhaps that one man alone wanted to accompany Jesus. (Mark 5:18-20) In a somewhat parallel situation, Matthew spoke of two blind men healed by Jesus, whereas Mark and Luke mentioned only one. (Matthew 20:29-34; Mark 10:46; Luke 18:35) This was not contradictory, for there was at least one such man.

▪ What color was the garment Jesus wore on the day of his death?

According to Mark (15:17) and John (19:2), the soldiers put a purple garment on Jesus. But Matthew (27:28) called it “a scarlet cloak,” emphasizing its redness. Since purple is any color having components of both red and blue, Mark and John agree that the cloak had a red hue. Light reflection and background could have given different casts to the garment, and the Gospel writers mentioned the color that was strongest to them or to those from whom they got their information. The minor variation shows the individuality of the writers and proves that there was no collusion.

▪ Who carried Jesus’ torture stake?

John (19:17) said: “Bearing the torture stake for himself, [Jesus] went out to the so-called Skull Place, which is called Gol´go·tha in Hebrew.” But Matthew (27:32), Mark (15:21), and Luke (23:26) say that ‘as they were going out, Simon of Cyrene was impressed into service to bear the torture stake.’ Jesus bore his torture stake, as John stated. In his condensed account, however, John did not add the point that Simon was later impressed into service to carry the stake. Hence, the Gospel accounts harmonize in this regard.

▪ How did Judas Iscariot die?

Matthew 27:5 states that Judas hanged himself, whereas Acts 1:18 says that “pitching head foremost he noisily burst in his midst and all his intestines were poured out.” While Matthew seems to deal with the mode of the attempted suicide, Acts describes the results. Judas apparently tied a rope to the branch of a tree, put a noose around his neck, and tried to hang himself by jumping off a cliff. It seems that either the rope or the tree limb broke so that he plunged downward and burst open on the rocks below. The topography around Jerusalem makes such a conclusion reasonable.

If we encounter seeming discrepancies in the Bible, it is good to realize that people often say things that appear contradictory but are easily explained or understood. For instance, a businessman may correspond with someone by dictating a letter to his secretary. If questioned, he would say that he sent the letter. But since his secretary typed and mailed the letter, she could say that she sent it. Similarly, it was not contradictory for Matthew (8:5) to say that an army officer came to ask Jesus a favor, whereas Luke (7:2, 3) said that the man sent representatives.

Torture stake? Really??

Why must you always include false doctrines of the Jehovah's Witnesses in your post? I was actually enjoying the read until I got to that part.
 
There are no contradictions in the bible. As we have already seen there are clear explanations if one is truly interested in them.

The contradictions canard is only a pointed stick to prod Christians with. You can throw out all the explanations you want the unbelievers aren't interested.

However, for us, it's good to discuss for ammo to lob back when someone makes these spurious claims.
 
Consider that what we call the Bible contains what is called the Word of God. Jesus is that Word of God and yet how did He speak to people?

And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?

He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.

For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.

Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.

And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:

For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.

But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear." Matt 13:10-16

The Word of God, Jesus, speaks to us effectively in all cases in parables. Whether we understand and how well we understand is dependent upon how good our spiritual eyes and ears are:

"For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known." I Cor 13:12

Discrepancies? The flesh will always see discrepancies, but when we are always led by the Spirit, we will always understand all of the parables!
 
I have found most, if not all, of the supposed contradictions, when looked at in context, and compared that way, simply go away. Even difficult "errors" in attribution of authorship (from Josh McDowell's Answers to Tough Questions skeptics ask about the Christian faith.)

When I was still just a new Christian, trying to answer some of those questions, and failing, made me very discouraged. It was that book and Walter Martin's Kingdom of the Cults that gave me enough information to begin, in my own walk with Christ, to "be prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect," and I had quite a lesson in "yet do it with gentleness and respect."

The issue of context has become almost a "war cry." It works for scripture, but it also works in other areas as well and has been God's wisdom to me. Text, without context, is pretext.

M

P.S. The avatar is perfect too. I think I'll leave it as is :-)
 
Last edited:
There is a seeming contradiction between Matthew 20:29-34, Mark 10:46-52 and Luke 13:35-43, whereby Matthew says that as Jesus was "going out of Jericho", he healed a blind beggar named Bartimaeus, whereas Luke says that Jesus was "getting near to Jericho", and Mark says that as he "came into Jericho". How can this be resolved ? Unknown to most, there were two cities of Jericho in Jesus day.

On this, Joseph P. Free writes: “Archaeology, however, has thrown additional light on this apparent discrepancy. Early in the twentieth century A.D., excavations were made at Jericho by Ernest Sellin of the German Oriental Society (1907-1909). The excavations showed that the Jericho of Jesus’ time was a double city . . . The old Jewish city was about a mile away from the Roman city. In the light of this evidence, it is possible that Matthew is speaking of the Jewish city which Christ had left, whereas Luke is speaking of the Roman, at which Christ had not yet arrived. Thus, on His way from the old to the new city, Christ met and healed the blind Bartimaeus.”—Archaeology and Bible History, 1964, p. 295.

This is true but the answer is much more simple.

Matt…
And as they went out of Jericho, a great crowd followed him. 30 And behold, there were two blind men sitting by the roadside, and when they heard that Jesus was passing by, they cried out, "Lord, have mercy on us, Son of David!"
Mark…
And as he was leaving Jericho with his disciples and a great crowd, Bartimaeus, a blind beggar, the son of Timaeus, was sitting by the roadside. 47 And when he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to cry out and say, "Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!"

So Mark and Matthew arte 100% in agreement and the Luke 13 reference has no relation to these whatsoever and does not even speak to Jericho at all…I think you were referring to Luke 18…but this is just a different event altogether. Surely Jesus healed many that were blind and made many trips into and out of Jericho, Bethany, and other cities....
 
Back
Top