There are mistakes in the Bible. There are also answers to some of these mistakes. But a question remains, are the answers given good answers or not. Or are they simply attempts to justify or rationalize the problem so we can continue to believe the Bible is the "Word of God" and not simply of human origin?
Many Christians are quick to point out the problems and mistakes with the Book of Mormon or with the Qur'an, but the same critical reasoning and judgment do not seem to apply when it comes to the Bible.
1. It has been suggested by some people that the original manuscripts, the autographs, were, inerrant. But we do not have the original manuscripts. All we have are copies of copies of copies, (etc.) and all of the manuscripts we do posses contain mistakes. So, it would be an assumption without any justification to suggest that the autographs were without mistakes. (Just a note: no two manuscripts are the same, i. e. identical.)
2. One of the most common answers to the problems is that it must have been copyists' error. Meaning that during the copying process of the manuscripts; human error would tend to creep in. Now there are a couple of points to make about this response. 1. There is still an unjustified assumption that the original documents did not have any mistakes; for which there is no evidence for this claim. It is simply an assumption with no justification. 2. There are still errors. Even if it is a "copyists'" error it is still an error. (Note: "Error" and "mistake" are synonymous; they mean the same thing.)
3. It has also been suggested that perhaps the problem is that the verses are being taken out of context. I would suggest before we accept this claim, we look at the context for ourselves and determine if such a problem really exists or if it is just a means of diverting the issue.
4. Sometimes it seems that no matter what kind of answer is provided for a Biblical mistake those who wish to hold to the belief that the Bible cannot be mistaken will simply accept any answer. But, just because an answer has been provided does not mean that it is a good one or that we should accept it. We must look at what appears to be a mistake itself and determine whether this is one or not. And whether the answer given really does solve the problem.
The most obvious question is, if there are mistakes; aside from the ones we find, how many mistakes are there that we are simply not aware of?
Apologists' tend to suggest that there are really no mistakes, but if there are mistakes they can easily be reconciled. It is easy to accept either of these points if you want to maintain your belief that the Bible is the "Word of God." (Note: But you cannot accept both of these claims at the same time that would be a contradiction.)
2 Kings 24:8
Near the end of Chapter 23 it deals with Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim and Chapter 24, verse 8 talks about Jehoiachin. Verse 8 starts with, "Jehoiachin was eighteen (18) years old when he began to reign; he reigned three months in Jerusalem..." verse 9, "He did what was evil in the sight of the Lord;..." (NRSV)
2 Chron. 36:9
Now Chapter 36 is about the reign of the same last kings of Israel. This includes Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, and Jehoiachin. What is interesting is Jehoiachin is said to be eight (8) years old when he began his reign; (verse 9) he reigned three (3) months and ten (10) days in Jerusalem. He did what was evil in the sight of the LORD. So he lost his kingship.
How old was he? The Bible, and specifically 2 Chronicles says he was 8; 2 Kings 24:8 says he was 18. Either way, both 2 Kings and 2 Chronicles cannot be true. One cannot be 8 and 18 at the same time in the same place. So, you have a choice. Either 2 Chron. is mistaken or 2 Kings is mistaken or perhaps they are both wrong, we do not know, but logically they cannot both be true, though they can both be false. So, either way the Bible is mistaken.
Perhaps it is a copyist error. But if one looks up "error" in a dictionary one finds that one of the definitions will include the synonymous term "mistake." So, it is a copyist mistake, a copyist of the Bible. Therefore, the Bible has mistakes.
One of the things I have noticed, is that when people are shown these mistakes, they tend to want to put words into the Bible that are simply not there. In other words, they do not want to read it literally at this point.
Another thing I have noticed; some translations change some of the verses so there are no longer mistakes. But as far as I understand these changes are without merit. They cannot say that these changes are justified by any of the existing manuscripts.
Let us just look at a couple more.
I think this is an interesting question; does God change his mind?
Num. 23:19
1 Sam. 15:29God is not a human being, that he should lie, or a mortal, that he should change his mind
Moreover the Glory of Israel will not recant or change his mind; for he is not a mortal, that he should change his mind.
So, this seems clear. God being who he is, does not change his mind. So, I wonder what the following verses mean? Ex. 34:14
Or how about 1 Sam. 15:11And the LORD changed his mind about the disaster that he planned to bring on his people.
I regret that I made Saul king, for he has turned back from following me, and has not carried out my commands."
Well, this last one is more of a change of heart rather then a change of mind. But does God change his mind? If not what do these verses mean? We want to be sure not impose our preconceived beliefs onto the Bible because we may be wrong.
Perhaps God is speaking in terms humans can understand. But this idea would lead to some other problems. What exactly would it be that we would be unable to understand? If we can answer this question, then we can understand and it is not about God trying to speak metaphorically.
But why assume that the problem is with our understanding and that God could not have changed his mind? Or that perhaps human beings wrote this not understanding themselves what the implications would be if they did.
2 Sam. 24:18-25 says that David paid 50 shekels of silver to Araunah for his threshing floor and oxen. This is a very specific amount, seems clear. But 1 Chron. 21:22-26 says, that David paid 600 shekels of gold to Ornan for the same threshing floor alone. We can look at what was going on before and after and find that this is the same story. Different people are simply telling it at different times with different agendas.
For example, 2 Sam. 24:9, says that Israel had 300,000 more men then Judah. But 1 Chron. 21:5, says that Israel had 630,000 more men. As we can see, it cannot be both numbers. It must be one or the other or neither. Perhaps something in between.
There are so many more that have not been mentioned. Now again, there are "answers" to these problems. But simply coming up with an answer does not always resolve the issue. You still have a mistake. Plus, one can ask, "Does the answer make any sense?" Or is it simply a means to maintain a belief? In other words are we trying to find an answer to an obvious mistake no matter how unreasonable?
These are the mistakes that we have found. But what about all of the mistakes we have not found or are unaware of? How many are there? And how do we know what is a mistake and what is not?
Now even though we know that most of the books of the Bible were written anonymously; that we do not have any of the original documents of any of the books of the Bible; that it was written in an ancient dead language and translating can be rather hard and at times leads to conflict; even though none of the manuscripts we have are identical; and that the Bible's development (how the books were brought together) would tend to undermine its reliability; and that in early church history anything critical of Christianity was sought out and destroyed (and that the church was not always honest), people still choose to believe it is the "Word of God."
So, is the Bible the "Word of God" or is it simply of human origin? The Bible has mistakes because it is simply written by people.
anon
