Post by Admin on Oct 13, 2012 10:39:15 GMT -8
Issue No. 2, February 1983
Among those beliefs crucial to Christianity few are of greater importance than that of the Resurrection. Paul went so far as to allege the very foundation of Christianity rests upon its occurrence.
1Cor. 15:14 "And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain." ( also: 1 Cor. 15:17)
Yet, why should the Resurrection be of such significance? Elijah raised a child from the dead (1 Kings 17:17, 21-22); Samuel said to Saul, "Why hast thou disquieted me, to bring me" (1 Sam. 28.7, 11, 15); Elisha raised the dead son of a Shunammite ( 2 Kings 4:32, 34-35); a dead man being lowered into a grave revived when he touched the bones of Elisha (2 Kings 13:21); Moses and Elijah revived at the time of the Transfiguration ( Luke 9:28, 30 );the saints arose at the time of Jesus' death ( Matt. 27:52-53 ); Jairus' daughter rose from the dead (Matt. 9:18, 23-25 ); the widow at Nain's son rose from the dead (Luke 7:11-15 ); and Lazarus rose from the dead ( John 11:43-44 ). All of these people ascended from death and all did so before Jesus. So why attribute so much importance to the event. By the time Christ rose from the dead this was a rather common occurrence. Moreover, people not only before Jesus rose from the dead but after as well. Peter raised Tabitha and Paul raised Eutychus.
While participating in a radio call-in program several years ago, the author was told by a caller that, except for Jesus, all of the above-mentioned people eventually died again. But Paul clearly asserted it's the Resurrection, per se, that matters not the fact Jesus never died again. The caller was asked to cite a passage that justified his contention. There was no reply.
A second major difficulty associated with the Resurrection lies in the contradictory accounts in the four gospels of what occurred. The following represent some of the major disagreements surrounding the events connected with the Resurrection:
A. At what time in the morning did the women visit the tomb?- At the rising of the sun (Mark 16:2) vs. when it was yet dark (John 20:1)
B. Who came?- Mary Magdalene alone (John 20:1) vs. Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (Matt. 28:1) vs. Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Salome (Mark 16:1) vs. Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James and other women (Luke 24:10)
C. Was the tomb opened or closed when they arrived? - Open (Luke 24:2) vs. closed (Matt 28:1-2)
D. Whom did they see at the tomb?- The angel (Matt. 28:2) vs. a young man (Mark 16:5) vs. two men (Luke 24:4) vs. two angels (John 20:11-12)
E. Were these men or angels inside or outside the tomb? -Outside (Matt. 28.2) vs. inside (Mark 16:5, Luke 24:3-4, John 20:11-12).
F. Were they standing or sitting? - Standing (Luke 24:4) vs. sitting (Matt. 28:2, Mark 16:5, John 20:12).
G. Did Mary Magdalene know Jesus when he first appeared to her?-Yes, she did (Matt. 28:9) vs. no she did not (John 20:14).
If the stories were consistent, one could write one long continuous narrative incorporating all four versions without fear of divergences. Yet, this has never been done without adding, altering or omitting key verses. Apologists often submit the witness-at-an-auto-accident argument which is quite irrelevant since two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive versions of the same event can not be simultaneously accurate. One or the other is false. Moreover, witnesses at an accident, unlike gospel writers, are not claiming inerrancy.
Thomas Paine summarized the relationship between the gospels quite well: "...it is, I believe, impossible to find in any story upon record so many and such glaring absurdities, contradictions, and falsehoods, as are in the books (Matthew, Mark, Luke & John). They are more numerous and striking than I had any expectation of finding, when I began this examination,..." (Age of Reason by Thomas Paine, page 167)
A third major problem connected with the Resurrection lies in the fact that even if Jesus had risen, nobody is going to follow his example.
Eccle. 3:19-21 (RSV) "For the fate of the sons of men and the fate of beasts is the same: as one dies so dies the other. ...man has no advantage (pre-eminence-KJV) over beasts;... All go to one place; all are from the dust, and all turn to dust again. Who knows whether the spirit of man goes upward and the spirit of the beast goes down to the earth."
Job 7:9-10, 1 Tim. 6:15-16, Isaiah 26:14 say as much. Robert Ingersoll, one of the greatest Biblical commentators in American history, spoke wisely when he said: "The Old Testament tells us how we lost immortality and it does not say a word about another world, from the first mistake in Genesis to the last curse in Malachi. No man in the Old Testament stands by the dead and says, "We shall meet again." From the top of Sinai came no hope of another world." (Orthodoxy, Ingersoll's Works, Vol. 2, page 424.
And lastly, others participated in even more momentous events. Adam was never born to begin with (Gen. 1:27); he came into the world as a full-grown adult. Enoch (Gen. 5:22-24) and Elijah (2 Kings 2:11) never died. The latter went straight to heaven, which, incidentally, contradicts Hebrews 9:27 which says, "And it is appointed unto men once to die..."
What did Jesus ever do that had not already been accomplished? He rose from the dead but only after others. He performed miracles but so had others. He raised people from the dead but so had Old Testament prophets. He healed but so had others. What, then, did Jesus do that was different, that had not already be [been] done? Plainly stated, "What makes him stand out from the crowd?" Thousands have claimed to be the savior; so what are the acts that substantiate his credentials. Assertions alone prove nothing. Anyone can claim to be the Messiah and thousands have.
For two thousand years Christians have alleged that Jesus of Nazareth is God incarnate, the sinless being, the embodiment of perfection.
1Pet. 2:22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:
Isa. 53:9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
Yet, the New Testament has many statements and acts by Jesus which prove the contrary. He, like Paul, repeatedly made false statements and inaccurate prophecies. Here are a few examples:
(A) John 7:8-10[KJV] Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast: for my time is not yet full come. When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee. But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.
John 7:8-10 RSV Go to the festival yourselves. I am not going to this festival, for my time has not yet fully come." After saying this, he remained in Galilee. But after his brothers had gone to the festival, then he also went, not publicly but as it were in private.
Jesus broke his promise[word] by going up secretly after saying he wouldn't.
(B) In John 13:38 jesus said: "...Verily, verily, I say unto thee, The cock shall not crow, till thou (Peter) hast denied me thrice."
And yet, what actually occurred is shown in Mark 14:66-68
"And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest: And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth. But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew."
According to Jesus' prophecy the cock was not to speak until after the third denial, not after the first.
(C) Jesus told the thief on the cross: Luke 23:43 "... Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise."
This prophecy could not have been kept unless Jesus went to heaven that day, in which case he would not have been buried for three days.
(D) Jesus told a man: Mark 8:34 "... Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me."
This statement was made early in his ministry. Yet, the cross could not have become a Christian symbol until after the Crucifixion. There would be nothing to pick up. This utterance would have made no sense whatever to the man being addressed.
(E) In Matthew 5:22 he said: Matt. 5:22 "...but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."
Yet, Jesus repeated called people fools: Matt. 23:17,19 "Ye fools and blind..." Luke 11:40 "Ye fools,..."
(F) In Matthew Jesus said: Matt. 12:40 " For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."
Mark 15:37 and 15:42 show Jesus died on the day before the sabbath which would be Friday. Mark 16:9 and Matthew 28:1 show he allegedly rose sometime during Saturday night or Sunday morning. Friday afternoon to Sunday morning does not encompass three days and three nights. His prophecy failed.
(G) John 3:13 Jesus falsely stated: "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven."
This verse is not only inaccurate historically as 2 Kings 2:11 shows: 2 Kings 2:11"...behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven." but also absurd on its face. If the son of man (Jesus) is down here on earth speaking then how could he be in heaven.
(H) And in Matthew 27:46 Jesus cried with a loud voice say: " Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"
How could Jesus be Savior of all mankind when he couldn't even save himself. These aren't the words of a man who went to the Cross willingly to die for our sins. These are the words of a man who could think of a hundred places he would rather be. They certainly the words of someone who has the situation under control.
These examples of Jesus' duplicity represent only a fraction of the 193 that could have been presented The New Testament provides more than enough evidence to demonstrate Jesus' inability to provide a reliable beacon to lighten the way to truth and honesty, to claim the Messiahship. As Thomas Paine said: "The priests of the present day profess to believe it (the story of Christ). They gain their living by it, and they exclaim against something they call infidelity. I will define what it (ifidelity) is. HE THAT BELIEVES IN THE STORY OF CHRIST IS AN INFIDEL TO GOD." (The Life and Works of Thomas Paine, Vol 9, page 292)
Jesus is not perfection incarnate. As Robert Ingersoll once said: "The theological Christ is the impossible union of the human and divine-man with the attributes of God and God with the weakness of man."
In closing this month's commentary several contradictions are worthy of note. Joseph's father is Jacob in Matthew 1:16 but is Heli in Luke 3:23. David slew the men of 700 chariots of the Syrians and 40,000 horsemen according to 2 Samuel 10:18 while 1 Chron. 19:18 says it was the men of 7,000 chariots and 40,000 footmen. Solomon had 40,000 stalls of horses for his chariots in 1 Kings 4:26 while 2 Chron. 9:25 says it was 4,000 stalls.
REVIEWS
Although such previously mentioned contradictions as "take up the cross," "go to the feast," and the warning not to call others fools were avoided by Gleason Archer in his apologetic work, The Encyclopedia of Biblical Difficulties, (discussed in January's issue of Biblical Errancy, p. 3), he did direct his attention toward several others.
His explanation for the "Today thou shalt be with me in paradise" problem is especially revealing. It abounds in suppositions, conjectures and hypotheses, virtually none of which is supported by Scripture. On page 367 Archer says: "The answer lies in the location of paradise on Good Friday. Apparently paradise was not exalted to heaven untill Easter Day. Jesus apparently refers to it in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus as "Abraham's Bosom," to which the godly beggar Lazarus was carried by the angels after his decease (Luke 16:19-31).
Apparently, apparently! "Apparently paradise was not exalted!" "Jesus refers to it in the parable of the rich man!" Thereis no solid evidence either assumption is true. However, from Archer's point-of-view it would be nice if they were so the problem would vanish.
He continues:
"Thus Abraham's Bosom referred to the place where the souls of the redeemed waited till the day of Christ's resurrection. Presumably this was the same place as paradise... Doubtless it was to the infernal paradise that the souls of Jesus and the repentant thief repaired after they each died on Friday afternoon."
Presumably! Presumed by whom? Archer's entire explanation is based on conjecture and unwarranted assumptions. Where is the evidence that paradise did not become heaven until Easter Day, that paradise was identical with Abraham's Bosom, or that souls went to paradise before later entering heaven. Moreover, even if both did enter "paradise" rather than heaven after death, Jesus would still not have been in the earth three days as he had prophesied in Matt. 12:40.
Like many apologists, Archer assumes that if he can devise reasonably viable explanations for Biblical difficulties then substantive evidence is not required. Plausible theories enrapped in carefully devised speculation are sufficient unto themselves. Most apologetics is more concerned with rationalization and justification than truth and objectivity.
In regards to the number of Solomon's stalls and the proper-name disagreements between 1 Kings 4:26 and Chron. 9:25, Archer frankly admits the contradictory aspects. On page 222 he says:
"In explanation of these transmissional errors (As we believe them to be), let it be understood that numerals and proper names are always more liable to copist errors than almost any other type of subject matter..." "As we believe them to be" is a frank admission that speculation is involved. It would be just as rational to assume there were no copyist errors, just independent writers following independent traditions while reporting on the same events. "Copyist error" is employed far too many instances by biblicists to escape what are otherwise impossible dilemas.(See: Alleged Bible Discrepancies by Haley). It provides a quick means of escape.
DIALOGUE & POLEMICS
Letter # 1 from Michael Hauerstir of Dayton, Ohio
I've read your "Bible Errancy" Newsletter. The Bible says in 1 Corinthians 2: 14, " But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." You are dealing with a spiritual book when you deal with the Bible. The Holy Spirit moved men to write the Scriptures, and to understand the Scripture, you must be Spiritual. To you, as 1Corinthians 2: 14 states, you find the Bible foolish, full of contradictions and errors(seemingly).
Actually, you need to be born again. Jesus, God manifested in the flesh, said "Ye must be born again."The enclosed tract will tell you how to be saved, be born again. You need to be saved, please read it.
Editor's Response to Letter #1
You asked me to read your small tract entitled, "In Devil's Hell." Well, I did and found it to be typical of the pamphlets that we often find in bus terminals, on library tables and on door knobs. It is permeated with the urgent need to accept Jesus, confess sins, be saved and fear hell. Much was asserted; nothing proved.
Now I ask you to respond in kind. Read Biblical Errancy, but not through a filter composed of Christian fundamentals. Among other things the January issue proved the Bible is not to be trusted as a reliable source. Yet, your tract avoided the evidence entirely and blindly plodded forward with such quotes as: "The wicked shall be turned into hell;" "Christ died for our sins and rose from the dead;" and "that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus...thou shalt be saved." You were`shown clearly contradictory utterances which you completely ignored.
You assumed the very point in dispute, that the Bibleis truth, per se. If asked how you know your statements are true, you would probably say, because they are in the Bible. But, instead of asking yourself the Bible is true, you just assumed as much. But I have proven the contrary; it is not the truth. It says for instance, that "all have sinned," which is completely false. How do I know, because your own book says so. Don't you believe it? "Noah was a just and perfect in his generation,..." (Gen. 6:9); "... that man (Job) was perfect and upright,..." (Job 1:1). These men were perfect, so obviously they could not have been sinners. How can you be a sinner and be perfect? The Bible has hundreds of problems of this nature and if you bear with me, I will prove as much in the issues to come. But please be reasonable; I can't cover the entire Book in two issues.
Quoting from a work is fruitless unless you first prove the book is valid, truthful and reliable. I provided evidence the Bible fails this test. Instead of proving my evidence to be false or invalid, instead of proving the Book to be true, valid and inerrant, you merely assume as much and proceeded to quote at will. Don't you believe the Bible when it says, "Prove all things..." (1 Thess. 5:12) or "But the wisdom from above is first pure, then...open to reason,..." (James 3:17). What have you proved? Where is your reasoning? The Bible says, "Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you;..." (1 Peter 3:15). Where is your defense? Mere assertions prove nothing.
You sent me a tract that implies people are wicked and sinful, while confident you abide in Jesus. Yet, the Bible says, "No man who abides in hum sins;..." (1 John 3:6). If you abide in him, as you believe, why are you still sinning. Surely you are not saying you no longer sin. My friend, with all due respect, if there is any verse in the Bible you and those of like mind should commit to memory it is Proverb 14:15, which says, "The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going."
Letter # 2 from an Anonymous Reader in Cleveland, Ohio.
Your Biblical Errancy discusses contradictions but how important are they. The Bible was not meant to be scientifically precise. It isn't a history book. It was written to provide a path to salvation through Jesus Christ Our Lord. You are concentrating too much on details and not seeing those things that really count. Accept Jesus and you will have the answer to your questions.
Editor's Response to Letter # 2
My friend, all you know about Jesus comes from Scripture. The validity of Jesus depends upon the validity, reliability and accuracy of Scripture. Rarely do I agree with Evangelicals but I couldn't agree more when a fundamentalist group, The International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI) of Oakland California, said the following when told, "Inerrancy is not important. It is the quibbling about insignificant details. What really matters is a person's relationship with Jesus Christ:"
"... But how do you know Jesus except as he is presented to you in the Bible? If the Bible is not God's Word and does not present a picture of Jesus Christ that can be trusted, how do you know it is the true Christ you are following? You may be worshipping a Christ of your own imagination." (Does Errancy Matter by James Boice, page 24)
Once conceding there are errors in the Bible, you have opened a Pandora's Box. How do you know which parts are true if you admit some parts are false. As ICBI said: "... But this position (claiming truthfulness for those parts of the Bible where God, as opposed to men has spoken). is unsound. People who think like this speak of Biblical authority, but at best they have partial Biblical authority since the parts containing errors obviously cannot be authoritative. What is worse, they cannot even tell us precisely what parts are from God and are therefore truthful and what parts are not from God and are in error. Usually they say that the "salvation parts" are from God, but they do not tell us how to separate these from the non-salvation parts." (Does Errancy Matter by James Boice, page 8)
The ICBI was also correct when it said the following statement of belief is an attack on the Bible:
"... Sure I believe in the Bible, as do you, but what difference does it make if there is a few mistakes in it? After all, the Bible isn't a history book. It's not a science book. It only tells us about God and salvation." This belief is more than an attack; it's a refutation. As the religious reformer, John Wesley, said:
"If there be any mistakes in the Bible, there may as well be a thousand. If there be one falsehood in that book, it did not come from the God of truth."
Well spoken! And Biblical Errancy will expose the falsehoods.
RESURRECTION
Among those beliefs crucial to Christianity few are of greater importance than that of the Resurrection. Paul went so far as to allege the very foundation of Christianity rests upon its occurrence.
1Cor. 15:14 "And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain." ( also: 1 Cor. 15:17)
Yet, why should the Resurrection be of such significance? Elijah raised a child from the dead (1 Kings 17:17, 21-22); Samuel said to Saul, "Why hast thou disquieted me, to bring me" (1 Sam. 28.7, 11, 15); Elisha raised the dead son of a Shunammite ( 2 Kings 4:32, 34-35); a dead man being lowered into a grave revived when he touched the bones of Elisha (2 Kings 13:21); Moses and Elijah revived at the time of the Transfiguration ( Luke 9:28, 30 );the saints arose at the time of Jesus' death ( Matt. 27:52-53 ); Jairus' daughter rose from the dead (Matt. 9:18, 23-25 ); the widow at Nain's son rose from the dead (Luke 7:11-15 ); and Lazarus rose from the dead ( John 11:43-44 ). All of these people ascended from death and all did so before Jesus. So why attribute so much importance to the event. By the time Christ rose from the dead this was a rather common occurrence. Moreover, people not only before Jesus rose from the dead but after as well. Peter raised Tabitha and Paul raised Eutychus.
While participating in a radio call-in program several years ago, the author was told by a caller that, except for Jesus, all of the above-mentioned people eventually died again. But Paul clearly asserted it's the Resurrection, per se, that matters not the fact Jesus never died again. The caller was asked to cite a passage that justified his contention. There was no reply.
A second major difficulty associated with the Resurrection lies in the contradictory accounts in the four gospels of what occurred. The following represent some of the major disagreements surrounding the events connected with the Resurrection:
A. At what time in the morning did the women visit the tomb?- At the rising of the sun (Mark 16:2) vs. when it was yet dark (John 20:1)
B. Who came?- Mary Magdalene alone (John 20:1) vs. Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (Matt. 28:1) vs. Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Salome (Mark 16:1) vs. Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James and other women (Luke 24:10)
C. Was the tomb opened or closed when they arrived? - Open (Luke 24:2) vs. closed (Matt 28:1-2)
D. Whom did they see at the tomb?- The angel (Matt. 28:2) vs. a young man (Mark 16:5) vs. two men (Luke 24:4) vs. two angels (John 20:11-12)
E. Were these men or angels inside or outside the tomb? -Outside (Matt. 28.2) vs. inside (Mark 16:5, Luke 24:3-4, John 20:11-12).
F. Were they standing or sitting? - Standing (Luke 24:4) vs. sitting (Matt. 28:2, Mark 16:5, John 20:12).
G. Did Mary Magdalene know Jesus when he first appeared to her?-Yes, she did (Matt. 28:9) vs. no she did not (John 20:14).
If the stories were consistent, one could write one long continuous narrative incorporating all four versions without fear of divergences. Yet, this has never been done without adding, altering or omitting key verses. Apologists often submit the witness-at-an-auto-accident argument which is quite irrelevant since two diametrically opposed and mutually exclusive versions of the same event can not be simultaneously accurate. One or the other is false. Moreover, witnesses at an accident, unlike gospel writers, are not claiming inerrancy.
Thomas Paine summarized the relationship between the gospels quite well: "...it is, I believe, impossible to find in any story upon record so many and such glaring absurdities, contradictions, and falsehoods, as are in the books (Matthew, Mark, Luke & John). They are more numerous and striking than I had any expectation of finding, when I began this examination,..." (Age of Reason by Thomas Paine, page 167)
A third major problem connected with the Resurrection lies in the fact that even if Jesus had risen, nobody is going to follow his example.
Eccle. 3:19-21 (RSV) "For the fate of the sons of men and the fate of beasts is the same: as one dies so dies the other. ...man has no advantage (pre-eminence-KJV) over beasts;... All go to one place; all are from the dust, and all turn to dust again. Who knows whether the spirit of man goes upward and the spirit of the beast goes down to the earth."
Job 7:9-10, 1 Tim. 6:15-16, Isaiah 26:14 say as much. Robert Ingersoll, one of the greatest Biblical commentators in American history, spoke wisely when he said: "The Old Testament tells us how we lost immortality and it does not say a word about another world, from the first mistake in Genesis to the last curse in Malachi. No man in the Old Testament stands by the dead and says, "We shall meet again." From the top of Sinai came no hope of another world." (Orthodoxy, Ingersoll's Works, Vol. 2, page 424.
And lastly, others participated in even more momentous events. Adam was never born to begin with (Gen. 1:27); he came into the world as a full-grown adult. Enoch (Gen. 5:22-24) and Elijah (2 Kings 2:11) never died. The latter went straight to heaven, which, incidentally, contradicts Hebrews 9:27 which says, "And it is appointed unto men once to die..."
What did Jesus ever do that had not already been accomplished? He rose from the dead but only after others. He performed miracles but so had others. He raised people from the dead but so had Old Testament prophets. He healed but so had others. What, then, did Jesus do that was different, that had not already be [been] done? Plainly stated, "What makes him stand out from the crowd?" Thousands have claimed to be the savior; so what are the acts that substantiate his credentials. Assertions alone prove nothing. Anyone can claim to be the Messiah and thousands have.
Jesus, The Imperfect Beacon
For two thousand years Christians have alleged that Jesus of Nazareth is God incarnate, the sinless being, the embodiment of perfection.
1Pet. 2:22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:
Isa. 53:9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
Yet, the New Testament has many statements and acts by Jesus which prove the contrary. He, like Paul, repeatedly made false statements and inaccurate prophecies. Here are a few examples:
(A) John 7:8-10[KJV] Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast: for my time is not yet full come. When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee. But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.
John 7:8-10 RSV Go to the festival yourselves. I am not going to this festival, for my time has not yet fully come." After saying this, he remained in Galilee. But after his brothers had gone to the festival, then he also went, not publicly but as it were in private.
Jesus broke his promise[word] by going up secretly after saying he wouldn't.
(B) In John 13:38 jesus said: "...Verily, verily, I say unto thee, The cock shall not crow, till thou (Peter) hast denied me thrice."
And yet, what actually occurred is shown in Mark 14:66-68
"And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest: And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth. But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew."
According to Jesus' prophecy the cock was not to speak until after the third denial, not after the first.
(C) Jesus told the thief on the cross: Luke 23:43 "... Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise."
This prophecy could not have been kept unless Jesus went to heaven that day, in which case he would not have been buried for three days.
(D) Jesus told a man: Mark 8:34 "... Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me."
This statement was made early in his ministry. Yet, the cross could not have become a Christian symbol until after the Crucifixion. There would be nothing to pick up. This utterance would have made no sense whatever to the man being addressed.
(E) In Matthew 5:22 he said: Matt. 5:22 "...but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire."
Yet, Jesus repeated called people fools: Matt. 23:17,19 "Ye fools and blind..." Luke 11:40 "Ye fools,..."
(F) In Matthew Jesus said: Matt. 12:40 " For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."
Mark 15:37 and 15:42 show Jesus died on the day before the sabbath which would be Friday. Mark 16:9 and Matthew 28:1 show he allegedly rose sometime during Saturday night or Sunday morning. Friday afternoon to Sunday morning does not encompass three days and three nights. His prophecy failed.
(G) John 3:13 Jesus falsely stated: "And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven."
This verse is not only inaccurate historically as 2 Kings 2:11 shows: 2 Kings 2:11"...behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven." but also absurd on its face. If the son of man (Jesus) is down here on earth speaking then how could he be in heaven.
(H) And in Matthew 27:46 Jesus cried with a loud voice say: " Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?"
How could Jesus be Savior of all mankind when he couldn't even save himself. These aren't the words of a man who went to the Cross willingly to die for our sins. These are the words of a man who could think of a hundred places he would rather be. They certainly the words of someone who has the situation under control.
These examples of Jesus' duplicity represent only a fraction of the 193 that could have been presented The New Testament provides more than enough evidence to demonstrate Jesus' inability to provide a reliable beacon to lighten the way to truth and honesty, to claim the Messiahship. As Thomas Paine said: "The priests of the present day profess to believe it (the story of Christ). They gain their living by it, and they exclaim against something they call infidelity. I will define what it (ifidelity) is. HE THAT BELIEVES IN THE STORY OF CHRIST IS AN INFIDEL TO GOD." (The Life and Works of Thomas Paine, Vol 9, page 292)
Jesus is not perfection incarnate. As Robert Ingersoll once said: "The theological Christ is the impossible union of the human and divine-man with the attributes of God and God with the weakness of man."
In closing this month's commentary several contradictions are worthy of note. Joseph's father is Jacob in Matthew 1:16 but is Heli in Luke 3:23. David slew the men of 700 chariots of the Syrians and 40,000 horsemen according to 2 Samuel 10:18 while 1 Chron. 19:18 says it was the men of 7,000 chariots and 40,000 footmen. Solomon had 40,000 stalls of horses for his chariots in 1 Kings 4:26 while 2 Chron. 9:25 says it was 4,000 stalls.
REVIEWS
Although such previously mentioned contradictions as "take up the cross," "go to the feast," and the warning not to call others fools were avoided by Gleason Archer in his apologetic work, The Encyclopedia of Biblical Difficulties, (discussed in January's issue of Biblical Errancy, p. 3), he did direct his attention toward several others.
His explanation for the "Today thou shalt be with me in paradise" problem is especially revealing. It abounds in suppositions, conjectures and hypotheses, virtually none of which is supported by Scripture. On page 367 Archer says: "The answer lies in the location of paradise on Good Friday. Apparently paradise was not exalted to heaven untill Easter Day. Jesus apparently refers to it in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus as "Abraham's Bosom," to which the godly beggar Lazarus was carried by the angels after his decease (Luke 16:19-31).
Apparently, apparently! "Apparently paradise was not exalted!" "Jesus refers to it in the parable of the rich man!" Thereis no solid evidence either assumption is true. However, from Archer's point-of-view it would be nice if they were so the problem would vanish.
He continues:
"Thus Abraham's Bosom referred to the place where the souls of the redeemed waited till the day of Christ's resurrection. Presumably this was the same place as paradise... Doubtless it was to the infernal paradise that the souls of Jesus and the repentant thief repaired after they each died on Friday afternoon."
Presumably! Presumed by whom? Archer's entire explanation is based on conjecture and unwarranted assumptions. Where is the evidence that paradise did not become heaven until Easter Day, that paradise was identical with Abraham's Bosom, or that souls went to paradise before later entering heaven. Moreover, even if both did enter "paradise" rather than heaven after death, Jesus would still not have been in the earth three days as he had prophesied in Matt. 12:40.
Like many apologists, Archer assumes that if he can devise reasonably viable explanations for Biblical difficulties then substantive evidence is not required. Plausible theories enrapped in carefully devised speculation are sufficient unto themselves. Most apologetics is more concerned with rationalization and justification than truth and objectivity.
In regards to the number of Solomon's stalls and the proper-name disagreements between 1 Kings 4:26 and Chron. 9:25, Archer frankly admits the contradictory aspects. On page 222 he says:
"In explanation of these transmissional errors (As we believe them to be), let it be understood that numerals and proper names are always more liable to copist errors than almost any other type of subject matter..." "As we believe them to be" is a frank admission that speculation is involved. It would be just as rational to assume there were no copyist errors, just independent writers following independent traditions while reporting on the same events. "Copyist error" is employed far too many instances by biblicists to escape what are otherwise impossible dilemas.(See: Alleged Bible Discrepancies by Haley). It provides a quick means of escape.
DIALOGUE & POLEMICS
Letter # 1 from Michael Hauerstir of Dayton, Ohio
I've read your "Bible Errancy" Newsletter. The Bible says in 1 Corinthians 2: 14, " But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." You are dealing with a spiritual book when you deal with the Bible. The Holy Spirit moved men to write the Scriptures, and to understand the Scripture, you must be Spiritual. To you, as 1Corinthians 2: 14 states, you find the Bible foolish, full of contradictions and errors(seemingly).
Actually, you need to be born again. Jesus, God manifested in the flesh, said "Ye must be born again."The enclosed tract will tell you how to be saved, be born again. You need to be saved, please read it.
Editor's Response to Letter #1
You asked me to read your small tract entitled, "In Devil's Hell." Well, I did and found it to be typical of the pamphlets that we often find in bus terminals, on library tables and on door knobs. It is permeated with the urgent need to accept Jesus, confess sins, be saved and fear hell. Much was asserted; nothing proved.
Now I ask you to respond in kind. Read Biblical Errancy, but not through a filter composed of Christian fundamentals. Among other things the January issue proved the Bible is not to be trusted as a reliable source. Yet, your tract avoided the evidence entirely and blindly plodded forward with such quotes as: "The wicked shall be turned into hell;" "Christ died for our sins and rose from the dead;" and "that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus...thou shalt be saved." You were`shown clearly contradictory utterances which you completely ignored.
You assumed the very point in dispute, that the Bibleis truth, per se. If asked how you know your statements are true, you would probably say, because they are in the Bible. But, instead of asking yourself the Bible is true, you just assumed as much. But I have proven the contrary; it is not the truth. It says for instance, that "all have sinned," which is completely false. How do I know, because your own book says so. Don't you believe it? "Noah was a just and perfect in his generation,..." (Gen. 6:9); "... that man (Job) was perfect and upright,..." (Job 1:1). These men were perfect, so obviously they could not have been sinners. How can you be a sinner and be perfect? The Bible has hundreds of problems of this nature and if you bear with me, I will prove as much in the issues to come. But please be reasonable; I can't cover the entire Book in two issues.
Quoting from a work is fruitless unless you first prove the book is valid, truthful and reliable. I provided evidence the Bible fails this test. Instead of proving my evidence to be false or invalid, instead of proving the Book to be true, valid and inerrant, you merely assume as much and proceeded to quote at will. Don't you believe the Bible when it says, "Prove all things..." (1 Thess. 5:12) or "But the wisdom from above is first pure, then...open to reason,..." (James 3:17). What have you proved? Where is your reasoning? The Bible says, "Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you;..." (1 Peter 3:15). Where is your defense? Mere assertions prove nothing.
You sent me a tract that implies people are wicked and sinful, while confident you abide in Jesus. Yet, the Bible says, "No man who abides in hum sins;..." (1 John 3:6). If you abide in him, as you believe, why are you still sinning. Surely you are not saying you no longer sin. My friend, with all due respect, if there is any verse in the Bible you and those of like mind should commit to memory it is Proverb 14:15, which says, "The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going."
Letter # 2 from an Anonymous Reader in Cleveland, Ohio.
Your Biblical Errancy discusses contradictions but how important are they. The Bible was not meant to be scientifically precise. It isn't a history book. It was written to provide a path to salvation through Jesus Christ Our Lord. You are concentrating too much on details and not seeing those things that really count. Accept Jesus and you will have the answer to your questions.
Editor's Response to Letter # 2
My friend, all you know about Jesus comes from Scripture. The validity of Jesus depends upon the validity, reliability and accuracy of Scripture. Rarely do I agree with Evangelicals but I couldn't agree more when a fundamentalist group, The International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (ICBI) of Oakland California, said the following when told, "Inerrancy is not important. It is the quibbling about insignificant details. What really matters is a person's relationship with Jesus Christ:"
"... But how do you know Jesus except as he is presented to you in the Bible? If the Bible is not God's Word and does not present a picture of Jesus Christ that can be trusted, how do you know it is the true Christ you are following? You may be worshipping a Christ of your own imagination." (Does Errancy Matter by James Boice, page 24)
Once conceding there are errors in the Bible, you have opened a Pandora's Box. How do you know which parts are true if you admit some parts are false. As ICBI said: "... But this position (claiming truthfulness for those parts of the Bible where God, as opposed to men has spoken). is unsound. People who think like this speak of Biblical authority, but at best they have partial Biblical authority since the parts containing errors obviously cannot be authoritative. What is worse, they cannot even tell us precisely what parts are from God and are therefore truthful and what parts are not from God and are in error. Usually they say that the "salvation parts" are from God, but they do not tell us how to separate these from the non-salvation parts." (Does Errancy Matter by James Boice, page 8)
The ICBI was also correct when it said the following statement of belief is an attack on the Bible:
"... Sure I believe in the Bible, as do you, but what difference does it make if there is a few mistakes in it? After all, the Bible isn't a history book. It's not a science book. It only tells us about God and salvation." This belief is more than an attack; it's a refutation. As the religious reformer, John Wesley, said:
"If there be any mistakes in the Bible, there may as well be a thousand. If there be one falsehood in that book, it did not come from the God of truth."
Well spoken! And Biblical Errancy will expose the falsehoods.