Are there Errors in the Bible?
A few days ago I received an email from a reader of this site who was concerned about how to answer those who claim that the Bible is a book filled with error and contradiction. Such claims are common and, sadly, are more and more being put forth even from within evangelical circles. This reader affirmed his belief in the inerrancy and authority of Scripture but was looking for some guidance on how to answer the multitudes of claims against the Bible.
I’d like to take that on. At first I was going to do that in a single, short article. But as I thought about it and as I began writing, I determined it would be best to first lay some groundwork. I’ve written about this subject in the past and find it a deep and fascinating one. I think I would do well to revisit some of the doctrine of Scripture and from there to examine the question this person has asked me. So we’ll likely make this a three-part series.
The doctrines regarding the Bible have been discussed and debated at length throughout the history of the church. At the time of the Reformation, the main thrust of the debate had to do with the Bible’s authority, and whether the Bible would be the sole ultimate authority over the lives of Christians over against popes, creeds, councils and the Catholic Church. In more recent days, the doctrine of the Bible’s inerrancy came under intense discussion and scrutiny. In response, several evangelical leaders, including Francis Schaeffer, J.I. Packer, R.C. Sproul, Roger Nicole and James Boice, created an organization called The International Council on Biblical Inerrancy. This organization had as its purpose “elucidating, vindicating and applying the doctrine of biblical inerrancy as an essential element for the authority of Scripture and a necessity for the health of the church of God” (James Boice, Whatever Happened to the Gospel of Grace, page 68”). Three gatherings were held which produced three scholarly documents, the first of which was “The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy.” The second dealt with principles of biblical interpretation (hermeneutics) and the third with the application of Scripture. These documents still stand as pillars on the subject. Though the majority of Christians agree with them, it is becoming increasingly common today to doubt or question such fundamental doctrines.
In his book Scripture Alone, James White has a chapter entitled “Definitions: More Than Half The Battle.” He is absolutely right that properly defining terms is often more than half the battle. Whenever I discuss this subject of inerrancy, I find that very few terms receive any clear definitions. While a term like “inerrancy” has a consistent theological meaning, this does not indicate that every person who uses the word means the same thing by it, and that the person truly understands it. I will suggest an appropriate definition of inerrancy shortly.
I found also that the issues at stake go far deeper than merely the inerrancy of Scripture. They extended to areas such as the canon of Scripture, the authority of Scripture and the inspiration of Scripture. Perhaps this is because, although inerrancy stands on its own biblical merits, it is also a doctrine constructed from other doctrines. While the Bible contains many passages that prove it true, it is also true that it follows logically from other doctrines of Scripture. So before we can approach inerrancy, I believe we need to step back and examine aspects of these other doctrines. We will do that briefly in this article. Certainly there is much more that could be said about any of these subjects, so understand this as a mere introduction.
Authority
When we examine the Bible’s authority, we must begin by answering the question of, “What does the Bible say about itself?”. We find throughout Scripture that the Bible claims for itself a position of unique and supreme authority. In doing so it appeals only to its own authority for proof because there is no greater authority to which it can appeal. After all, if something is the ultimate authority, to what else can it appeal? Were the Bible to appeal to our reason to substantiate its authority, it would implicitly show that human reason is a higher authority. In an article written a couple of years ago by a popular blogger I found cause for concern when he expressed one of his main disagreements with inerrancy is that it did not “feel right.” “My problems with inerrancy have been going on for a very long time, and I’ve heard it presented and taught by the best. It’s never sat well with me, probably because I have a lot of literary interest in the text of scripture, plus I don’t like to be bullied. I get a rash.” But as I indicated, the Bible does not appeal to our feelings or our reason for its authority. Nor could it while remaining Scripture.
We can define the doctrine of Scripture’s authority as follows: “The authority of Scripture means that all the words in Scripture are God’s words in such a way that to disbelieve or disobey any word of Scripture is to disbelieve or disobey God” (Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, page 73). I do not know of any Christians who claim that they have the right to disbelieve or disobey what God has taught in Scripture. They may do this in their lives (and we all do, at times) but I do not know of any who believe Scripture gives us such license. This doctrine forms the basis of apologetics, for we can only appeal to the Scripture when we trust its authority.
Inspiration
Closely related to the authority of Scripture is the inspiration of Scripture. Inspiration tells us how the Bible was transmitted from God to men. We find that the Bible draws its authority and inerrancy from the indisputable fact that it is inspired by God. The Bible teaches that “All Scripture is breathed out by God” (2 Timothy 3:16). The words the ESV translated as “breathed out by God” are also translated “inspired” and this is the basis of inspiration. This is explained further by the apostle Peter who writes, “no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:20,21). The Holy Spirit was actively involved in bringing God’s words to humans.
The actual form this inspiration took is much disputed. We know from reading the Scripture and observing the different styles of writing and differing levels of expertise in writing, that God did not merely use men as automatons. If He had done this, we would expect to find a consistent writing style throughout. Somehow God used the specific skills, backgrounds and situations of the authors to transmit His words. Zechariah 7:12 sheds light on this. “…lest they should hear the law and the words that the Lord of hosts had sent by his Spirit through the former prophets.” We see that the ministry of the Holy Spirit extended to the whole and to the individual parts (…the words that the Lord of hosts…).
The Testimony of Scripture
If it was God who inspired men to write the Bible, what does that teach us about Scripture? Is it possible that Scripture, as it was given from God to men, can be anything less than perfect? Would God lie? Would He write in only half-truths? The Bible tells us otherwise:
2 Samuel 7:28 - “And now, O Lord God, you are God, and your words are true, and you have promised this good thing to your servant.”
Numbers 23:9 - “God is not man, that he should lie,
or a son of man, that he should change his mind.
Has he said, and will he not do it?
Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?”
Psalm 12:6 - The words of the Lord are pure words,
like silver refined in a furnace on the ground,
purified seven times.
Proverbs 30:5 - Every word of God proves true;
he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.
We find a consistent Scriptural witness that God does not lie, for He is incapable of telling falsehood. The men who wrote God’s words, had supreme confidence in the rest of His words. If God is incapable of telling a lie, it follows that the words He spoke to those who wrote the words of Scripture must also be perfectly true. At this point, I trust we have sufficient Scriptural basis to conclude that Scripture is authoritative and that the words given by God to men were without error. But how can we know that the words we have today accurately represent those words?
Canon
Many people do not understand the concept of canon and this is especially true in the fallout of The Da Vinci Code and hundreds of similar books. There seems to be a misconception that when the Bible was compiled as one book made of many different books and letters, people were engaged in gathering together some writings attributed to God and publishing them in one volume, much as one might do with the writings of a favorite poem or play-write. But this is not how the canon came together. The Bible is more than a “best of” compilation of God’s writings.
The term “canon” originally referred to a stick which was used for measurement. It later came to describe a standard or rule. By extension, it came to describe an authoritative list of something. In the case of Scripture, it speaks of the authoritative list of God’s writings, yet it is more than a mere table of contents. It refers to all the writings that were breathed out by God (2 Timothy 3:16). Thus without the act of inspiration, there could be no canon.
As we have seen, canon refers to the entire body of an author’s work. Allow me to provide an example. If we look at the canon of a man like John Piper, we would say that it includes Desiring God, The Passion of Jesus Christ, Don’t Waste Your Life and so on, from the first book he wrote to the last. The canon of John Piper would only be complete when it included every word he had ever written. But who can infallibly know a person’s canon? In truth, only the author really knows what he or she has written. John Piper may have many books available to us, but who is to say that every word of his has been made available to us? Who is to say that he has not released other books under a pseudonym? Only he infallibly knows his canon. Similarly, it is only God who infallibly knows all He has written. The Scriptural evidence compels us to believe, then, that if we have the complete canon, God helped people find out what it includes. When the Bible was compiled into the book we know and love today, it represented every word God had ever written. So there is a sense in which the primary task of the men who compiled the Bible was to find the complete canon of God. The primary measure they used was whether a book was inspired by God.
This is a topic that could (and perhaps should) be covered at length, but I am not writing today to defend the canonicity of Scripture. As far as I can tell, most people who struggle with inerrancy, do not deny that the canon of Scripture represents God’s words to us.
Transmission
The final topic I will write about in this opening article is transmission which describes how the words of God were transmitted from the original documents to what we have today. This is a topic that can only be done justice in a much longer treatment, so allow me to merely point to some of the facts. We possess a wealth of biblical manuscripts in the original languages of Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic. John MacArthur aptly summarizes as follows: “With this wealth of biblical manuscripts in the original languages and with the disciplined activity of textual critics to establish with almost perfect accuracy the content of the autographs, any errors which have been introduced and/or perpetuated by the thousands of translations over the centuries can be identified and corrected by comparing the translation or copy with the reassembled original. By this providential means, God has made good His promise to preserve the Scriptures. We can rest assured that there are translations available today which indeed are worthy of the title, The Word of God” (John MacArthur, The MacArthur Bible Handbook, page xxii).
And Now…
Having begun to define terms and provide background to the study of inerrancy, I will turn at last to the doctrine in the next article.




Comments (17) »
1. Jerry
January 11, 2008
10:22 AM
I have also heard people say “The Bible is full of errors”, and normally respond by asking them to list a couple of these. Most of the time they either can’t come up with even one, or instead respond with something nonsensical, such as “Doesn’t the Bible say that the world is flat?”
The best response then is to ask them where that is located in the Bible, to which they have no answer. I then ask them if they have ever read the Bible, which normally elicits a negative answer. This is the time to gently ask them whether it is fair to pass judgment on a book without reading it, and encourage them to read for themselves.
2. Tim Challies
January 11, 2008
10:38 AM
I have also heard people say “The Bible is full of errors”, and normally respond by asking them to list a couple of these. Most of the time they either can’t come up with even one, or instead respond with something nonsensical, such as “Doesn’t the Bible say that the world is flat?”
While admitting that there are some difficult questions that arise when we read the Bible, I, too, have found that the majority (and the vast majority,at that) of these supposed errors and contradictions are laughably stupid and could only be put forth by someone who was really committed to willful ignorance (to be frank).
3. David
January 11, 2008
11:34 AM
Never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by “stupidity” is a maxim that has served me well over the years.
You’d be surprised the number of people who don’t understand what a real contradiction is. Logic and philiosophy is not commonly taught in public schools (and perhaps a good schooling blog topic might be how to best supplement public schooling for those who don’t feel it is delivering children to Molech - but I digress…). A failure to recognize the difference between paradox, analogous language use, mystery and the law of ‘non-contradiction’ have become so muddied in their use as to be seen almost as synomyms when they are, in fact, quite different from one another.
Anyhoo - looking forward to the rest of this series!
4. Jerry
January 11, 2008
11:54 AM
David,
I suggest a simple change:
“Never ascribe to malice that which can be explained by ignorance is a maxim that has served me well over the years.”
Wouldn’t this be more charitable?
5. Truth Unites... and Divides
January 11, 2008
12:17 PM
Hi Tim,
Great Post! I’m glad that you wrote about a growing area of attack against the Doctrine of Biblical Inerrancy which is “Text Criticism” or “Transmission” as you labeled it.
Dan Wallace has a series of posts on the subject of Text Criticism in his blog Parchment & Pen or reclaimingthemind.org. He says there have been scribal corruptions to the original autographs. AND he says that despite this, there is really no adverse consequences to any essential doctrines. I don’t know if inerrancy is an “essential” doctrine according to Dr. Wallace, but he does subscribe to inerrancy.
Anyways, I think it all boils down to an attack against the doctrine of the Authority of Scripture. So critics attack the doctrine of inerrancy, attack the doctrine of inspiration, attack the doctrine of preservation, attack the doctrine of sufficiency because they DO NOT WANT the Authority of God’s Word in their lives and in their consciences.
6. mikbry24
January 11, 2008
12:20 PM
Charitable….yes…..factual……no.
7. Scott D. Andersen
January 11, 2008
12:32 PM
A great book which I throughly enjoyed on this subject and which had a great impact on strengthening my understanding is “Theopneustia, The Verbal Plenary Inspiration of Scripture” by Louis Gaussen. I think Monergism.com is offering this book under a different title, you can search by author. I found my copy on abebooks.com.
sda
8. Melchizedek
January 11, 2008
5:43 PM
I disagree that the issue of canon is not a major one. Is it the Catholic bible that is inerrant, or is it the Protestant one?
Also, scripture itself does not specifically declare what should be considered canon - so we have something with less authority than scripture deciding what scripture is.
9. Carl
January 11, 2008
9:38 PM
Two books I currently own that have aided me, a simple Christian layman, address those “Bible has errors” claims made all the time on Usenet newsgroups, are “An Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties” by Gleason Archer and “Hard Sayings of the Bible” by Peter H. Davids, Frederick Fyvie Bruce, Manfred T. Brauch, and Walter C. Kaiser.
Anyone suggest any other ones for the layman like me?
It’s interesting that I’ll see the atheist, agnostic and unbeliever claim that “no one explained the error of __” but I’ll point out that it has be addressed and explained quite well but as usual and as foretold by God in the Bible, their eyes and ears are closed to the truth.
10. Ross Appleton
January 11, 2008
11:01 PM
Dan Wallace does some great work on textual criticism at Reclaiming the Mind. I found this article in particular, as well as the ensuing discussion, to be helpful: http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2008/01/08/the-significance-of-scribal-corruptions-to-the-new-testament/
11. Albert
January 11, 2008
11:11 PM
I’ll have to agree with Melchizedek, in that my difficulties with inerrancy lie with how the Bible came to be.
“The Scriptural evidence compels us to believe, then, that if we have the complete canon, God helped people find out what it includes.”
That statement begs the question. How do we know we have God’s canon? My limited understanding is that the early Church Fathers came up with the canon. I have no doubt they tried hard to make sure to include those books that reflected their understanding of orthodoxy, and so what we have to day is as close as anyone could ever have gotten to the Truth. But close isn’t inerrant, so how can we claim inerrancy? Since you won’t talk about this in your future articles, any suggestions on good material on this?
12. Bryan
January 11, 2008
11:36 PM
“Though the majority of Christians agree with [The Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy]”
This is a rather astounding statement. Wouldn’t you want to qualify that with something like, the majority of conservative evangelical Christians agree with it?
13. Steve
January 12, 2008
2:06 AM
Here is a great website on the New Testament Canon http://www.ntcanon.org/ be sure to check out the hyperlinked table http://www.ntcanon.org/table.shtml that summarizes references and opinions from numerous ancient authorites on the canonical and apocraphyl books.
14. laymond
January 12, 2008
9:03 AM
Sir as per usual when one attempts to prove the bible, or all scripture as God’s inspired word they usualy pull two short scriptures, and then misrepresent what they say. you said and I quote “The Bible teaches that “All Scripture is breathed out by God” (2 Timothy 3:16). The words the ESV translated as “breathed out by God” are also translated “inspired” and this is the basis of inspiration. This is explained further by the apostle Peter who writes, “no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:20,21). The Holy Spirit was actively involved in bringing God’s words to humans.”
Then when we go farther into the text and context we find that is not at all what Paul, or Peter said. 2Tm:3:16: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: (so far it sounds as if what you said is correct) but lets put that statement in context with the two previous verses. 14: But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; 15: And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. Now we find out that Paul could have only been talking of the Jewish book/Old testament. from which Timmothy had been taught as a child. You wrote and I quote; Peter who writes, “no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” KJV 2Pt:1:20: Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21: For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. when we read what you wrote and what the bible said, you lelt out two very important words “Old Time” which again could only be referring to the Old Testament. I don’t believe I have ever heard the New Testament referred to as a book of prophecy. Maybe you have? May God Bless
15. Nathanael
January 12, 2008
12:38 PM
Good stuff, brother. Looking forward to reading the rest of the posts.
Shalom
16. Patricia Burns
January 12, 2008
8:39 PM
Scriptures are given by God and are True from the Beginning
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God (2 Tim.3:16 below).
God’s word is true from the beginning (Ps.119:160 below).
God is the God of truth (Ps.31:5, Deut.32:4, Ps.25:5, Jn.17:17 below).
The Holy Scriptures are not the private interpretation of men (2 Pe.1:20 below), but they are given by God through the Holy Spirit.
When writing to the law and to the testimony: if the writing does not speak according to the Holy Bible there is no light in them (Isa.8:20 below).
The spirit of Truth will guide you into ALL truth (Jn.16:13 below)
ALL Scripture is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness (2 Pe.1:21, 2 Tim.3:16, 2 Samuel 23:2, Eph.3:5 below).
Isa.8:20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, [it is] because [there is] no light in them.
Ps.119.160 Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever.
2 Pe.1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
2 Pe.1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost.
2 Tim.3:16 All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2 Samuel 23:2 The Spirit of the LORD spake by me (David), and his word [was] in my tongue.
Eph.3:5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;
Ps.31:5 Into Thine hand I commit my spirit; Thou hast redeemed me, O LORD God of truth.
Deut. 32:4 He is the Rock, His work is perfect; for all His ways are judgment, a God of truth and without iniquity; just and right is He.
Ps.25:5 Lead me in Thy truth and teach me, for Thou art the God of my salvation; on Thee do I wait all the day.
Jn.17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
2 Tim.3:16 All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
Jn.16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, [that] shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
Pat (ndbpsa ©) Bible Prophecy on the Web
17. Truth Unites... and Divides
January 13, 2008
2:32 AM
That statement begs the question. How do we know we have God’s canon?
Here’s a brief article addressing your question: http://www.reclaimingthemind.org/blog/2007/08/15/is-our-canon-of-scripture-a-fallible-collection-of-infallible-books