14.    Realize that no one has ever proven a contradiction.

Do you realize that no one has ever proven the Bible to be in error?  Many have claimed to have found error, but later have been forced to admit their own error by new evidence.  Archeology is unearthing much new evidence that sheds light on Biblical texts.  It has been said that no archeological find has ever proven an error exists in Scripture, but many times they have proven that those claiming a supposed error were the ones in the wrong.

15.    Avail yourself of an “intellectual icebox.”

It is fine—even a mark of integrity—to admit when we do not understand something in Scripture.  We should concede that there are “difficulties” in the Bible.  That is the time to place the difficulty in an “intellectual icebox” where we hold it while we await further evidence for the resolution of the difficulty.  Always leave room for God to provide more evidence concerning a difficult passage.

Having reached the end of our journey, what shall we say by way of summary?  When others raise what they label as an error in Scripture, we need to realize that all that is demanded of us is the ability to put forward a possible, rational conclusion to the difficulty.  We are not obligated to prove a possible interpretation is the right interpretation.  Our task is simply to demonstrate that there is a reasonable solution to the difficulty raised.  Since Scripture has proven trustworthy for thousands of years we should declare it innocent until proven guilty of error.  Being made up of sixty-six books, having been written over a span of 1,600 years, on three different continents, in three different languages, by more than forty authors, the miracle is that the Bible has such a cohesive, sound text that espouses one singular theme!

Let us remember the burden lies with the accuser of Scripture.  They must prove the error they claim exists.  Let us never forget that ultimately the real struggle with Scripture is a moral one (John 7:17).  Mark Twain reportedly said, “It ain’t those parts of the Bible that I can’t understand that bother me, it’s the parts that I do understand”!

Update: You may find the entire text of this series here.

12.    Assume harmony in parallel passages unless you have good reason to do otherwise.

Both Matthew and Luke record the account of two thieves being hanged on crosses to the right and left of Jesus.  Matthew tells us that both criminals were casting insults at Jesus (27:44), while Luke records only one hurling abuse at Him (23:39).  Which was it?  Common sense says that both criminals had joined in the verbal abuse, but that one had a change of heart and repented, and then began defending Jesus before the other.  W.A. Criswell once said, “God gave us five senses: taste, touch, smell, sight, hearing; but we need two more: common and horse.”

13.    Distinguish between “difficulties” and “errors.”

There is a vast difference between admitting that there are some “difficulties” in understanding all that the Bible says and conceding that the Bible contains error.  I join with the Apostle Peter in admitting that sometimes Scripture is difficult to understand (2 Peter 3:16), but I do not concede that there are errors within its pages.  “Difficulties” leave room for further discussion, information, and study.  More light on the given “difficulty” will later become available and it would be premature to assume error.  The jury is still out on any given alleged discrepancy.

10. Be certain of the original text.

The doctrine of inerrancy claims that it is the original autographs that were without error, not the copies made from them.  It is quite possible that copyists have made some minor errors in transcription.  This might account for some variation among numbers reported in the Old Testament.  1 Kings 4:26 says that Solomon had 40,000 stalls for horses and 12,000 horsemen.  2 Chronicles 9:25 says that he had 4,000 stalls and 12,000 horsemen.  Similarly, 1 Samuel 13:1 says that Saul reigned for 32 years, while Paul says that his reign lasted 40 years (Acts 13:21).  In the Hebrew language numbers were recorded by assigning numerical value to each of the letters of the alphabet.  Letters were then used in combination to record larger numbers; this made for greater susceptibility for a scribal mistake because the letters were not grouped according to a logical linguistic pattern (a word they were used to seeing), but randomly, to record a given number.

Though there may be other legitimate explanations for these numerical differences, it is possible that we have a scribal error made in transcription.  If such minor errors do exist, they do not harm the doctrine of inerrancy, nor lessen our confidence in the accuracy of our Bibles.  There are not many of these kinds of difficulties in the Bible.  It is said that our current text of the New Testament is 98.33% pure from copyist error.   Of the few slight variations not one affects any major doctrine.

11. Face the possibility that you may have misinterpreted one or both passages.

If it appears that the difficulties of a passage are insurmountable, consider the possibility that you have misinterpreted it.  Just after I came to faith in Jesus Christ as a Junior High student, I began to read my Bible regularly.  Starting at the beginning of the New Testament, I soon came upon Matthew 5:29, “And if your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out, and throw it from you; for it is better for you that one of the parts of your body perish, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.” I was stumped.  I wanted to please Christ, but this request seemed too harsh!  How could I gouge my eye out?  How could I handle the pain?  How could I explain to my parents what I had done?  Fortunately I waited for further information and came to see that I was taking literally what Jesus was using as a literary technique to make a point.

Not long afterward I came to Matthew 16:2-3: “When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is read.’  And in the morning, ‘There will be a storm today, for the sky is read and threatening.’  Do you know how to discern the appearance of the sky, but cannot discern the signs of the times?” My conclusion?  I understood this to mean that it was wrong to attempt to predict the weather; therefore, I thought I had to stop watching the weather forecast with my father each evening before going to bed.  I wanted to do what Christ commanded, but the command, as I interpreted it, seemed a bit arbitrary.  I sought further input and discovered that I had misunderstood the point of what Jesus said.

7.    Realize that most New Testament quotations of the Old Testament are taken from the Septuagint (LXX).

On occasion someone will cross-reference from the New Testament, where they have just read the Biblical writer quoting from the Old Testament, to the Old Testament reference being cited.  They will notice that the quotation may not match exactly what their Old Testament records for that verse.  What is going on?  We need to realize that the New Testament writer may well have been quoting from the Septuagint.  The Septuagint is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament that was completed in the mid 200’s B.C.  This translation of the Hebrew Scriptures was widely used at the time the New Testament documents were being written.  So the author of Scripture in the New Testament may have been quoting form a Greek translation of the Old Testament and when we compare that with our English translation of the Hebrew Old Testament it may not be phrased exactly the same.

Beyond that, it is more than possible that the New Testament writers did not always attempt to quote verbatim when they referred to the Old Testament.  Suppose we would make a tape recording of the conversations taking place during a small group Bible study and then compare what we quoted as Scripture with what our actual English versions say.  Would the differences invalidate what we said in the Bible study?  Would we be found to be liars when we heard ourselves say, “Psalm 35:4 says …” and then discovered it did not match exactly with our version of that passage?  No.

8.    Realize that when the New Testament quotes from the Old Testament, God, as the ultimate Author, has the right to give His own meaning or interpretation of what He wrote in the first place.

Scripture makes clear that it is of divine origin.  This means that God has the freedom to explain what He has said.  “But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God” (2 Peter 1:20-21).  “All Scripture is God-breathed …” (2 Timothy 3:16).

9.    Use the fuller of two accounts to explain the shorter account.

Consider the Biblical accounts that describe the conversation of the Apostle Paul.  The actual event is described for us in Acts 9:10-19.  Paul’s testimony of it before the Jews in Jerusalem is recorded in Acts 22:12-16.  Upon reading the two accounts it becomes clear that 9:10-19 is the fuller account and 22:12-16 is an abbreviated account (little wonder Paul abbreviated it, read Acts 22 for the context in which he gave this testimony!).  It would only make sense to allow the fuller of the two accounts to explain the shorter one.

If we go to the movie theater and see a film and then try to relate it to someone who later asks us to tell them about it, we don’t tell them the entire story.  We give them the bits and pieces of the movie that will explain the basic story line.  Although we have only reported small portions of the plot, when that person goes to see the movie they find us later and say, “It was just like you described it!”


5. Realize one author’s purpose may differ from another.

Why do you suppose that when Matthew records the words of the criminals who hung on crosses on either side of Jesus he mentions both as hurling insults at Him, while Luke mentions only one doing the cursing?  Does Scripture contradict itself?  Not at all.  Matthew desires to highlight the opposition to Jesus, so he selects the details of what actually happened and records them according to the purpose the Holy Spirit put in his heart when writing Scripture.  Luke, on the other hand, wishes to emphasize the truths of repentance and salvation.  With this view in mind he records the events truthfully, though only mentioning one of the thieves as hurling insults at Jesus.

When we read the four Gospel accounts of the New Testament we should take into consideration the audience to which they are seeking to communicate. Matthew addresses a primarily Jewish readership.  For this reason you find many more references to and quotations from the Old Testament Scriptures.  Luke wished to communicate with a largely Gentile audience, so he does not use as many Old Testament allusions or quotations.  Each Gospel writer, moved by the Holy Spirit to address different groups of people, selectively recorded what they wrote to be appropriate to their audience.  What they wrote is true, though not a recording of every fact.  Again consider the self-confessed selectivity of the Apostle John in writing the fourth Gospel (John 20:31).

6. Realize that the rules for quotation vary with culture and situation.

When recording varied accounts by different writers, realize that one may use direct discourse to record the person’s words, another may employ either indirect discourse or make a simple statement summarizing what was said.  In today’s English language we have use of quotation marks to set off a person’s specific words, ellipses to indicate an omission of words, brackets to mark off words that have been added to explain what a person meant, and footnotes to record the exact location from which a statement or idea is cited.  The Biblical languages of Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic had none of these devices in their language.  It is wrong for us to impose these literary techniques from our age back upon writings from a different age and from different languages.

Realize also that Jesus undoubtedly spoke at least these three languages (Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic).  It is likely that Jesus often spoke in Amamaic; therefore His words were translated into the written language of Greek for our New Testament.  The questions we need to ask are these: Do the words selected accurately portray what Jesus said?  Do they faithfully represent what Jesus in fact spoke?