Are There Errors in the Bible?

[Jason_Gastrich]

Charash:

Jason,
I applaud your scholarship and your work to bring the Word to others and correct their errors in interpretation they may have.
My question to you, however, is how do you affirm those interpretations you come up with? You seem to be a scholarly person who knows history, logic, reason, etc., so how do you justify anything you say about scripture?

Please do not say the scriptures interpret the scriptures because we all know books do not interpret books–people do. When I am faced with a difficult passgae in Scripture, I consult the Fathers of the Church–who were much closer in time to the events described than we are–in the Navarre Bible which contains 2000 years of commentary. As always, I trust in the Holy Spirit to guide these leaders of the Church to teach us what we need to know–not necessarily what we want to know.

You also stated in a post above that some words are to be taken literally and others symbolically. How do you know what sense is meant? How can you prove the sense on your own?

My final question for you is if for 2000 years the Church and its leaders have categorically and universally interpreted John chapter 6 (along with the other passages detailing the Eucharist)in the same way, how do you justify your interpretation when it is different from so many throughout history? Faith in its most basic form is a test of obedience, a test of trust, and a test of love. I am living proof of that test.

Finally, I repeat Dr. Hahn’s answer to the question are there any errors in Scripture: “No, there are only errors in human understanding of them.”

Charash,

Thanks for your encouragement.

In order to maintain the integrity of this topic, which is alleged Bible errors, I’m going to answer you briefly. Feel free to email me or start a new thread if you wish to talk about Christian/Catholic doctrines.

I’ve created a web page on Hermeneutics. It’s simple, but it will guide you through the scriptures. Link: jcsm.org/Education/hermeneutics.htm . Should I copy and paste the page into this message? I’m not sure which you prefer around here.

God bless,
Jason

 

[Jason_Gastrich]

Malachi4U:

Jason,

Did Judas hang himself or gut himself?

God bless you also,

Malachi4U

Hi Malachi,

Thanks for your message.

Matthew 27:5 and Acts 1:18 complement each other. Judas hung himself, the branch broke, then he fell headlong and his entrails gushed out.

Incidentally, Acts 1:18 never says that his fall was the cause of his death. It reads, “Now this man purchased a field with the wages of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his entrails gushed out.”

Sincerely,
Jason

 

[Malachi4U]

Jason Gastrich:

Dear Readers,

I hope you are well, today.

Do you think you’ve found an error in the Bible? Have you heard an argument against the Bible’s inerrancy that you couldn’t answer?

I’ve studied the Word for thousands of hours and I’ve found answers to all of the alleged, Bible errors. Therefore, I can conclude that the Word of God is inerrant. Glory to Him.

If you think you have found an error, then please post it. I’d be happy to read your post and respond. If I don’t know the answer, then I’ll do some research and post what I find.

May God bless you richly.

Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich

Jason,

Just to let you know before I begin, I believe that the ‘inspiration’ for Scripture was infalable and correct. I do not believe that all scripture is 100% correct however since men and women are human and do error. Satan also tries to attack the Church of Christ at every opportunity as well. So what I am saying is that men can write poor and incorrect versions of the Bible. Our language also changes so words take on new meanings and thus Scripture is allways trying to just keep up with an ever changing language.

Words are interpreted diferently by people as well. Look at ‘pray’, ‘worship’, ‘adore’ and ‘venerate’. One big stumbling block between Catholics (Roman) and protestants (all sects) is that these words are used to mean two different things. We use the same words but with different meaning.

In addition, all of the original MS for Scripture is no longer extant. This is why we must reley on Tradition and Scripture. After all, we had Tradition before we had the NT and the Catholic Church told us which Books were inspired and which were not. We would not have a Bible today were it not for the Catholic Church. Praise God!

I also think the best Bible version is the one you open and read, even if not a perfect translation. A perfect Bible with dust on it does no good.

So first, are all these following Bible versions perfect?

Original King James (AKJV)?
NKJV?
KJV?
Joseph Smith Translation?
Geneva 1560?
Geneva 1599?
NIV?
New World Translation?
NRSV?
DR?
Vulgate?
NAB?

Why do some versions change words like works/deeds/doing/does for the exact same Greek word? Is it to support a preferred theological belief and not the accuracy of translation?

Do publishers use different words due to copyright law?

Lets take this following verse and tell me why part of it was added to the KJV when not in older extant text and why has it been left in:

Mt 6:13 (KJV) “13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.”

Also note words used in Eph 2:8-10 and Jas 2:1-26 that are different in the NIV and KJV and others. Are they changed to pass off theological views of one sect against another? (The words are ‘work’, ‘deeds’, ‘doing’, ‘does’).

Why was the word ‘pope’ used in the Geneva Bible? The title hadn’t even been used when Scripture was first put written?

God bless,

Malachi4U

PS. Looks like an enormous web site you linked to, I will check it out.

 

[Jason_Gastrich]

Hi Malachi,

Thanks for your message.

JCSM is my site. I’m the founding director. Feel free to check it out. You’re right, though. It’s quite large.

In part, I agree with you when you say the best translation is the one you’ll read. I agree because I began reading the Living Bible in college. It was the first Bible I really enjoyed. However, I rarely read it today because it’s a paraphrase. If someone said I HAD to read the KJV, then I may not have read it much . . . maybe I would have, though. If someone gave me the NKJV, I would have read it like the Living and it would have been more accurate.

I have a couple of web pages on Bible translations. I’m sure you’ll find them interesting. Here they are:

The Best Bible Versions (and Worst): jcsm.org/biblelessons/BBV.htm

Modern Translations of the Bible vs. the KJV:
jcsm.org/biblelessons/KJV.htm

I debate atheists and sometimes they like to cite the changes between translations as an argument against the Bible’s inerrancy or authority. They also like to cite the differences between the denominations as a “black eye” to Christianity. However, I proclaim that the vast majority of the denominations and Christian religions affirm the biblical doctrine of salvation. This is easy to understand and the most important thing. Incidentally, here is the gospel message on JCSM: gospel.jcsm.org .

God bless,
Jason

 

[agname]

Here’s a good book to read Jason…since we’re plugging products.

ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ12.HTM

 

[agname]

Jason Gastrich:

Dear Readers,

I hope you are well, today.

Do you think you’ve found an error in the Bible? Have you heard an argument against the Bible’s inerrancy that you couldn’t answer?

I’ve studied the Word for thousands of hours and I’ve found answers to all of the alleged, Bible errors. Therefore, I can conclude that the Word of God is inerrant. Glory to Him.

If you think you have found an error, then please post it. I’d be happy to read your post and respond. If I don’t know the answer, then I’ll do some research and post what I find.

May God bless you richly.

Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich

Sounds great Jason…let me tell you some stuff that I learned through research…perhaps you can add on the CD.

Luther had a trouble with verses such as “See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. (James 2:24)” This really infuriated him. He wanted to remove James along with the other seven books…but was talked out of it. In Romans 3:28 it read, “For we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law.”, etc. etc. Luther decided that “works of law” was in reference to the laws of the Old Testament, including the Ten Commandments. The interesting thing is that when the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered…they supported the Catholic belief that “works of law” …or in Greek “ergon nomou” refers to ceremonial law handed out in the Old Testament…not to the Ten Commandments ala Moral Law. Luther also inserted “alone” in Romans 3:28…to read, “man is justified by faith alone.” This is why there isn’t an absolute assurance of salvation – “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven” (Matt 7:21). Scripture shows that one’s final salvation depends on the state of the soul at death. As Jesus says, “He who endures to the end will be saved” (Matthew 24:13; cf. 25:31–46). So basically, one who dies in the state of friendship with God (the state of grace).

Sounds good…good luck!

 

[agname]

Jason Gastrich:

Hi Malachi,

Thanks for your message.

JCSM is my site. I’m the founding director. Feel free to check it out. You’re right, though. It’s quite large.

In part, I agree with you when you say the best translation is the one you’ll read. I agree because I began reading the Living Bible in college. It was the first Bible I really enjoyed. However, I rarely read it today because it’s a paraphrase. If someone said I HAD to read the KJV, then I may not have read it much . . . maybe I would have, though. If someone gave me the NKJV, I would have read it like the Living and it would have been more accurate.

I have a couple of web pages on Bible translations. I’m sure you’ll find them interesting. Here they are:

The Best Bible Versions (and Worst): jcsm.org/biblelessons/BBV.htm

Modern Translations of the Bible vs. the KJV:
jcsm.org/biblelessons/KJV.htm

I debate atheists and sometimes they like to cite the changes between translations as an argument against the Bible’s inerrancy or authority. They also like to cite the differences between the denominations as a “black eye” to Christianity. However, I proclaim that the vast majority of the denominations and Christian religions affirm the biblical doctrine of salvation. This is easy to understand and the most important thing. Incidentally, here is the gospel message on JCSM: gospel.jcsm.org .

God bless,
Jason

I highly recommend the following:

Ignatius
amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/089870491X/qid=1086409805/sr=8-6/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i6_xgl14/102-7544521-9870546?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

or

Douay-Rheims aka Douay-Challoner

tanbooks.com/index.php/page/shop:flypage/product_id/644/category_id/9/

I have several problems with the errors and the purity of the KJV. For instance…the interpretation of “xeraino” in Mark 9:18…“suntereo” in Mark 6:20…the use of “ereb” and “boqer” in Daniel 8:14…the alteration of “pascha” in Acts 12:4…“Aeropagus” and “deisidaimonestero” in Acts 17:2…the suppression of “hierourgeo” in Romans 15:16…“hayah” in Genesis 1:2…etc.

KJV is so/so…I suppose it’s better than nothing.

 

[kman025]

I tried to post this same topic in a rather veiled fashion under Bible Confusion / Parasceve.

My question is: When did Christ’s crucifixion commence? Did it happen on Nisan 14, as in John, or on Nisan 15, as in Mark? More specifically, at what hour did the crucifixion commence? Did it start at the third hour, as in Mark 15:25, or after the 6th hour, as in John 19:14?

Mark 15:25: “And it was the third hour, when they crucified him.”

John 19:14: “Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. He [Pilate] said to the Jews, ‘Here is your King!’”

For those who need more background:

The Catholic Encyclopedia page on the Parasceve is newadvent.org/cathen/11476a.htm. There’s a paper with a timeline by a Jesuit online at: clawww.lmu.edu/faculty/fjust/Bible/Jesus_Death.htm.

Thank you,
Chris

(Are we allowed to post small quotes from the Catholic Encyclopedia? If so, I would really like to quote a small part of my Catholicy Encyclopedia’s description of Inerrancy for everyone, since I cannot find it at newadvent.org. I really think the Church’s formal understanding of Inerrancy and some small quotes from Dei Verbum must enter this thread to help everyone, and my Catholic Encyclopedia seems to sum it up well.)

 

[Jason_Gastrich]

kman025:

My question is: When did Christ’s crucifixion commence? Did it happen on Nisan 14, as in John, or on Nisan 15, as in Mark? More specifically, at what hour did the crucifixion commence? Did it start at the third hour, as in Mark 15:25, or after the 6th hour, as in John 19:14?

Mark 15:25: “And it was the third hour, when they crucified him.”

John 19:14: “Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. He [Pilate] said to the Jews, ‘Here is your King!’”

Hi Chris,

Thanks for your message.

John 19:14 clearly says it was “about the sixth hour.” In this verse, there are even distinct Greek words used for “about,” “sixth,” and “hour.” John forgot his watch, so he had to guess. This is why he was approximately 2-3 hours off.

Sincerely,
Jason

 

[agname]

It is true that the hours are different…Mark…describes it as being the third hour…John the sixth…there is a reason. John was using
the Roman measurement of time (in regards to the crucifixion.) Matthew, Luke, and Mark for the most part, used the Hebrew system of measuring a day…being – from sundown to sunup. The Roman system was from midnight to midnight. John wrote his gospel in Ephesus, the capital of the Roman province of
Asia, and therefore in regard to the civil day he would be likely to employ the Roman reckoning.

Though, I could be wrong.

 

[astralis]

I think it’s important that Catholics do not fall into the same trap that Fundamentalists make for themselves by interpreting the Bible as they do. Inerrant does not mean there can be no apparent inconsistencies and that the reader must fill in the spaces. If you find an inconsistency, this means you’re reading the Bible from a narrow point of view and must learn more about it, especially how and when it was written. The best place to start is the Catholic Church’s Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation Dei Verbum.

Here is an excerpt:

…However, since God speaks in Sacred Scripture through men in human fashion, the interpreter of Sacred Scripture, in order to see clearly what God wanted to communicate to us, should carefully investigate what meaning the sacred writers really intended, and what God wanted to manifest by means of their words.

To search out the intention of the sacred writers, attention should be given, among other things, to “literary forms.” For truth is set forth and expressed differently in texts which are variously historical, prophetic, poetic, or of other forms of discourse. The interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express and actually expressed in particular circumstances by using contemporary literary forms in accordance with the situation of his own time and culture. For the correct understanding of what the sacred author wanted to assert, due attention must be paid to the customary and characteristic styles of feeling, speaking and narrating which prevailed at the time of the sacred writer, and to the patterns men normally employed at that period in their everyday dealings with one another…

 

[SHEMP]

Jason Gastrich:

Hi Chris,

Thanks for your message.

John 19:14 clearly says it was “about the sixth hour.” In this verse, there are even distinct Greek words used for “about,” “sixth,” and “hour.” John forgot his watch, so he had to guess. This is why he was approximately 2-3 hours off.

Sincerely,
Jason

You didn’t address the question as to which day Jesus died. Did it happen on Nisan 14, as in John, or on Nisan 15, as in Mark?

 

[Jason_Gastrich]

SHEMP:

You didn’t address the question as to which day Jesus died. Did it happen on Nisan 14, as in John, or on Nisan 15, as in Mark?

Hi Shemp,

I corrected and explained an atheist commentary called The Skeptic’s Annotated Bible. This (possible) alleged contradiction wasn’t in the book I rebutted.

I don’t see these scriptures giving us two different dates. I read the assertion above and missed this possible discrepancy. The scriptures surely don’t mention Nisan. Could you or someone share how or why they see a date discrepancy?

Sincerely,
Jason

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

PhilVaz:

One error is when you take the Bible as a modern science text, as it seems to present both a flat and stationary earth, but we need not take those statements literally, just as heaven doesn’t literally have “windows” in the sky where God rains both water and food to his people (Gen 7:10f; 8:2; 2 Kings 7:2,19; Isa 24:18f; Jer 51:15f; Mal 3:10).

Phil:

I’d be interested in reading a quote from the Bible that indicates the earth is flat. Will you point it out to me?

God seems to say otherwise through Isaiah:

“He [God] sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a tent to live in.” (Isaiah 40, verse 22, New International Version)

Now, i’m not a Hebrew scholar, but i have read the writings of those who are who say that the Hebrew word translated “circle” may also mean “sphere.” Also, i’m not a physicist, but i understand that a widely accepted theory is that space (or the heavens) is expanding. Hence, the Bible, here, seems right on with current scientific theory.

I also like the words of Job:

“He [God] stretches out the North over empty space, and suspends the earth over nothing at all…” (Job 26, verse 7, New American Bible)

At a time when the ancient Greeks believed a god named Atlas was holding the earth on his shoulders & other cultures believed the earth was riding on the back of a giant animal such as an elephant or a turtle, Job speaks the truth that the earth is suspended over nothing.

To me, these statements say that the Bible more accurately predicts scientific truth than any other ancient manuscript.

But what do you think, Phil?

 

[trogiah]

It appears that Jesus found errors in scripture. Scripture that was written before his time on Earth but is still included in the Bible today.

Once he was asked about the question of divorce and was reminded that Moses allowed a decree of divorce to be written. Jesus said that Moses allowed such a decree “because of your hard-heartedness” which tries to deflect the blame away from Moses but still leaves us with the inescapable conclusion that there was something wrong with what Moses had written.

In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus begins several statements with the phrase "You have heard it said … " and then proceeds to clarify, if not actually contradict, previous laws given through Moses.

A writer of philosophy once observed that the gospels stand out in the bible as being virtually free of “second rate material.” He wrote that in genuine admiration of the words of the gospels but his words imply that the rest of scripture has “second rate material” I find that I can agree his view and still remain strong in my faith in Jesus as the one who brings salvation to all who listen to him.

To answer your question, Yes I believe within the Bible there are errors, short-comings, and material that fails to inspire people in all times and all places. But I believe the words and deeds of Jesus, as recorded in the gospels, do not suffer from those limitations.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

trogiah:

It appears that Jesus found errors in scripture. Scripture that was written before his time on Earth but is still included in the Bible today.

Once he was asked about the question of divorce and was reminded that Moses allowed a decree of divorce to be written. Jesus said that Moses allowed such a decree “because of your hard-heartedness” which tries to deflect the blame away from Moses but still leaves us with the inescapable conclusion that there was something wrong with what Moses had written.

Do you think Jesus was saying that Deuteronomy 24 is in error, or was He saying that God really had no choice but to have Moses write: “When a man, after marrying a woman and having relations with her, is later displeased with her because he finds something indecent, and therefore he writes out a bill of divorce and hands it to her, thus dismissing her from his house…” (verse 1).

Maybe i’m wrong, but what i see there is NOT a command TO DIVORCE a wife. Rather, it is an acknowledgement that a man may do the evil of divorcing his wife, but if he does, he must do it in a way that brings the least harm to her. Without a certificate of divorce, a woman would not be able to remarry. Since she would likely not be able to work to support herself in ancient Jewish society, she might become homeless, or worse, a prostitute.

But what do you think, Trogia?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

On the topic of divorce, i think it helps to know that in Jesus’ time, there were two opposing philosophies regarding what the Bible taught about the practice:

(1) Rabbi Shammai, for example, was dead set against divorce on any ground, except infidelity.

(2) Rabbi Hillel, on the contrary, said, “A wife may be divorced by her husband even if he has nothing against her other than that she spoiled the cooking.”

Jesus was being asked to take sides in this heated controversy of His day; Matthew chapter 5 seems to indicate that He sided with Shammai.

But that’s just my opinion.

 

[kman025]

Hey Jason,

I think you may be getting closer to the Catholic interpretation of inspiration than you think. I certainly agree that either Mark or John “forgot their watch” or miswrote the time years later when they wrote. This passage plus Paul’s forgetfulness in 1 Cor 1:16 show beautifully that the authors of the Bible did not merely take a dictation of the inspired text word-for-word from God.

9 am and 12 noon are quite different times of day. Also, Mark has Jesus on the cross at 9 am, whereas John still has Jesus being examined by Pilot around noon, which is obviously still sometime before crucifixion. So, one account places crucifixion in mid morning, the other in early afternoon. Personally, that creates too much cognative dissonance in my mind to call it “close enough”. Keep in mind that the Catholic Church has had thousands of men and women, especially monks, devote not just thousands of hours but their entire lives to researching the Bible. They’ve been doing so for about 2 millenium, and our view of inspiration is a product of all their hard work. I look forward to further chats, and I invite you to read the links on the Parasceve that I posted above, as they explain the differences between Nisan 14 and 15.

Thanks,
Chris

 

[SHEMP]

Jason Gastrich:

Hi Chris,

Thanks for your message.

John 19:14 clearly says it was “about the sixth hour.” In this verse, there are even distinct Greek words used for “about,” “sixth,” and “hour.” John forgot his watch, so he had to guess. This is why he was approximately 2-3 hours off.

Sincerely,
Jason

Did you look at this timeline? clawww.lmu.edu/faculty/fjust/Bible/Jesus_Death.htm

The Teaching Company at www.teach12.com has some great college courses. Their history, music, and phylosophy courses are very good but of course most of their religious courses are taught from the so called “historical method”. I made the mistake (maybe not a mistake but it has challenged me) of listening to some of Bart D. Ehrman from Chapel Hill. He is a very effective lecturer. He is one of the companies most popular lecturers. I know he as influence many people in a negative way (as far as Christianity goes). Dr. Ehrman ( teach12.com/store/course.asp?id=656&d=New+Testament ) also points out the one day descrepancy between the synoptic Gospels and John’s Gospel.

If you disagree with the above time line, then why?

 

[kman025]

I think it is very important for anyone reading this thread to have a firm knowledge of Mother Church’s understanding of Inspiration and Inerrancy, because it would help you to understand that confusions by the writers of the New Testament do not constitute errors in validity or inspiration. The Holy Bible is the inspired Word of God, which passed on the Good News of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. Dear Mother Church, who brought us this Good News, teaches that “the Scriputes freedom from error is implicit in their divine authorship. It has always been recognized that the Scripture could contain errors of fact in some area --biology or history-- and yet be inerrant in the required sense that it teaches “firmly, faithfully, and without error… that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to teh sacred Scriptures” (Dei Verbum, n. 11)” - taken from Our Sunday Visitor’s Catholic Encyclopedia’s commentary on Inerrancy.

I highly recommend Catholic Answer’s Proving Inspiration track: catholic.com/library/Proving_Inspiration.asp

as well as newadvent.org’s (Catholic Encyclopedia’s) article on Inspiration: newadvent.org/cathen/08045a.htm

Basically, Bible confusions are not a valid reason for distrusting the Bible, but they do give reasons for distrusting heretical sola scriptura views on it.

Take care,
Chris