Are There Errors in the Bible?

[Jason_Gastrich]

Monarchy:

Okay,

Gen.18:14"Is any thing too hard for the LORD?"

Jd.1:19 “And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.”

Hi Monarchy,

This verse indicates that Judah could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley. Incidentally, Judah simply perceived that they could not drive out these people. God had already given them the land and told them that they would be victorious in battle.

“So the Lord was with Judah. And they drove out the mountaineers, but they could not drive out the inhabitants of the lowland, because they had chariots of iron.”

Also
Mk.6:5
Hb.6:18

If you don’t mind, please elaborate on the alleged error with those verses. In other words, please state your case.

God bless,
Jason

 

[Jason_Gastrich]

Hananiah:

Was David an unbeliever between the time he commited adultery and the time he repented? Of course not. He believed that God was one, and trembled.

The verse in question isn’t referring to David. It is a New Testament verse written by Paul and referring to unbelievers in the New Testament that take communion without being saved.

Sincerely,
Jason

 

[kman025]

Dr. Gastrich,

I want to remind you that I gave you a Nisan timeline clawww.lmu.edu/faculty/fjust…Jesus_Death.htm from Fr. (and Dr.) Just to refute in my opening question on this subject. I also provided some background from the Catholic Encyclopedia on the topic for you (newadvent.org/cathen/11476a.htm), since it provides additional information beyond Fr. Just’s timeline. In your response to the hour of day question, you noted that the hour accounts were 2-3 hours off, which is taking a large liberty with the text, considering one account has Jesus on the cross at 9 am while the other has him at “about noon” to even begin his journey to the cross. Not to mention, even though your approximation of it being 2-3 hours off is a stretch in itself --because it’s probably more like 3-3:30 or 4 hours-- 2-3 hours off would be a discrepancy.

I think many people are interested in having you, rather than someone else, try to refute Fr. Just’s timeline for several reasons: 1) because while you like to show yourself as an expert with “informed faith”, it was apparent by your ignorance of the Nisan question that you are not informed enough; 2) because we were able to see through your attempt to dress up your incomplete response to the hours question with completely unnecessary comments about Greek words (You have to be careful about trying to intimidate by showing your unrelated knowledge around here, because even little Catholic laymen like me translated the Gospel of John from Ancient Greek to English back in high school, although those and my Latin skills have long faded L ); and 3) because you seem afraid of it, as you have continued with several other questions that were asked after this one and by fewer people than this one while claiming that you haven’t had the time and that you’d like someone else to take a shot in the interim.

I’ve made things easy on you by highlighting the important texts to the Nisan debate. Mark 14:12-31 marks the Last Supper as a Passover meal, with phrases such as “when they sacrificed the pasch… The master saith, Where is my refectory, where I may eat the pasch with my disciples?.. And they found as he had told them: and they prepared the pasch.” Plus, doesn’t the account of the meal follow the scheme of the Passover meal? Thus, Mark would have the crucifixion occur on Nisan 15. Anyway, John 18:28 and 19:14 mark the crucifixion occurring before the Passover, which would have it occur on Nisan 14 – at the same time as the sacrifice of the lambs throughout Isreal. The Catholic Encyclopedia also offers some additional reasons why John’s timing, Nisan 14, is more likely than Marks.

 

[Carl]

*Pope Pius X: Lamentabili Sani: Condemns the following notion: “Divine inspiration does not extend to all of Sacred Scriptures so that it renders its parts, each and every one, free from every error;” *

I find this to be a hard saying. And I don’t see why every single statement in the Bible must be divinely inspired and free from error. I know this borders on heresy for some people, but the attitude of inerrancy of Scripture gives Protestants the Pope they otherwise would not have as they turn every page of Scripture. Moreover, unless these pronouncement by various popes were under the umbrella of ex cathedra, they are not infallible and theologians may still disagree.

Even our Pope does not pretend to be inerrant in all matters. He is inerrant on the matters that count. If a difficulty develops, as in the case of circumcision debated at the Council of Jerusalem, he has the power to settle matters, as Peter did when Paul brought the matter before the Council … Acts 15.

I don’t think any modern day pope would insist that Genesis 1 was inerrant when it describes all plant life as created on the third day, whereas the sun and the moon were not created until the fourth day … not if that pope knew anything about photosynthesis.

Likewise, in Mark 15, both of the criminals crucified with Jesus were abusive toward him. But in Luke 23 one of the criminals abuses him, while the other defends him. At least one of these accounts must be in error.

Neither of these errors, if such they be, has anything to do with faith and morals. Why can’t we allow them as errors while being assured that everything pertaining to faith and morals is inspired by God?

Finally, is the pronouncement of any of the popes on inerrancy of scripture under the umbrella of ex cathedra? If so, please identify the relevant document.

If you’ve already done so, please excuse the request, as it is impossible to read every post in all of these interesting forums. The post # is all I need to know.

Peace,
Carl

 

[kman025]

In Exodus 12:6-11, it seems quite clear that the lambs should be sacrificed in the afternoon of Nisan 14 and eaten that night, which is Nisan 15 because Jewish days start at night. The Passover meal is to be completed that night as well. I will take all quotes from the online New American Bible found at: nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/

"You shall keep it until the fourteenth day of this month, and then, with the whole assembly of Israel present, it shall be slaughtered during the evening twilight.
7 They shall take some of its blood and apply it to the two doorposts and the lintel of every house in which they partake of the lamb. 8 That same night they shall eat its roasted flesh with unleavened bread and bitter herbs. 9 It shall not be eaten raw or boiled, but roasted whole, with its head and shanks and inner organs. 10 None of it must be kept beyond the next morning; whatever is left over in the morning shall be burned up. 11 3 "This is how you are to eat it: with your loins girt, sandals on your feet and your staff in hand, you shall eat like those who are in flight. It is the Passover of the LORD.
In Mark 14:12-17, Jesus’s disciples prepare for the Passover “When they sacrificed the Passover lamb” (Nisan 14) and ate the Last Supper that night (Nisan 15). Jesus was then crucified after sunrise on the continuation of Nisan 15.

"On the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, when they sacrificed the Passover lamb, 3 his disciples said to him, “Where do you want us to go and prepare for you to eat the Passover?” 13 He sent two of his disciples and said to them, “Go into the city and a man will meet you, carrying a jar of water. 4 Follow him. 14 Wherever he enters, say to the master of the house, ‘The Teacher says, “Where is my guest room where I may eat the Passover with my disciples?”’ 15 Then he will show you a large upper room furnished and ready. Make the preparations for us there.” 16 The disciples then went off, entered the city, and found it just as he had told them; and they prepared the Passover. 17 When it was evening, he came with the Twelve.
In John 18:28, Jesus is brought before Pilate before Passover (Nisan 14), making the Last Supper occur on the night following Nisan 13 (early Nisan 14 in Jewish days).

"Then they brought Jesus from Caiaphas to the praetorium. 13 It was morning. And they themselves did not enter the praetorium, in order not to be defiled so that they could eat the Passover."This is reaffirmed in John 19:14: "It was preparation day for Passover, and it was about noon. 5 And he said to the Jews, “Behold, your king!”

It seems quite clear that the two accounts are discrepant. Catholic Bible scholars note it as so. Here is the footnote in the NAB for John 18:28:

" [28] Praetorium: see the note on Matthew 27:27. Morning: literally, “the early hour,” or fourth Roman division of the night, 3 to 6 A.M. The Passover: the synoptic gospels give the impression that the Thursday night supper was the Passover meal (Mark 14:12); for John that meal is still to be eaten Friday night."

I’m running into space issues, and so I will continue on a separate post.

 

[kman025]

Before we get into a big discussion on what the popes have said ex cathedra on Inerrancy, which is a discussion I very much want to have in detail, I want to first allow Dr. Gastrich or someone else to find an error in my thinking.

Now y’all may understand why my first post on the site asked the question: Why don’t Catholics use our understanding of the Parasceve (by which I meant the Nisan 14/15 discrepancy) in our apologetics with Baptists and Fundamentalists?

If anyone is just checking into this thread, I think it is vitally important for you to have a firm understanding of Mother Church’s position on Inspiration and Inerrancy, at least as I was taught it and as it is explained in the Catholic Encyclopedia, and so I will repost that info below. Please let’s hold off on the Inerrancy debate until after we’ve proven error to all, especially Dr. Gastrich.

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 Scriptures 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 the 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.

 

[Jason_Gastrich]

kman025:

Dr. Gastrich,

In your response to the hour of day question, you noted that the hour accounts were 2-3 hours off

I never said they were “off.” One account said “about,” so it is obviously not giving us an exact time.

I think many people are interested in having you, rather than someone else, try to refute Fr. Just’s timeline for several reasons:

I intend on giving one. However, you’ll have to be patient. Repeating yourself and trying to prioritize yourself is inappropriate and if I construe future messages as harassment, I may not answer you at all.

Sincerely,
Jason

 

[Jason_Gastrich]

Carl:

Likewise, in Mark 15, both of the criminals crucified with Jesus were abusive toward him. But in Luke 23 one of the criminals abuses him, while the other defends him. At least one of these accounts must be in error.

Hi Carl,

Thanks for your message.

Right now, I’m just going to answer your question. You had also posted about inerrancy and why/if it mattered. I can address that later because it’s very late right now.

It is entirely possible that the criminal who confessed Christ as Lord in Luke 23 first cursed Jesus, then repented and trusted Him. This would explain why we only see a general statement about the cursing in Mark 15:32 and we also see a statement regarding his faith in Luke 23.

On my CD-ROM, I have put together a detailed synopsis of Christ’s last statements on the cross and why it was likely that some omissions were made. These eyewitnesses surely didn’t stand in the same place throughout the entire ordeal, so some things were recorded and some things were not.

God bless,
Jason

 

[Chesster]

Kman, for the record, I’ve seen two possible answers to this discrepancy, for which even St. Thomas Aquinas showed confusion when it came to this issue.

1. Jesus celebrated the Essene Passover, which occurred on a Thursday. The Pharisees, being of a different sect, calculated when to celebrate the Passover differently, so celebrated theirs starting Friday evening. (This was posted here.)
2. According to Anne Catherine Emmerich’s Dolorous Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ, chapter 8 found here:

Some said that he had eaten the Paschal Iamb on thc previous day, which was contrary to the law, and that the year before he had made different alterations in the manner of celebrating this ceremony. But the witnesses contradicted one another to such a degree that Caiphas and his adherents found, to their very great annoyance and anger, that not one accusation could be really proved. Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea were called up, and being commanded to say how it happened that they had allowed him to eat the Pasch on the wrong day in a room which belonged to them, they proved from ancient documents that from time immemorial the Galileans had been allowed to eat the Pasch a day earlier than the rest of the Jews. They added that every other part of the ceremony had been performed according to the directions given in the law, and that persons belonging to the Temple were present at the supper. This quite puzzled the witnesses, and Nicodemus increased the rage of the enemies of Jesus by painting out the passages in the archives which proved the right of the Galileans, and gave the reason for which this privilege was granted. The reason was this: the sacrifices would not have been finished by the Sabbath if the immense multitudes who congregated together for that purpose had all been obliged to perform the ceremony on the same day; and although the Galileans had not always profited by this right, yet its existence was incontestably proved by Nicodemus;

 

[kman025]

Sorry Dr. Gastrich. The question has been gnawing on me for some time now, and I am excited to now have a forum where I can discuss it. I was just impatient and fearful that the question wouldn’t be answered. Please forgive me. Thanks Chesster for the interesting post. If St. Thomas Aquinas couldn’t resolve the confusion, then I’m confident that it won’t be solved. I guess we’ll all have to be content to leave it as a mystery of God.

 

[Schabel]

While being fairly well-versed in the protocanonical books, I have only a nodding aquaintance with the deuterocanonical books. I’m trying to defend the full canon of 73 books, but am having some trouble.

Here’s a specific challenge I was given:
The claim is that 2 Maccabees contains errors in that it gives conflicting accounts of the death of Antiochus Epiphanes in 2Maccabees 1 and 9.

The Catholic Encyclopedia had a “short answer” that didn’t quite compute with me.

Any elaborations?

 

[Schabel]

Schabel:

Any elaborations?

Sorry to follow up my own post. It’s usually bad form.

However, I found a great answer in this very thread. The third posting, by PhilVas, had a link to a website on this very subject! Thanks, PhilVas!

Now, I’m sure that this answer will evoke even more questions. If you read the article at catholicapologetics.net/apolo_157.htm , you’ll see that it compares these “errors” to some discrepencies in canonical books, such as the deaths of Saul, Aaron, and Sisera. I can fully explain the accounts of Saul’s death. The others?

Thanks again in advance.

 

[Monarchy]

Jason Gastrich:

Hi Monarchy,

If you don’t mind, please elaborate on the alleged error with those verses. In other words, please state your case.

God bless,
Jason

Mk.6:5And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them.

Hb.6:18"It was impossible for God to lie."

would contradict

Mt.19:26 and Mk.10:27 …“With God all things are possible.”

 

[Hananiah]

kman025:

If anyone is just checking into this thread, I think it is vitally important for you to have a firm understanding of Mother Church’s position on Inspiration and Inerrancy, at least as I was taught it and as it is explained in the Catholic Encyclopedia, and so I will repost that info below.

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.

You are persisting in an error about which you have already been corrected. The Catholic Church’s position on Inspiration and Innerancy is precisely the position which Dr. Gastrich is defending. It may be obscure in places, but it is innerant in every respect (not solely faith and morals) and all alleged contradictions can be reconciled.

Pope Leo XIII: Providentissimus Deus, “It is absolutely wrong and forbidden either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Sacred Scripture or to admit that the sacred writer has erred;”

Pope Pius X: Lamentabili Sani: Condemns the following notion: “Divine inspiration does not extend to all of Sacred Scriptures so that it renders its parts, each and every one, free from every error;”

Pope Benedict XV: Spiritus Paraclitus: “…the divine inspiration extends to all parts of Scripture without distinction, and that no error could occur in the inspired text;”

Pope Pius XII: Divino Afflante Spiritu, repeats Pope Leo XIII’s decree: “It is absolutely wrong and forbidden either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Sacred Scripture or to admit that the sacred writer has erred;”

Pius XII: Humani Generis: Condemns the following notion: “…immunity from error extends only to those parts of the Bible that treat of God or of moral and religious matters”;

Vatican Council 1: “Further, this supernatural revelation…is contained in the written books…from the apostles themselves by the dictation of the Holy Spirit, and have been transmitted as it were from hand to hand” (Denz. 3006).

Pope Leo XIII: Providentissimus Deus (I, B, 2, b): “For the Sacred Scripture is not like other books. Dictated by the Holy Spirit, it contains things of the deepest importance, which, in many instances, are most difficult and obscure…For all the books in their entirety…with all their parts, have been written under the dictation of the Holy Spirit” (Denz. 3292).

Vatican I: “But the Church holds these books as sacred and canonical, not because, having been put together by human industry alone, they were then approved by its authority; nor because they contain revelation without error; but because, having been written by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author and, as such, they have been handed down to the Church itself…God inspired the human authors of the sacred books…it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever He wanted written, and no more.” (Denz 1787).

 

[Jason_Gastrich]

Monarchy:

Mk.6:5And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them.

Hb.6:18"It was impossible for God to lie."

would contradict

Mt.19:26 and Mk.10:27 …“With God all things are possible.”

Hi,

Thanks for your post.

In Mark 6:5, he states that Jesus couldn’t do mighty works because of their unbelief. This doesn’t mean that God’s power is limited. Faith activates God’s power. Since these people didn’t believe, they didn’t receive the mighty miracles of God.

It would be correct to say that Jesus could not resolve to do miracles among these unbelievers.

This situation could be seen like me saying I couldn’t walk another step or I couldn’t eat another bite. We’ve all said these things to express a certain feeling. However, we could literally walk another step and we could literally eat another bite. We were just tired and full.

In the same way, Jesus didn’t do miracles among those unbelievers. It wasn’t that He was literally unable, though.

Sincerely,
Jason

 

[Jason_Gastrich]

kman025:

Sorry Dr. Gastrich. The question has been gnawing on me for some time now, and I am excited to now have a forum where I can discuss it. I was just impatient and fearful that the question wouldn’t be answered. Please forgive me. Thanks Chesster for the interesting post. If St. Thomas Aquinas couldn’t resolve the confusion, then I’m confident that it won’t be solved. I guess we’ll all have to be content to leave it as a mystery of God.

No problem. I understand.

JG

 

[Malachi4U]

Jason Gastrich:
…I’m sure you didn’t mean to do this, but you question bombed me. I’ve been in lots of debates and question bombing isn’t a nice thing to do. Plus, this thread was created to address alleged Bible errors.

Right now, I’d prefer to keep this topic as it was intended. Plus, I feel that we are getting off on the wrong foot since you question bombed me. I’m not sure what to tell you, but that you are approaching me incorrectly and (accidentally?) attempting to hijack this topic.

I’ve noticed a trend for some: to always bring the conversation to Protestant/Catholic issues. In a topic about alleged Bible errors, nothing I wrote indicated that I wished to address Protestant/Catholic issues. Therefore, you should probably go and discuss them with people in threads that are designed for those issues. Yes?

I hope you take this post in the spirit in which it was intended…

Part 1, sorry its long but I felt it was needed.

Jason,

You asked for questions and I gave you some.:yup: I know I got some hard questions in there for you too. I just did not like getting redirected to your protestant web site that you sponsor and appear to sell things. I felt many of the members of this forum could benefit from seeing your answers to the many honest questions I asked. I also thought all my questions were directed in accordance with “your rules” for this string which you refer to. I am sorry if you can’t answer them though or won’t without redirecting off this forum.

I never heard of bombing till now and that was not my intent at all. I just wanted some good answers and thought you could do a good job. I guess I was wrong. I apologize for offending you so greatly. I also did not know that asking you the questions you asked for was bombing?

HIJACKING? As for hijacking your site here on this forum I thought we were able to ask questions freely. Many protestants hate the RCC for what it calls control yet I see you doing the same thing and limiting free speech here? Free will and free speech are the Catholic way after all. It appears as though you can only handle questions on Bible errors you have an answer for so I will take your advice and go elsewhere to search for Gods Word and the HARD answers to the Hard questions. I don’t ask for something I don’t want someone to give me.:tsktsk:

I would also like to know from other people on this string if my honest questions were out of line? Please post your comments here? Let me and Jason know how wrong I was for asking the questions he asked from us and ‘bombing’ and ‘hijacking’ HIS SITE, not ours!

Is it fair to get redirected to someone’s own web site instead of answering questions here on this forum for all to see?

Which of my questions was so offensive to you?

If we are talking about Bible errors what better place to start then at the very beginning of Bible errors, the Bible itself? You appear to be a KJV onlyism sort of guy based on the overwhelming evidence on your site? Why? What makes it so perfect and given by God and not the NAB or NIV or AKJV? That’s not a fair question on Bible errors? Then what is?

What has your extensive research shown to prove the NIV or NAB bad and the KJV only as perfect and without flaw? Why not the AKJV? How are these questions not directed at Bible errors?

How many questions are we allowed to ask you? 1? 3? Please clarify your rules here so others do not get insulted like I have been.

If the Bible is free from error then why are there 33,000 ‘Christian’ sects in the USA ‘alone’ today? Why did God not write one perfectly - which He is capable of - so as to be free from misinterpretation?:whacky:

 

[Malachi4U]

Part 2,

What “documented” proof do you have that ALL your answers are correct?

Perhaps you could limit your ‘debates’ so as to answer some of my questions since you asked for them? I don’t like going to a gas station so that I can wait while the attendant talks to someone else on the phone who’s not even buying something.

Considering most protestants consider the Catholic Bible in error and their protestant KJV is perfect, is this not a fair question? Where is the proof? I would pray (it means ‘to ask’) this same question to a Catholic, I just wanted to know the answers. Perhaps a smart man like Karl Keating could answer this question but he did not ask for the questions here either? I don’t care if your Catholic or Buddhist, I just wanted the correct answer, or at least the best one you could give.:banghead:

I quote you in message 1: *"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."*

How did I violate your rules in post 1?

As a RC with an authority given by God to teach us, His body, His Catholic Church, cannot I ask you by what authority you speak on? As Catholics authority is important and I would like to know what authority you have to teach Catholics other then your own? Is that not a fair question to ask either? How can you ask anyone here to believe you if you hide your sources, references and teaching authority? You may have been taught by humans who are devout anti-Catholics and are using this as a means to mislead us? We have a right to know?:nope:

I apologize if my questions were out of line or any of my comments above were. I admit I am a bit peeved at being called a “hijacker” and “bomber” and to go elsewhere and it may show through. I know you are a good man and doing what you believe is correct. That’s why I asked you questions to begin with. I hope you will answer ALL my questions for me and others as I do enjoy your ‘opinions’ on Scripture.:clapping:

A prisoner of Christ

PS, this is a new forum and there were few strings when you and I came here. You had the ONLY string that had this subject matter when I started. If others have started since then do not blame me for wanting to stay with you and being unaware others had been posted

 

[Jason_Gastrich]

Hi Malachi4U,

I think it would be best if you and I put some distance between ourselves. Please don’t respond to my messages or expect any responses from me. By the way you are talking to me, any conversation we have will be an argument and that’s not what I want.

I apologize if I have offended you in any way. That was not my intent. I’m surprised that you have not heard of question bombing, though.

I hope you take this letter in the spirit in which it was intended. We have gotten off on the wrong foot and for the purposes of this thread, I will not be reading or responding to any more of your messages. Feel free to contact me via email if you wish.

As for everyone else, I’d be happy to read any alleged Bible errors that you may find. I’ll answer them and if I don’t know the answer, then I’ll do some research and post what I find.

May God richly bless you all.

Sincerely,

Jason Gastrich

 

[Malachi4U]

Jason,

I took the kids out to eat and whilst they played I decided to give you some simple verses only that appear to contridict Holy Scripture. I hope I have written these to suit you. Here goes a fresh start:

2 Maccabees 14:41–42 “41 But when these troops, on the point of capturing the tower, were forcing the outer gate and calling for fire to set the door ablaze, Razis, now caught on all sides, turned his sword against himself, 42 preferring to die nobly rather than fall into the hands of vile men and suffer outrages unworthy of his noble birth.”

These two verses of Sacred Scripture seem to indicate suicide is OK? Is that right?

A prisoner of Christ

1 Pe 3:15-16 “15 … Always be ready to give an explanation to anyone who asks you for a reason for your hope, 16 but do it with gentleness and reverence, keeping your conscience clear, so that, when you are maligned, those who defame your good conduct in Christ may themselves be put to shame.”