Does the Church allow for there to be copyist errors in the Bible?

[Holly3278]

Hello! Does the Church’s doctrine of the inerrancy of the Bible allow for the Bible to have copyist errors in it that don’t affect the theology of the Bible? For example, say there is a statistic in the Bible or a historical passage and it contradicts another passage in the Bible that says basically the same thing. What I am thinking about is supposed contradictions/copyist errors such as the ones below:

(2 Samuel 23:8 RSV) These are the names of the mighty men whom David had: Josheb-basshebeth a Tah-chemonite; he was chief of the three; he wielded his spear against eight hundred whom he slew at one time.

(1 Chronicles 11:11 RSV) This is an account of David’s mighty men: Jashobe-am, a Hachmonite, was chief of the three; he wielded his spear against three hundred whom he slew at one time.

(Ezra 2:17 RSV) The sons of Bezai, three hundred and twenty-three.

(Nehemiah 7:23 RSV) The sons of Bezai, three hundred and twenty-four.

Emphasis in bold and underline is mine to show where the error is in the passages easily.

Now granted, these statistical errors do not affect the theology of the Bible in any way so they are very minor but does the Church allow for this sort of thing or is there some other way of explaining these supposed errors?

 

[Advocatus_Fidei]

(Ezra 2:17 RSV) The sons of Bezai, three hundred and twenty-three.

(Nehemiah 7:23 RSV) The sons of Bezai, three hundred and twenty-four.

I Esdras (Ezra) was written before 2 Esdras (Nehemiah). The list in I Esdras is only those who were carried of into captivity who then returned while the second list seems to be of the total amount who returned, it is possible that another child as born to Bezai while in captivity and so was only included in the second list.

 

[Advocatus_Fidei]

(2 Samuel 23:8 RSV) These are the names of the mighty men whom David had: Josheb-basshebeth a Tah-chemonite; he was chief of the three; he wielded his spear against eight hundred whom he slew at one time.

(1 Chronicles 11:11 RSV) This is an account of David’s mighty men: Jashobe-am, a Hachmonite, was chief of the three; he wielded his spear against three hundred whom he slew at one time.

In the Second book of Kings (2 Samuel) it is talking about Jesbaham (Iesbaal Hachamonites) while in 1 Paralipomenon it is talking about Jesbaam the son of Hachamoni. (Iesbaam filius Achamoni).

So the first thing I wonder is if it is the same man. And if it is it could then be describing two different incidents.

There are usually several explanations for such things but yes the Church also dos allow for copiest errors as an explanation I believe.

 

[Holly3278]

Ok thank you!

 

[NHInsider]

We are not literalists. Not only are we okay with the possibility of copying errors, we acknowledge that variations on a story may have been passed along in oral tradition and then recorded, and that the recollections of eyewitnesses do not always (in fact, almost never) correlate precisely.

And you’re correct, it is not theologically significant whether there were 323 or 324 (or 300 or 800) casualties in a particular battle.

 

[Holly3278]

We are not literalists. Not only are we okay with the possibility of copying errors, we acknowledge that variations on a story may have been passed along in oral tradition and then recorded, and that the recollections of eyewitnesses do not always (in fact, almost never) correlate precisely.

And you’re correct, it is not theologically significant whether there were 323 or 324 (or 300 or 800) casualties in a particular battle.

Thank you for your answer. I know that we are not literalists but I still wondered aobut this. Anyway, thanks again!

 

[patrick457]

I agree with NHInsider. Our faith as Catholics do not rest on whether the text as we have it today is exactly the same as the one that left the pen of the sacred writers or whether the accounts which report the same thing correlate in a 120% precise manner; otherwise, it would have been invalidated, what with the presence of various textual traditions and variants and the differing perspectives of the eyewitnesses themselves. The Church recognizes and fully accepts the humanity of her members; that, I think is one of the good things about her.

 

[Holly3278]

I agree with NHInsider. Our faith as Catholics do not rest on whether the text as we have it today is exactly the same as the one that left the pen of the sacred writers or whether the accounts which report the same thing correlate in a 120% precise manner; otherwise, it would have been invalidated, what with the presence of various textual traditions and variants and the differing perspectives of the eyewitnesses themselves. The Church recognizes and fully accepts the humanity of her members; that, I think is one of the good things about her.

I totally agree! Thanks for posting!