Board index ‹ Specific Bible verses, texts, and passages ‹ Luke

[J Lord]

So are you saying that any errors in scripture would all be transmission errors?

[jimwalton]

It depends how you define "errors". I've actually been writing a book about alleged Bible contradictions, and I found 99.9% of them to be specious. Webster's Collegiate Dictionary recognizes various levels and standards of contradictions, so it depends what you're talking about. One calling a color "dark pink" and another calling it "fuchsia" may be considered a contradiction by some, but I think it's a mere preference of term. Two eyewitnesses of a car accident will have seen the event from different contexts, and though their accounts may differ, a detective putting the pieces together will be able to make use of both perspectives. To me this is not a contradiction, but varying perspectives.

Here’s another illustration: What was the #1 pop song in America this year? It depends how you figure it. If you mean the highest number of downloads, it’s one song. If you mean the highest number of radio plays, it’s another song. But if you’re counting CD sales, or numbers of requests, it could be a different song. So if I were to say this song was number 1, and you were to say another song was #1, we could both be telling the truth because there are different ways of looking at it. These are not contradictions, but varying viewpoints.

I make a distinction between discrepancies and contradictions in the Bible. Discrepancies are unintentional differences, either copying errors, misspellings or misunderstandings. Contradictions are intentional conflicts of position and information, so much so that if you sat the two authors across from each other at a table, they would have a debate over the matter. In other words, a true contradiction is when two people oppose each other in the accurate representation of a truth, with each claiming opposing and mutually exclusive truths.

The Bible has many discrepancies in it, and a few instances of different viewpoints, but these are easily resolved, and they actually account for about 98% of what is labeled “contradiction” by skeptics and critics of the Bible. They are not contradictions at all, but simple and resolvable discrepancies.

The other 2% are varying perspectives. We are being told the same story from different viewpoints that sound like they contradict, but a small amount of detective work is able to coalesce the standpoints into a sensible and unified whole.

Now let's go to science. The Bible portrays science from the vantage point of its own culture. God never reveals a higher science to them, or they would never have understood it. So all science in the Bible is in a cultural context. We now know most of it to be incorrect, but they were telling science with dead-on accuracy based on the scientific understandings of their time, which, by the way, is exactly what we do. A hundred years from now our science will have been shown to be incorrect also, but we still count on it and consider it to be truth. They did too, in their era.

So it depends what you mean by "errors". If we want to just jump to conclusions without any rational thought, sure, the Bible is FULL of errors. If we want to use our brains and have a reasonable discussion, I might even say the Bible is free from error.

[Rhymer]

If it will make you stop avoiding the answer, I'll throw in my suggestion. Let's skip the copy errors and just go with the half of Pauls books that are known forgeries. Or the fact that you can't even tell me what happened on the most holy day of the year because there are differing accounts of who was there and what happened in the Gospels. How about the stories merged into some books centuries later? Paul's mis attribution of the old testament prophecy? I mean he has multiple lineages. How hard is it really to admit there are errors?

[jimwalton]

> Let's skip the copy errors and just go with the half of Pauls books that are known forgeries.

Au contraire, most of Paul's books have solid attestation. The ones that are recognized as solidly Pauline are Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, and Philemon. The only ones that are subject to high debate are the Pastorals: 1 & 2 Timothy, and Titus (a far cry from the "half" you claimed). But even these three have massive evidence for Pauline authorship. The evidence is presently in Paul's favor, but the debate will continue for a long time.

> Or the fact that you can't even tell me what happened on the most holy day of the year because there are differing accounts of who was there and what happened in the Gospels.

Are you talking about the resurrection? The different accounts reveal different reasons for writing, but the accounts are fairly easily blended into a sensible whole:

Jesus was crucified beside a road west of Jerusalem. His trial had garnered some attention around town, because he had entered the city a few days previous in the manner of a king. His arrest piqued the curiosity of some of the population of Jerusalem, and because the city was bulging with guests at Passover time, the streets were swollen as Jesus carried his cross to the Place of the Skull. Because Jesus was too weak to carry it the entire way, Simon of Cyrene was recruited to carry it the rest of the way for him.
Very few actually followed the procession to the place of crucifixion just outside the city walls. Not only was crucifixion a gory and morbid affair, but most people were too busy with the Passover preparation to bother. There is no reason that we would expect a large crowd to gather for the crucifixion. Jesus, despite his fame in Galilee, was not as well known in Judea. At the execution site were the soldiers, some of the Jewish leaders, a few of Jesus’ followers (mostly women), and the passers-by.
Jesus was hung on the cross at 9 a.m. on Friday. Crucifixion was generally a long, drawn-out business, most often a process of days from onset to death. People didn’t exactly pack lunches and stay to watch. In the case of Jesus, since it was Passover weekend, it would likely be cut short and ended before sundown. Unlike the general population, the soldiers were bound to stay since the guaranteed death of the miscreants was their responsibility. The Jewish religious leaders may have come and gone, but some of the women who followed Jesus, along with Jesus’ mother Mary and John the Apostle, probably stayed through the whole ordeal.
Jesus died at 3 p.m., and the attending soldiers were surprised by his quick demise. They broke the legs of the other malefactors, but were confident that Jesus was already dead. Just to make certain, they plunged a spear in his side, up under his rib cage, into his chest cavity. Now there was no doubt he was dead.
Meanwhile, Joseph of Arimathea, a member of the Sanhedrin, had requested of the authorities permission to take Jesus’ body upon death and bury it in his own family tomb, within sight of Golgotha. That permission was granted. Joseph and another member of the ruling council, Nicodemus, received the body of Jesus from the cross, and wrapped it as best they could in the time they had before sundown, as some of the women watched. Those same women also observed that the body was not finished being wrapped and filled with spices, so they took note of where the grave was. A stone was rolled over the tomb entrance.
Some of the Jewish leaders were wary of the rumors that Jesus had predicted his own resurrection (especially in the Temple courts just a few days prior to his death, as well as at other times). They requested that the tomb be sealed to prevent tampering and a guard posted to dissuade any activity around the tomb, presumably so the body wouldn’t be stolen. Both of these activities—the sealing and posting the guard—happened sometime during the day Saturday. The Sabbath passed otherwise uneventfully.
Sometime just before dawn on Sunday morning, the earth shook and Jesus rose from the dead. The stone was lifted right out of its track and removed from the entrance. The soldiers all fell unconscious. Jesus emerged from the tomb and walked away.
Now the guards come back to consciousness, see the stone rolled away, notice there is no body inside, and they run away in fear and report the empty tomb to their bosses.
On Sunday morning at about the same time, just before the break of dawn, some women had woken early to walk to the tomb to finish dressing the body for its burial. It was important to them to reach the body before the fourth day, for Jewish tradition held that decomposition set in after three days. The sun rises while these three women are walking, and it has just creased the horizon as they arrive. On the way they remember that there is a large stone over the entrance and ponder how they are going to gain entrance to the burial chamber to finish the work that had been begun late Friday afternoon. (They are probably unaware of the sealing, or of the posted guard.)
Not only to their surprise, but also to their utter shock, they arrive at Joseph’s family tomb to find that the stone is no longer over the entrance, but displaced and to the side of the opening. Mary Magdalene stops in her tracks, changes directions and runs to tell the disciples, leaving the other women behind. This small group of women continues to the gravesite, where they see angels who declare to them that Jesus has risen from the dead. An angel instructs these women to go and tell the disciples to meet him in Galilee, but the women are scared. Jesus appears to them, and they worshipped him. He tells them to tell the others. They leave the scene, but don’t tell a soul, despite what they have seen and what Jesus has said.
Mary Magdalene, meanwhile, has found John and Peter, both of whom run to the tomb in fear, confusion, and surprise. John reaches the tomb first and glances in the tomb. Peter arrives shortly behind him, crashes past him and bursts into the burial chamber. John then follows him in, notices the position of the graveclothes and the head cloth, and then both he and Peter leave the scene to head back to find the other disciples.
Mary Magdalene, who has walked back to the site, now arrives. She is the only one there now, and is still noticeably upset. She thinks someone has stolen the body, and is beside herself with grief and confusion. She looks in the tomb and sees two angels, but, still confused, retires a short distance away, where Jesus himself appears to her. At first she thinks he is a gardener, but Jesus reveals himself to her, and she worships him.
In the middle of the day, Jesus walked the road to Emmaus with two of his disciples, and revealed himself to them.
Later that same day, still Sunday, the day of resurrection, Jesus appears to Peter, and then to ten of the disciples (the other nine plus Peter, minus Thomas). The story continues from there.

> How about the stories merged into some books centuries later?

Not sure what you're talking about here, but the evidence is strong that the Gospels were all written in the 1st century. There is even some fairly strong evidence they were all written before AD 70.

> Paul's mis attribution of the old testament prophecy?

The NT writers, especially Paul, used prophecy in accord with standard and recognized rabbinical practice and Bible interpretation.

> I mean he has multiple lineages.

???? You lost me here.

> How hard is it really to admit there are errors?

It depends how you define "errors". I've actually been writing a book about alleged Bible contradictions, and I found 99.9% of them to be specious. Webster's Collegiate Dictionary recognizes various levels and standards of contradictions, so it depends what you're talking about. One calling a color "dark pink" and another calling it "fuchsia" may be considered a contradiction by some, but I think it's a mere preference of term. Two eyewitnesses of a car accident will have seen the event from different contexts, and though their accounts may differ, a detective putting the pieces together will be able to make use of both perspectives. To me this is not a contradiction, but varying perspectives.

Here’s another illustration: What was the #1 pop song in America this year? It depends how you figure it. If you mean the highest number of downloads, it’s one song. If you mean the highest number of radio plays, it’s another song. But if you’re counting CD sales, or numbers of requests, it could be a different song. So if I were to say this song was number 1, and you were to say another song was #1, we could both be telling the truth because there are different ways of looking at it. These are not contradictions, but varying viewpoints.

I make a distinction between discrepancies and contradictions in the Bible. Discrepancies are unintentional differences, either copying errors, misspellings or misunderstandings. Contradictions are intentional conflicts of position and information, so much so that if you sat the two authors across from each other at a table, they would have a debate over the matter. In other words, a true contradiction is when two people oppose each other in the accurate representation of a truth, with each claiming opposing and mutually exclusive truths.

The Bible has many discrepancies in it, and a few instances of different viewpoints, but these are easily resolved, and they actually account for about 98% of what is labeled “contradiction” by skeptics and critics of the Bible. They are not contradictions at all, but simple and resolvable discrepancies.

The other 2% are varying perspectives. We are being told the same story from different viewpoints that sound like they contradict, but a small amount of detective work is able to coalesce the standpoints into a sensible and unified whole.

Now let's go to science. The Bible portrays science from the vantage point of its own culture. God never reveals a higher science to them, or they would never have understood it. So all science in the Bible is in a cultural context. We now know most of it to be incorrect, but they were telling science with dead-on accuracy based on the scientific understandings of their time, which, by the way, is exactly what we do. A hundred years from now our science will have been shown to be incorrect also, but we still count on it and consider it to be truth. They did too, in their era.

So it depends what you mean by "errors". If we want to just jump to conclusions without any rational thought, sure, the Bible is FULL of errors. If we want to use our brains and have a reasonable discussion, I might even say the Bible is free from error.

[J Lord]

So you are saying that the bible we have now is erroneous, even with the possibility of scribal errors? Because I agree that any contradiction can be rationalized if you start from the conclusion that there are no contradictions. One calling a color "black" and the other "white" can be harmonized if you have already determined that they cannot be conflict.

[jimwalton]

No, I'm not saying any of those things. I feel that you haven't been listening.

I didn't say the Bible we have now is erroneous. I said we have to define "error," because what critics use as a definition is often a straw man.

> I agree that any contradiction can be rationalized

I haven't rationalized anything. Legitimate defining of terms is not rationalizing one's position.

> if you start from the conclusion that there are no contradictions

Whoa, whoa. I didn't START from a conclusion.

> One calling a color "black" and the other "white" can be harmonized

Whoa. That's not what I did. I compared "dark pink" and fuchsia, not claimed black and white can be harmonized.

You've really jumped to a world of false conclusions and false accusations here. Let's have an honest discussion, OK?

[John Opinion]

I'm happy with your definition of "authority" in that case. I wondered if you might be arguing for some special status for the Bible deserved by no other book, but I don't think you're doing that, so that's fine. Some Christians do. My point had more to do with an authority that is given to religious texts that is allowed to stand even despite facts that contradict its claims.

Evidently there are some things in the Bible that are true. But there are some things that aren't. As such nothing particularly special can be derived from it. Some of its claims can be verified, some can be disproved. Insofar as it makes unverifiable claims, we should simply reserve judgement.

[jimwalton]

> But there are some things that aren't...some can be disproved.

OK, well then here is the place to have our discussion. Obviously you are under the impression that there are something in the Bible that aren't true, and some have been disproved. Can we talk about those?

[John Opinion]

OK. How about the logical and mathematical mistakes? The value of Pi is assumed in 1 Kings 7:23-26 and 2 Chronicles 4:2-5 to be precisely 3.0, which is false.

In Titus 1:12, Paul does not seem to be aware of the liar paradox. He makes a statement that has deeply troubled logicians both before and after Paul, but he is apparently unaware of the problem.

[jimwalton]

This is funny. What Internet site have you been looking at? It's hard to imagine you came across this in your daily devotions. : )

The cubit and pi: There were no standards of measure then as there are now. Most ancient cultures used a cubit, which was roughly the length of a man's arm from his elbow to his fingertips. It varied based on who was doing the measuring, but it was good enough to get the job done (Obviously, since some of the structures of the ancient world are magnificent in design and construction). Therefore all cubit measurements are approximations. It is no different in 1 Kings 7 (parallel in 2 Chr. 4). They also didn't use fractions of cubits, except on occasion the half. They had no terminology for 3.1415... cubits, and so it was about 10 cubits from rim to rim and roughly 30 cubits in circumference. We don't even know if the bowl was exactly round or hemispherical ("circular in shape"). Your accusation of a mathematical mistake here is gravely misplaced. Ancient mathematicians obviously knew of the notion of pi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi#Antiquity), but there's no reason to think such a number would show up in the description of the approximate dimensions of a cauldron. Even the ancient cultures, as you can read in Wikipedia, used mathematical approximations.

Titus 1.12: Paul isn't talking about logic, but about morality, giving a well-known example of rebellious people (v. 10). Titus was a pastor on Crete for a religion founded on propositional truth, which is difficult to communicate in a culture where lying is a value. Paul is counseling Titus on people steeped in sin that motivates them to lie to save face, to exaggerate for the sake of pride, or to manipulate another person. All of these things are detrimental to a life of honesty and integrity. If we are going to evaluate the writings of Paul, we need to evaluate them according to his intent, and not a superimposed template. This is not an example of a mistake in the Bible, for sure.