-55 votes

3 Good Examples of Bible Errancy

- Daniel 12:2 raises the prospect of a third class of people, who will not be resurrected to a glorious afterlife, nor to an inglorious punishment, but will simply stay dead. This is not in keeping with the traditional Christian teaching on such matters, which is based on passages like John 5:28-29

UPDATE: Kudos to tfichter who has succeeded in finding a potentially valid resolution for Daniel 12:2 by using a different original language literal translation than the one I used. "tfichter"'s comment can be found here:
- http://www.dailypaul.com/comment/2857934

However, because Gods chosen translators/linguists were apparently unable to correctly translate this verse for modern day Bibles, a red flag needs to be raised, that perhaps Gods original choice of words for this verse was less than perfect. Remember, God claims to have invented the languages and to know the future (this supposedly all-knowing God would therefore have foreseen this ambiguity). And how many of even todays Christians in third world countries could reasonably be expected to search out the correct meaning of this verse? Most of them do not even have access to the Internet. And we still do not know with certainty that tflichter's explanation is the correct one. It's almost as if the Bible was soliciting to receive a black eye here (this seems woefully sloppy).

- The Bible (apparently regardless of which translation we look at) clearly contradicts itself regarding Jesus' last words on the cross:
Luke 23:46 ""Father, into your hands I commit my spirit." When he had said this, he breathed his last."
John 19:30 ""It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit."

Note: There Can Only Be One Final Phrase Uttered. Neither of the above two verses were stated in context to possibly be the second or third to the last phrase uttered by Jesus, but rather the final phrase uttered.

- God's name Yahweh, was given to Abraham (in Genesis), and yet later (in Exodus) was stated to have been kept from Abraham and others:
Genesis 15:7 "And he said to him [Abram], I am Yahweh who brought you out from Ur of the Chaldeans to give you this land to possess."
Exodus 6:3 "I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob [each individually], as God Almighty, but by my name Yahweh I did not make myself known to them."
[The reader can verify the use of the name Yahweh in these verses from the original Hebrew using the online Interlinear translation at http://scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Hebrew_Index.htm ]

Bonus: Christian Bible Scholar Reluctantly Says Jesus Did Not Die On Cross

- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/7849852/Jesus-did-n...

The Positive Message Behind This Post:

Many organized religions, including those stemming from Christianity/The Bible, have misrepresented the most important thing in the universe, which of course is love. Without understanding the true principles of love in the proper context, humanity is helplessly hindered from achieving world peace.

This is why I wrote the article "Sowing The Seeds For A Peace Revolution". It offers the opportunity for the general public to properly understand the truth of this matter. People really ought to read this article in its entirety:

- http://www.dailypaul.com/241312/sowing-the-seeds-for-a-peace...

It is well and good if people wish to offer their two cents regarding the 3+ prospective Bible contradictions discussed throughout this thread. However, MORE THAN A THOUSAND TIMES OF GREATER IMPORTANCE is correctly understanding and applying the true essence of love.

So who then will be the first Christian to acknowledge that to this end I have INDEED spoken the truth?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


You're assuming something that's incorrect. The Bible as originally written is not wrong; that does not mean that it is immune to error in being copied. This kind of stuff happens on a fairly regular basis. Of course, all our copies of the Bible are something like 98% accurate to each other, and the 2% differences have zero effect.

Regarding Daniel, it's not raising any prospect of a third class. Given that Hebrew is a tricky language, and that only two fates are actually mentioned, it's pretty safe to assume that "many" either has no effect, or that it was a simple scribal error. Not a big deal by any means - if you'll notice, none of your "contradictions" actually affect core doctrine to any degree. Here's the site I linked to earlier; it may be of use to you. :)


Gotta say, though, I'm quite impressed by your/your source's attention to detail.

Thanks For Your Level Headed Response

I did read the information from the link you provided, which I found to be very nicely done for explaining techniques which should be employed in resolving possible Bible contradictions. However, some of its attempts to resolve real world contradictions came across as disingenuous to me. For example, it covered many peripheral aspects of the earth round or flat argument, but completely swept under the carpet the elephant in the room which includes the following 2 verses:

- Matthew 4:8 (KJV)
Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world [obviously written by someone who believed the world is flat]

- Ecclesiastes 1:5 NIV
"The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises.

I also found its argument regarding insects walking on all fours to be a stretch. I feel my article covers this contradiction more accurately:

- Leviticus 11:20-23, "All flying insects that walk on all fours are to be detestable to you." [No insect with four legs exists. Insects have six or more legs and feet, and use all their feet when walking. Therefore the words "that walk on all fours" is technically incorrect, and cannot be deemed to be flawless inspired words from an all-knowing God.]

Remember, the Bible declares:

"As for God, his way [or method of inspiring scripture] is perfect; the word of the LORD is flawless...." (Psalm 18:30)

"... I [God] will put my words in his [the prophet's] mouth" (Deuteronomy 18:18) [It is clear here that the inspired words of God were not subject to any alteration by the inspired writers of the Bible. Had this passage instead stated that the inspired words of God were to be placed into the 'mind' of the prophet, only then would they be subject to possible alteration due to erroneous preconceived ideas, misunderstandings, or what have you. So in effect, what the Bible says here, in context with the other passages cited, is that the inspired written/spoken words of the Bible came word for word from God, and therefore are absolutely flawless.]

I also feel it is a stretch for you to insinuate/assume that the 3 Bible contradictions I cited for this topic are likely victims of errors in copying. You do make a valid point that Daniel 12:2 is not [verbosely] "raising any prospect of a third class", even though it does raise this prospect from a technical standpoint. Directly from the Hebrew this verse translates in a straight forward manner as "And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame [and] everlasting contempt." using the online Interlinear translation at http://scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Hebrew_Index.htm

Also, regarding the concept that only the original Bible writings are inerrant, if God leaves the Bible scholars no intellectually honest way to bring the best of our remnants back to inerrancy, then it effectively matters not whether the original was errant, or if only the best of what we have is errant. In either case the Bible effectively does not live up to its own standard that God's "way [or method of inspiring scripture] is perfect". So in either case we can say that what we effectively have is an errant Bible.

- AMAZING PHOTO delineating where UNRESTRAINED CAPITALISM has taken us: http://www.rense.com/general96/whatare.html
- "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."-- Mohandas Gandhi

Human beings are creatures of

metaphor. It's how we express ourselves. It is who we are. It gives poetry and beauty to our lives. Metaphor gives meaning to our words. We don't express ourselves like computer manuals, like pages of pure data, or in reductionistic terms. If we had to speak in scientific terms at all times there would be no stories and poetry, no metaphor. For an example of what I mean by "reductionism", a kiss is not merely the squeezing of the lip muscles.....even though that is all it is scientifically speaking. It would be terribly boring if we were all required to only describe a kiss in scientific terms.

The Bible is not a science manual, it's normal talk that is swimming in the beauty of metaphor. You live and breathe metaphor just like everyone else, and I'm sure you enjoy a good story which is up to its eyeballs in metaphor. See, I just used metaphor, and you know what I mean! You don't come back at me and say, "Stories don't have eyeballs, so what you said about stories is wrong and inconsistent."

Metaphor is actually a better way for a human being to communicate most truth to another human being than just a bunch of facts standing out in the cold shivering in their skivvies (I just did it again, and you understand my meaning far better than if I wrote reductionistically, and ,in fact, if I had written reductionistically you would have thought I was being weird), because we are made that way, we have heart and soul. You, yourself describe the rotation of the earth that makes light and shadow on it as sunrise and sunset, but other people can't do it? Like I said, the Bible is not a list of scientific facts, but a story that talks like a normal person. It communicates. It's full of metaphor and poetry.

Walking on all fours is how we describe creatures that don't walk upright like we do. Metaphor vs test tube, again.

I have been in the Judean Wilderness where Jesus and Satan were. It's mountainous and the mountains are steep. When you are up there you can see a very long way, and you wax poetic, believe me. There is nothing at all strange about using that figurative language to get a certain meaning communicated. The one who said those words about all the kingdoms of the world was not speaking literally with test tube language but was expressing a concept, a concept, with metaphor.

Do you normally use the method you use to pick apart the Bible to pick apart every novel that you come across? Every story? Every poem? Everything people say to you? It appears that for some reason you are going ridiculously overboard with your criticisms of the Bible, and requiring things of it that you don't require of yourself or others or of any other writer or artist. Why are you doing that?

Author's Response To Your Comment

I do not take issue with the Bibles metaphoric use of the words "The sun rises and the sun sets", for the same reasons you do not. However, the subsequent words "and hurries back to where it rises." suggest strongly, if not conclusively, a flat earth world view. People who understand that the sun is always rising somewhere in the world are not going to state these subsequently stated words which denote a false belief that the sun only rises from one location in the world.

Also, Matthew 4:8 states as a point of fact that "the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world". As stated, I do not think these words qualify as being a metaphor. It would be like saying that the phrase "all the kingdoms of the world" was meant as a metaphor to really mean "all the kingdoms of the world". That is just plain silliness.

- AMAZING PHOTO delineating where UNRESTRAINED CAPITALISM has taken us: http://www.rense.com/general96/whatare.html
- "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."-- Mohandas Gandhi


Not really. As I've noted before, the Bible uses a lot of poetic language, and for all we know, Satan took Jesus to the top of the mountain and showed him a vision - it might not have involved a literal mountain at all, in fact. It could very well have simply been a vision. Oftentimes, too, "world" is used in the sense of the Roman world in ancient literature, and this would certainly make sense in this context.

Regarding Ecclesiastes, we still say sunrise and sunset. That's hardly a literal statement.

I think I pointed this out before regarding the four legs - any person could see that a bug doesn't have four legs, and I'm hard pressed to think of any reason they'd say it had four and mean that literally. It just seems to me that it's more rational to assume it's a way of saying "on all its legs."

I think what this dispute boils down to is that you and I have different definitions of inerrant, which is understandable. My understanding has always been that inerrancy means no false teaching, whereas yours appears to be that it means no mess-ups/technical discrepancies that have occurred through copying.

In my humble opinion, to think that it would be POSSIBLE to keep all the technicalities perfectly copied, or to bring the Bible back to inerrancy, is to give humans far too much credit. All things considered, the Bible is easily our best-preserved and best-documented ancient text in existence, and is astoundingly consistent even WITH the translation errors. The Word of the Lord is perfect; the copying methods of people are decidedly not.

Is It Possible?

Jesus was an orator and not a writer. Those people who were effected by his words wrote down as many of his wisdom filled sayings and parables as they could remember. It is possible the earliest bible was just a sayings book and there is historic evidence to support this idea. Although it was more than 200 years ago, Thomas Jefferson worked to attempt to separate the sayings from the story. Why would he do this unless he believed it might have been possible that it began as a sayings book? Perhaps the sayings stand on their own?