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.