Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 19:26, 17 November 2004

This article or section is in a state of significant expansion or restructuring. You are welcome to assist in its construction by editing it as well. If this article or section has not been edited in several days, please remove this template. If you are the editor who added this template and you are actively editing, please be sure to replace this template with {{in use}} during the active editing session. Click on the link for template parameters to use. This redirect was last edited by CheeseDreams (talk | contribs) 20 years ago. (Update timer)

Although some religions believe that the Bible was inspired or recieved in singular events, most historians believe that the Hebrew Bible and New Testament were written over a long period of time. In addition, various religions assign varying degrees of inerrancy to these Scriptures. Because of this, the alleged inconsistencies in the Bible take on an importance in ecumenical and apologetic discussions. Those believing in Scriptural inerrancy sometimes refer to these issues as Biblical difficulties, which they regard as surmountable.

Various explanations are provided for the alleged inconsistencies. Most advocates of Biblical inerrancy hold that they are not, in fact inconsistencies, noting the difficulty of effectively interpreting the text in its context, and sometimes theorizing unwritten histories that allow the story to read without contradictions. Alternatively, scholars who analyze stories, myths, and ancient documents interpret many of the apparent inconsistencies as intentional secular storytelling devices. The majority of Christians, notably Catholics (especially since the Second Vatican Council), hold that the inerrancy of the Bible is limited to the things that God intended to reveal. The alleged inconsistencies do not belong to this group of teachings, or are examples of figurative language. Opponents of organized religion often see these alleged inconsistencies as a reason to reject the Bible out of hand.

Difficulties in evaluating inconsistencies

Besides the major philosophical/theological differences brought about by different views of Biblical inerrancy and different religions, there are many other factors that may make what is an "inconsistency" to one reader seem perfectly acceptable and unproblematic to another. An inconsistency is considered here to be two statements in the Bible that cannot be true at the same time.

As there is not complete agreement among believers as to which books form the Biblical canon, some alleged inconsistencies will simply not exist for some observers, as they do not consider the particular books containing them as belonging to Scripture. Problems of translation can also cause problems that may be perceived as inconsistencies. For instance the word used in Isaiah 7:14 to indicate the woman who would bear Emmanuel means simply young woman in Hebrew, while the Gospel of Matthew (1:23) translates this with a Greek term meaning virgin, thus slightly changing the meaning. Some might term this an inconsistency, while others do not. Further, failure to understand the culture of the peoples of the Bible may also cause certain passages to appear inconsistent to a modern reader, when an ancient reader never would have noticed a problem. Jewish "slaves" were very different from African "slaves" in the New World, even though the same term is used for both.

Some alleged inconsistencies might be better termed "incomplete information". When Cain is banished, he is worried that someone might kill him, yet according to the people explicitly mentioned in the Bible, only his mother and father are alive, and don't seem inclined to murder him. For some, this would be taken as evidence of inconsistency in the Biblical narrative.

In the following sections, several major groups of alleged inconsistencies in the narrative will be discussed, together with explanations for why some persons see no inconsistency in the matter.

Creation

Main article: Creation accounts in Genesis

A completely literal reading of the first two chapters of Genesis often produces the impression of two separate accounts of the same event, with details differing considerably between the accounts. For instance, in the first chapter, man and woman are created simultaneously after the animals, while in chapter two, man is created, then the animals, then woman. The medieval legend of Lilith stems from an attempt to harmonize these two accounts. Some advocates of Biblical inerrancy see two different creations here, one of which was destroyed or ended before the second. Since Wellhausen, the documentary hypothesis provides the explanation for these differences for most critical scholars. According to this theory, the first chapter was written by the late "priestly" source, while the second stems from the very early "Yahwistic" source.

Further problems sometimes cited in regard to the creation account because the text only indicates the existence of Adam, Eve, Cain, and Seth after the third chapter. Nonetheless, both Seth and Cain have children, even though Cain has been banished from the rest of the persons listed. Lilith is sometimes cited here as a solution, but most theorists surmise that Eve's daughters simply were not mentioned by the author.

The same sort of problem continues throughout Genesis and the Pentateuch. Noah is told once to choose one pair of each living creature for the ark, but another time to choose seven pairs of all clean creatures (although the definition of what is clean comes afterwards, in Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy). Again, the strictest proponents of Biblical inerrancy generally interpret the text as written as reflecting exactly what happened in the flood, despite the apparent contradictions, while advocates of the documentary hypothesis hold that two different accounts (the "Yahwist" and "Elohist") are mixed here by a later editor (often hypothesized to be the priest Ezra).

The Nephilim and the sons of Anak

The Genesis account of the great flood indicates that no beings survived other than those on Noah's Ark (Gen 7:4). However, A race of giants existed before the flood, called the nephilim, and the sons of Anak, who were with the Canaanites well after the flood, are referred to as the Nephilim. (Numbers 13:33)

Possible explanations include:

• The description of the sons of Anak as giant and legendary Nephilim was a metaphor to illustrate their great and imposing height, in comparison to the Israelites, who are described as "like grasshoppers" in the same verse;
• The Great Flood of Noah was a large local flood, but did not actually cover the whole Earth as claimed by Genesis, leaving survivors, including the nephilim;
• The Nephilim were angels.
• The claims of both passages are false.

Moral "failings" in the Hebrew Bible

Many of the primary characters in scripture commit questionable or sinful acts. For example:

• Abraham and Sarah are close relatives (they have the same father), yet God blesses their marriage, even though he later strictly forbids incest;
• Abraham had sex with his slavegirl, Hagar, in order to preempt God's plan, and have a child;
• Lot (the 'Good man' permitted to leave Sodom and Gomorrah) got drunk, and his daughters had sex with him in his stupor, although God forbids drunkenness and incest;
• "Among the detestable villains that in any period of the world have disgraced the name of man, it is impossible to find a greater than Moses, if this account be true. Here is an order to butcher the boys, to massacre the mothers, and debauch the daughters.", Thomas Paine, citing Number 31:13, in Age of Reason.
• David, the "man after God's own heart" committed adultery and murder, and instead of punishing David for his sin, God killed David's son;
• God commands Hosea to marry a prostitute, despite the forbidden nature of adultery;
• Peter, the "Rock of the Church," denied Christ three times;

Critics of scripture assert that these facts show that God was not good, and neither were the people of God.

Proponents of scripture assert that these stories show that the characters of scripture (including God) were real, complex, and full characters; that the fact that moral failures of biblical characters are recorded in scripture improves its historical reliability as a "legendary" account would be more likely to exclude the sin of the ostensible heros of the faith; and that God works his plan by calling imperfect people to a higher life. Further, they note that some of the purported "sins" were not actually sins, as Hosea did not commit adultery, only his wife did, and Abram and Sarah's marriage took place at a time when such marriages were permitted.

Various details of the accounts

The various censuses and geneologies in the Bible provide a large number of questions for those who seek to interpret the text completely literally. When the same event is described in two places, often the numbers differ slightly. As examples, according to Matthew, the father of Joseph is named James (or Jacob), while in Luke, he is called Eli. In the Books of Kings, the basin built before the Temple has a volume of 2000 baths (a Jewish measure, approximately 32 liters or 8 U.S. gallons), while the account in the Books of Chronicles cites a volume of 3000 baths. David's census yields a result of 800,000 people in Israel and 500,000 in Judah, according to the Books of Samuel, but 1,100,000 in Israel and 470,000 in Judah according to the Chronicler.

Questions of this kind formed the subject of Anglican bishop John William Colenso's 1863 book, The Pentateuch and Book of Joshua Critically Examined. The book created a sensation; its impact at the time was comparable to that of The Origin of Species. An example of Colenso's sort of analysis is provided by chapter IV, "The size of the court of the Tabernacle compared with the number of the congregation." Leviticus 8:1-4 says that "the Assembly was gathered unto the door of the Tabernacle of the Congregation." To Colenso "it appears to be certain" that phrases such as "the Assembly" refer to "the whole body of the people—at all events, the adult males in the prime of life," which would in turn include "the 603,550 warriors" mentioned in Numbers 2:32. Colenso says there are multiple references to this whole congregation's being assembled within the court of the Tabernacle. Exodus 27:18 gives the court's dimensions as 100 x 50 cubits, which he calculates as 1800 square yards; he deducts 108 square yards for the Tabernacle itself, leaving 1692 square yards for the area of the court. He concludes that, "The court, when thronged, could only have held 5000 people; whereas the able-bodied men alone exceeded 600,000."

For those who support the results of critical scholarship, these inconsistencies stem from different reports of the same event, with the details having become muddied in time. Many people have no problem with considering the Bible to be inerrant in its message as God intended it to be given, while allowing errors on ancillary data. Others seek to explain these "errors" by providing additional information not found in the letter of the Bible to achieve harmony.

Conflict between the Old and New Testament

In the Hebrew Bible, God is often pictured as a vengeful god, a consuming fire that blazes forth on his enemies. In contrast, the New Testament declares that God is love. This apparent contradiction led to the Gnostic religion of Marcionism. Marcion claimed that the God of the Hebrew Bible is different from the God of the New Testament, and in fact, that the God of the Hebrew Bible was an evil god. The vast majority of Christians, however, do not see a complete rupture between the two parts of the Bible, though many advocate some form of supersessionism.

It is important to note that even in the Hebrew Bible, God is described as "kind and merciful, slow to anger". A Jewish response to the apparent inconsistency would be that God is angered by sin and evil, even though he loves humanity and desires the good for them. Christians generally add to this explanation via their doctrine of original sin. By Adam and Eve's fall, the nature of man was injured (this idea is stated very differently in the various Christian traditions), so that especially early man was prey to his passions and instincts. This often inflamed the anger of God. As humankind learned to control their passions, helped along by the Law of God, the revelation of God as a merciful God could continue. This revelation, according to the Christians, was completed in Jesus, who taught his disciples of the love of God for mankind.

Inconsistencies in the Resurrection narrative

Main article: Resurrection of Jesus

The last chapters of the four canonical Gospels are dedicated to the description of the Resurrection of Jesus. Taken absolutely literally, it is difficult to reconcile the order of events that are supposed to have taken place in the first few days after Jesus's death. Critics often charge that this is a sign of the disciples having invented the stories.

Some advocates of Biblical inerrancy have gone to great lengths to harmonize the four accounts, producing a version that they say represents the truth of what happened "on the third day". Critical scholars from a Christian background say that these accounts reflect the state of affairs where several people all have limited information about an event and report what they have heard. Just as a modern-day news story often appears very differently when reported by different news agencies having different sources, so the different sources of the resurrection report do not always agree on the details, although they do agree on the heart of the message. Some, such as C.S. Lewis, have argued that the slight inconsistencies in the narratives improve the credibility of the narratives as a whole, as they are evidence that the narratives were written independently. Proponents of this theory hold that the resurrection reports are based on very early traditions. Some have asserted, however, that some passages (such as Mark 16 and John 21), appear to be later additions to the main Gospel text.

External link

List of alleged inconsistencies

• Biblical criticism