Twenty Ways to Answer A Fool [16]

Is the Bible a reliable guide to Christ’s teaching’s and is the basic text riddled with contradictions?

I am coming down to my final two posts responding to Chaz Bufe, the Christ-hating, blues guitar picker and his article 20 Reasons to Abandon Christianity.

I put points 18 and 19 together because they have a similar challenge to the integrity and veracity of Scriptures Rather than reproducing the two points in whole, they can be read HERE and HERE.

Haters of Christianity really amuse me at times.  Here you have individuals who insist that the Bible is an error-filled, bigoted, homophobic religious text, that God doesn’t exist, and that Jesus never lived, pretend to be the most “learned” scholars on those very subjects they despise. So much so they want to correct me, the buffoonish religious crank, what it is I should really know about my own faith.

If God is supposed to be a myth and the Bible an old, unreliable guide to anything relevant in our modern world, you would think the skeptic wouldn’t bother wasting time immersing himself in anything related to God and the Bible. I expect blues guitar festivals to be Chaz’s field of expertise. However, when the subjects of textual criticism, what the Bible teaches, and the historicity of the biblical record is raised, our atheist reveals he is also a “well rounded” expert. If you even attempt to defend the Bible as reliable against him, he’ll show how you’re an idiot.

For example, under point 18, Chaz throws out a number of factoids about the NT Gospels not being a reliable guide to Christ’s teaching. He writes, “These texts [meaning the Gospel narratives] have been amended, translated, and re-translated so often that it’s extremely difficult to gauge the accuracy of current editions.” Oh really? Since when did our amateur guitar player learn all there was to know about the ancient Hebrew and Greek languages and the various translations developed from them? I may be going out on a limb here, but I would venture a guess and say that Chaz is about as much of an expert in the accuracy of the Gospels as Dan “Da Vinci Code” Brown.

Of course a guy like Chaz would never allow his claim to be honestly scrutinized. The fact is, the real textual critics of the world, which are many, even if they come from a non-evangelical background, all agree that the vast amounts of textual evidence we have for the NT alone is remarkably consistent in its content. That in spite of the textual variants, translations, and editions produced over the centuries. When the store house of just the NT manuscripts alone are compared together with what we hold now in our hands as Scripture, the message remains unaltered. The record of Christ’s life and teaching has not been lost or tampered with and it is most certainly reliable.

Only psuedo-intellectual crackpots like the Jesus Seminar folks Chaz appeals to as his authority are the ones who deny the factuality of the textual evidence as it testifies to the over all integrity of the NT. That is because they all have as a driving presupposition a deep seated pathology against God and the Christian faith. Those folks are dishonest with the facts and have an agenda to promote.

A more current day example is Bart Ehrman, NT professor at the university of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Atheists often appeal to him as a reliable critic of the NT text because he graduated from Princeton and is considered the “heir” of NT textual scholar, Bruce Metzger.

In nearly all of his popular level publications and lectures, Ehrman retells the story of how he was once a born-again evangelical who affirmed the inerrancy and infallibility of Scripture. He had an interest to really knowing the Bible and attended Moody Bible Institute in pursuit of that goal. It was not until he began his post-graduate studies in NT textual criticism, however, that he “saw the light.” He realized he had been misled by his evangelical pastors and friends about the veracity of the NT text and thus he was carried kicking and screaming against his will to become a shrieking apostate. He even recounts how during his days at Moody Bible Institute none of his teachers provided any solid defense of the Bible in light of the overwhelming textual evidence against infallibility and inerrancy.

But I happen to know individuals who attended Moody at exactly the same time Ehrman did and they tell me he is lying. One particularly reliable person who attended Moody the same time Ehrman did, told me he had the same questions Ehrman claims he had about the biblical text. Contrary to Ehrman’s assertion, the NT professors did an outstanding job of dealing with the so-called over-whelming evidence against inerrancy and infallibility.

So there is certainly something else at work here other than textual evidence. Textual evidence doesn’t cause a person to lie against his schooling and twist around the historical interpretation of the manuscripts so as to misrepresent what they really tell us about the formation of the NT. That is a moral problem not at all related to evidence.

Then moving on to Chaz’s next point, the claim is that the Bible is riddled with contradictions. Out of all of the criticisms a Christian will hear from skeptics, pretty much all of them start with the assertion that the Bible cannot be believed because it is full of contradictions. Chaz even lists three to prove his point.

debatemeI remember that many of my conversations I had regarding “contradictions” in Scripture took place after dinner during the holidays like Thanksgiving or Christmas while watching football. Usually it was with a snooty relative, like a curmudgeonly older cousin you only see once or twice a year. As a young believer I would quickly become discombobulated with the examples of “contradictions,” and my attempt to throw out some simplistic response never really satisfied the person. The encounter would cause me to do some studying, but when I thought I had a better answer, at the next holiday get together the person would have an entirely different set of “contradictions” to rub in my face.

I have since developed a better approach when dealing with those sorts of challenges to the biblical text.

One of the first things I learned is that folks like Chaz place an absurd literary standard of perfection upon the Bible. The standard is so ridiculously outside the realm of reality that no written historical document could comply, let alone the Bible. So when someone tells me the Bible is full of contradictions, I will ask the person to define for me what he means by “contradiction.” The number of times I have asked for a definition, the person is taken aback, because no Christian had before ever thought to ask the person to define his criteria for “contradiction.” The normal, everyday understanding of a contradiction is when two propositions are contrary to one another and produce opposite conclusions. In logical terms, “A” cannot be “A” and “non-A” in the exact same way at the same time.

The critic’s understanding of “contradiction” rarely falls under the everyday working definition. That is clearly demonstrated when he pulls examples from two separate contexts, perhaps even being written by two different biblical authors writing to separate readers during different time periods. Chaz does exactly that when he compares a passage in Genesis with one in Exodus, and then John as well as Genesis and James and declares how they “contradict” each other. The closest he comes to giving an honest comparison is with quoting from Jeremiah, but he compares passages that are 14 chapters apart without any consideration of who the prophet was speaking to and why. He does the same with quotations from Jesus as recorded by John, but again, the examples are three chapters apart and Jesus is addressing two entirely different audiences.

Once I have the critic explain to me what he means by “contradiction,” I then ask the person to show me the one hands down, undeniable contradiction he thinks utterly demonstrates the Bible is is error. The reason I ask for the ultimate contradiction is because in debates with skeptics on the subject, the person will toss out an alleged contradiction, and when you provide an answer to it, the person has already moved on to the next one on his list. Asking for the ultimate example cuts past having to put out a bunch of little fires.

Yet, even with this modified approach I always keep in mind the fact that a hardened biblio-skeptic like Chaz is not looking for answers. He is an unbeliever merely wanting to make a mockery of the Christian and the Bible, as well as continue in his rebellion against God.

With a skeptic like Chaz, it truly is not a matter of whether there are answers to his criticisms. It is a matter of whether or not he will submit himself to God’s authority as revealed in Scripture. He is operating with an unregenerate mind; one that is darkened in sin and has no interest in the truth, and what truth he is given, he will reject, suppressing the truth by explaining it away with some clever argument he devises. Hence, the Bible in the mind of the unregenerate sinner will never be a “reliable” guide to Christ’s teaching and no one will ever satisfactory answer his list of “contradictions.”


17 thoughts on “Twenty Ways to Answer A Fool [16]

  1. Validity with OT myths and theology aside, the Bible is a very valuable historical document and has been a valuable tool for archaeologists and cultural anthropologists. The historical Jesus, the Disciples and Paul’s travels are undeniably true from a purely secular history.

  2. Pingback: Mid-May Presuppositional Apologetics’ Links Round Up | The Domain for Truth

  3. This is a mute point when you consider that there is no evidence to confirm who the writters of the Bible were. The basic fact is that the Bible was written by names only.

  4. Face up to facts. After considering religious history, including the gods that came before the Christian God or Mohammad how could anyone with simple logic even contemplate that the bible is the absolute truth is beyond me. If anyone had written similar stories within the last century it would have been in the fiction section and made into a movie like Harry Potter. Considering history, science, news reports etc. are manipulated to suit the company or writers ideology, why would you expect people to believe everything you read in the bible?

  5. So says the guy who wants us to believe in spontaneous regeneration of life on earth from inanimate matter brought here by comets. Good one.

  6. OK fivepointer. The elements were and still are critical to life no matter how they got to the planet so says this guy and the most credible scientists on the planet. Have you got a more logical explanation to set all these scientist guys on the right path??? Maybe the planet was created in 7 days with a magic wand!

  7. Credible? That’s a good one. You sure do put a lot of blind faith into that credible scientist who has an extremely limited perspective of how things work. Still magic bean science.

  8. Blind Faith…… that is hypocrisy, have you checked out the underlying facts on what you base your “faith” on? You believe and accuse thousands of credible scientists for using magic. If you were to express this view in the days of Isaac Newton you may have had some credibility, however expressed in 2015 it is a most deluded and illogical comment especially when you are likely to be sitting behind a computer typing this rubbish and using a mobile phone, medicines and many other amazing devices credited to scientific and technological achievements. Magic bean science is about talking snakes, burning bushes, returning from the dead etc. You are caught in a time warp of your own making, exactly like those other religious terrorist idiots fighting for the so called Islamic State. Believe in a deity if you must, but take a look around you and stop ignoring the real world.

  9. – have you checked out the underlying facts on what you base your “faith” on?

    Yes, I have. Have you?

    – If you were to express this view in the days of Isaac Newton you may have had some credibility, however expressed in 2015 it is a most deluded and illogical comment especially when you are likely to be sitting behind a computer typing this rubbish and using a mobile phone, medicines and many other amazing devices credited to scientific and technological achievements.

    You do know that Isaac Newton was a Christian, right? He only laid the foundation of physics. What do computers, mobile phones, and medicine have anything to do with the reliability of the Gospel narratives? You’re seriously deluded, but hey, you have your authorities you put your trust in, so who am I to question your faith.

  10. Can you please tell what these underlying facts are that you base your faith on? I do not have a “faith” and I do not care if Isaac Newton was a Christian. The computers mobile phones, and medicine were to highlight your ridiculous magic bean and limited perspective scientist comments. There is no argument about the Gospel narratives, it is what you believe as being realistic and logical based on common sense. Just like any written media or any story that is supposed to be based on fact much of it will be fabricated to satisfy the writer and the unknown between the facts in the story, designed to add credibility, suspense or even some entrainment value. The fact that people worship each and every word in the bible regardless of the interpretation and blindly ignore factual scientific discoveries is beyond my comprehension. As I do not use trust and faith but seek only the facts, how does this make me deluded?

  11. Pingback: Articles on Apologetics and Evangelism | hipandthigh

  12. Thanks! My husband directed me to your blog, to this very article only to show me that there is another person in the world who uses the word “discomboblulated” lol, but seriously, I wasn’t aware of the huge number of people who thought they were Christians and now consider themselves atheists until it (falling away) happened to a blogger friend of mine and I truly believe it is that prophecy that is being fulfilled (of the great falling away occurring just prior to the Lord’s returning. I too have been having dialogues with atheists, many claiming to have been saved and now being abandoned by a God who doesn’t exist….yeah I know it doesn’t make sense to me either.

  13. Falling away is a prophecy you say. God has been returning to the earth on a number of occasions due to a prophecy in the bible and he has not managed to keep one of those appointments, what makes this one any better? It appears that people are either abandoning religion all together or joining the Islamic faith as this is the only religion that has gained any popularity this decade. What does the bible prophesise about that?

    Is it any wonder that people are ditching religion in the Western world because it does not make sense in this modern world and if God does not hurry up and do something he will end up with no followers at all?

  14. “I too have been having dialogues with atheists, many claiming to have been saved and now being abandoned by a God who doesn’t exist….yeah I know it doesn’t make sense to me either” ~ Susan

    What this demonstrates to me is that when you dialogue with atheists who were former believers, you don’t listen to what they are actually saying. Seriously, if you can’t wrap your mind around something so simple as someone changing his or her mind about something, then sure, it will never make sense to you. As for “discomboblulated”, what marvelous timing, because I’d say that your view of the believer-turned-atheist position is discomboblulated.

Leave me a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s