A major concern occurs when the Bible is considered to be totally inerrant,
in its teaching of theology, morals, beliefs, geology, geography, history, etc.
If it is so considered, then it leaves the individual's faith vulnerable. Even
one proven error can shatter the whole belief system and make the Bible seem
useless to some believers: "If in actual fact Caesar Augustus did not really order a census
while Quirinius was governor of Syria - if it turns out there really was only
one Gadarene demonaic rather than two - then the entire Bible becomes worthless
and every tenet of Christian faith falls flat. If one single discrepancy
emerges, it's all over. This makes Christian faith an easy target for skeptics,
and drives believers to unimaginable lengths to 'defend' the Bible."
1
Problems with inerrancy:
Interpretation Conflicts: This is perhaps the most
serious problem associated with inerrancy. Some biblical passages can be
interpreted in so many different ways, that there is no way
to know which interpretation is the correct one.
People bring different foundational beliefs to the Bible. This causes them
to reach very different conclusions about what it says. One example
involves the roles of men and women:
The folks at The Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood
believe that men and women should be restricted to very different roles
within the family,
church organizations, and the rest of society. 2 Typically,
they view positions
of leadership and authority to be reserved for males only.
Christians for Biblical Equality teach that men and women were
both created in the image of God, and that the Bible intends that they function
in a full and equal partnership. Talents, including the ability to preach
and to lead, exist throughout both genders. 3
Both groups are conservative Christian. Both believe that the Bible is the authoritative Word of God.
Both groups are staffed with honorable, devout, intelligent, thoughtful,
rational people. But both groups find many biblical passages which support their position
and which negate the other group's beliefs.
A second, more widespread, example involves the Christian faith groups in
North America, which number in excess of 1,000. All or essentially all
believe that their group's beliefs are based on the Bible. Many take the
position that they are the "true" church. Yet
their belief systems differ. There appears to be no way to resolve these
different interpretations. Some have suggested that believers assess the
will of God on theological matters. But this
appears to be ineffective.
Translation errors due to source ambiguity:
Inerrancy of the Bible refers only to the original, autograph copies of
each book, as written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek. Hebrew is an extremely ambiguous language. Some
passages in the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) may be interpreted in many different
ways. At most, only one of those translations would be correct, and thus be inerrant. But
there is no way in which we can know for certain which translation is the correct one.
Consider Leviticus 18:22. According to one
source, a word-for-word translation is:
"And with a male thou shall not lie down in beds of a woman; it is an
abomination."
(The word "abomination" is a mistranslation, in terms of modern English. The
Hebrew word means something like "ritually impure". Some other examples of
"abominations" are: a person eating lobster, the offering of an animal which has
a blemish for ritual sacrifice, a man getting a haircut or shaving his beard, or a woman
wearing jeans or slacks, a person eating a cheeseburger.) This passage is normally interpreted in English as something
similar to:
"You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination" (RSV)
That rendering would condemn all male-male sexual activity. Or, if the translators
really wanted to stretch the meaning of the passage well beyond what the original Hebrew
states, they might want to write a condemnation of lesbianism into the
translation, as in:
"Do not practice homosexuality; it is a detestable sin. (NLT)
But it could be argued that an equally accurate rendering is:
"Men must not engage in homosexual sex while on a woman's bed; it is an
abomination"
That is, homosexual activity is only condemned if it is done in the wrong location: on
a woman's bed. Bible translators, scholars and individual believers debate endlessly over
the precise meaning of individual passages such as this one. If people attribute multiple
meanings to various verses, then only one (perhaps none) could be inerrant.
We can try to compare a passage with other similar verses in the Bible in
order to determine which interpretation is most likely. But, we have no
absolutely reliable method of determining which interpretation is true.
The inclusion/exclusion of the Apocraypha: The Bible used by Jesus, his disciples, and the
early Christian movement was the Septuagint (a.k.a. LXX). This was a Greek
translation from the original Hebrew. It included a number of books that
are commonly called the Apocrypha. These books appear in the
translations of the Bible used by Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and
some Anglican churches, but have been deleted in the translations used
by Protestants and most Anglicans. One reason for this rejection was a
passage which implies the existence of Purgatory.
Thus, the range of books in the Bible which are to be considered inerrant is open to
debate among Christians. However, in any given denomination, the official canon
is firmly established.
The selection of the Christian Scriptures: There were
three main movements within early Christianity:
the Jewish Christians, Pauline Christians and Gnostics. Among them,
there were on the order of fifty gospels, probably hundreds of epistles
(letters), and many examples of apocalyptic literature similar to
Revelation. All were considered authorative by various early Christian
groups. When the Bishops fixed the official canon, they selected the
Hebrew Scriptures, and 27 books: four gospels, Acts, 21 epistles, and
Revelation. The concept of inerrancy requires that they did not err in
their selection: that the authors of precisely these 27 books were inspired by God
and wrote without error. This would imply that their
selection process must have been guided by God so that fraudulent books were not
chosen. The Gospel of John was almost rejected by the early Church because of
its Gnostic content. Revelation almost did not make it into the Bible either,
because it described God in angry, hateful terms that seemed
incompatible with the loving Abba (Dad) that Jesus prayed to.
When Emperor Constantine ordered 50 copies of the Bible to be copied, they
included The Letter of Barnabas and The Shepard of Hermes -- two
books that do not appear in today's Bibles.
"The Canon evolved obscurely over many centuries. Books were accepted by some
and banned by others. Books accepted for centuries were rejected later. Rival
church factions excluded each other's scriptures. Personality clashes and rival
ambitions were responsible for the disappearance of much that scholars would
like to read today." 4
Grammatical errors: Biblical scholars have noted that almost every page
of the Bible, whether written in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek contains both spelling and
grammatical errors. Although some spelling errors could be attributed to mistakes by later
copyists, it appears reasonable to assume that some of the grammatical errors were in the
original copy. If one assumes that the Bible is not inerrant, then one would expect errors
of all types to creep into the Bible: errors in fact, errors in belief, errors in spelling
and errors in grammar. But if the Bible is inerrant, one wonders why the original writings
were not free of errors in grammar.
Intentional translation errors: No Bible translation is free of bias.
Essentially all versions are the product of translators who come from a similar
theological background. Being human, they sometimes produce versions of the Bible that
tend to match their own belief systems. For example:
The original Hebrew and Greek texts contain a number of different
concepts for the place where people will live after death: Sheol,
Gehenna, Hades. Some
translations transliterate these place names, and so they appear in the English text in
their original forms as "Sheol," "Gehenna," and
"Hades." The reader is thus aware that they refer to different beliefs
about life after death. But other Bible versions are homogenized by rendering all three
locations as "Hell." This makes the Bible appear more internally
consistent than it really is, and clouds the meaning of the original text.
Many Bible translations contain what appear to be intentional errors in relation to some
acts. Exodus 22:18, in the original Hebrew orders the death penalty for
"m'khashepah" The word means a woman who uses spoken spells to
harm others - e.g. causing their death or loss of property. Clearly "evil
Sorceress" or "woman who does evil, black magic" would be a
clear translation. But many versions of the Bible render this word as "witch," thus inverting the meaning of the original
text. (Witches and other Neopagans are prohibited by their
Wiccan
Rede from doing harm to others.) A similar intentional mistranslation in some versions
of the Bible relates to the Greek word "pharmakia" from which the
English word "pharmacy" is derived. It refers to the practice of preparing
poisonous potions to harm or kill others. "Poisoner" or simply
"murderer" would be an accurate translation here. But many versions of the Bible
invert the meaning of the original text by render the word as "witch." These inverted translations have
caused a few modern-day, devout Christians to persecute Neopagans,
believing that they are following the will of God.
Copying Errors: A small number of conservative Christians believe that
a particular English translation of the Bible is inerrant. Often this is the King James
Version, prepared in 1611 CE. Most believe that it is only the original
autograph copy as written by
the author in Hebrew, Aramaic and/or Greek which is inerrant. This leaves open the
possibility that subsequent manual copying introduced mistakes into the book. Thus, later
copies may be errant. Often, we have no way of detecting where errors or later insertions
have occurred.
Symbolic vs. Literal Interpretation: Not all passages in the Bible can
be interpreted literally. For example: John 15:1 describes Jesus as
saying:
"I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman." (ASV)
In this case, Jesus is obviously not a vine. He is using symbolic language. Other
passages in the Bible are more ambiguous; they might be translated literally or
symbolically. For example, Genesis 3:15 describes Jehovah talking to the
serpent in the Garden of Eden. He says:
"and I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and
her seed: he shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel." (ASV)
Some Bible scholars interpret the verse literally, that the men and women who are
descendants of Eve (i.e. the entire human race) and the descendants of the serpent (i.e.
all the snakes in the world) will hate and attack each other. The phrase "he
shall" is interpreted in the collective sense to refer to all of humanity. Other
Bible scholars interpret the verse symbolically. They believe that it is linked to Romans
16:20:
"The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet."
The "he shall bruise thy head" phrase in Genesis refers to Jesus
triumphing over Satan. As a result of this interpretation, Genesis 3:15 is sometimes
referred to as the "protoevangelium", the first gospel. 3
There are many Bible Passages that have been interpreted literally by some groups and
symbolically by others. This generally leads to conflict, and has historically led to many
church schisms.
Multiple Authorship: Some passages in the Bible appear at first glance
to be completely written by a single author: e.g. the Pentateuch (Genesis to Deuteronomy)
state that they were written down by Moses. The book of Isaiah was written by Isaiah; the Book of Daniel by Daniel; the Gospel of Mark by a single author. But
analysis of content and style reveals that the Pentateuch was written by several authors from different traditions over many
centuries. The books were probably edited later by still other unknown persons. Isaiah
also appears to be written by multiple authors. The Book of Daniel appears to have been
written over 4 centuries after Daniel's death by an unknown author. The Gospel of Mark
originally ended abruptly at Mark 16:8. Some other writer subsequently added verses 9
to 20, to make a "longer ending" to Mark; it was
apparently based on Luke, John and some other sources. 5
Another writer created a "shorter ending" consisting of two sentences after
verse 8. It was a later addition, probably based on Matthew. Some translations include
both endings. Still other Bible versions include additional material after verse 14. All
of this multiple authorship raises the question whether the later additions by unknown
authors are inerrant, or merely attempts by later believers to augment the text to better
match some early Christian group's belief system.
Multiple Versions: There appears to have been two versions of
Mark: "Secret Mark", "for those who had
attained a higher degree of initiation in to the church than the common crowd."
6
and the shorter, edited version that has survived to the present time. The latter was the
freely available, public version, and was probably a later, smaller version. This raises
the question as to which version should be considered inerrant.
More interpretation conflicts: Sometimes, the Bible will contain passages
whose interpretation is unclear or ambiguous. For example, the Bible contains many references to
parents using physical punishment in order to discipline their children. All
but one of these passages come from the book of Proverbs. The
book itself says that they were written by Solomon. The author appears to consider
corporal punishment of children as the preferred method of discipline. One can assume that
he followed his own advice in the raising of his son Rehoboam. The son became a widely
hated ruler after his father's death. He had to make a hasty retreat to avoid being
assassinated by his own people: 1 Kings 12:13-14 and 1 Kings
12:18 describe that he was so evil towards the people that they killed his
representative. Ultimately, Rehoboam fled Jerusalem to avoid being assassinated by the
subjects that he mistreated. The passages from Proverbs and 1 Kings can be interpreted in
at least two ways:
Some conservative Christians accept the verses in Proverbs at their face value: Proverbs
requires all believers to use corporal punishment on their children as the preferred
method of discipline.
Liberal Christians might interpret Proverbs as accurately representing Solomon's
parenting style, and interpret 1 Kings as indicating the horrible outcome of that form of
discipline. Thus, 1 Kings is a warning to parents to not follow Solomon's
advice, to avoid hitting their children, and to rely on other forms of discipline.
Since these two interpretations are mutually exclusive, at least one is probably false.
But a consensus cannot be reached at this time as to which is in error. The secular belief
that hitting children is counter-productive appears to be
gaining ground at this time.
Internal Conflicts: Various passages in the Bible appear to be in
conflict with each other. To liberal Christians, these disagreements are inevitable
because they believe that the various books of the Bible were written over a period of
about 1 millennium, by authors with very different religious views. But to conservative
Christians who believe in Biblical inerrancy, conflicts present a problem. If all passages
of the Bible are inerrant, then no passage can truly contradict any other passage. Most
conflicts can be handled by interpreting one passage in its literal sense, and other,
apparently conflicting passages either in some narrow sense or symbolically. Some passages
cannot be harmonized in this way. Conservatives usually believe that the latter passages
can be resolved, but not with our present knowledge. Books harmonizing hundreds of
apparent conflicts have been written. One attempts to solve over 500 such difficulties.
7
Nature of Truth - Absolute or Relative: It is sometimes not obvious whether a portion of the
Bible refers only to a particular society and era, or whether its teaching is applicable
for all locations and all time. For example:
St. Paul in 1 Corinthians, chapters 11 and 14 advises the Christians at Corinth to
restrict the roles of women to positions without power and under the domination of men.
These passages are often quoted in debates over whether women can
be ordained as clergy. Other passages, particularly from
the Hebrew Scriptures, describe the position of women as greatly inferior to men, often as
an item of property. Some liberal Christians believe that Paul's instructions to the
church at Corinth was in response to a specific problem in that city in which women were
disrupting services; they might interpret limits on the roles of women in the Hebrew
Scriptures as being accurate representations of early Jewish society. But they might also
believe that such passages are not applicable in today's society where limitations and
restrictions on women have been largely removed after decades of effort by the feminist
movement. Many conservative Christians regard St. Paul's instructions to the Corinthians
as being equally valid today for all persons.
The Bible has many references to slavery. Much of the conflict
that led to the American civil war was fueled by differences in interpretation of Biblical
passages on this topic. Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America,
said that slavery "was established by
decree of Almighty God...it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis
to Revelation."Various Christian leaders of the time made such
statements as: "There is not one verse in the Bible inhibiting slavery, but many
regulating it. It is not then, we conclude, immoral." (Rev. Alexander Campbell),
and "The right of holding slaves is clearly established in the Holy Scriptures,
both by precept and example." (Rev. R. Furman). Abolitionist forces argued that
the teachings of Jesus made the ownership of human beings a sin. Many of the arguments
over slavery revolved around whether the institution was an acceptable practice for all
times and all societies, or whether it was no longer permissible in 19th century North
America. Clearly, the matter could not be resolved theologically at the time. It was
eventually settled by a political consensus in Canada and, much later, by a civil war in
the US.
Conclusions:
The combination of source ambiguity, intentional translation errors, copying errors,
symbolic vs. literal interpretation, multiple authorship, multiple versions,
interpretation conflicts, internal conflicts, the nature of truth, etc. make it quite
impossible to prove that a particular passage in an English translation of the Bible
is inerrant. Or if it is regarded as inerrant, it is not necessarily obvious how the
passage is to be interpreted.
One can hope to minimize the effect of intentional translation errors by accessing
many versions of the Bible to compare the full range of translations. One can hope to
understand passages better by comparing verses on the same topic in other parts of the
Bible in order to get a consensus of what the Biblical authors wrote. But we are largely
stuck with the remaining factors.
