Wednesday, January 24, 2018

Alleged historical errors in the Gospels

1 comment:

  1. Any alleged biblical "contradictions" mentioned by the skeptics usually form as a result of willful misinterpretation of Scripture and/or intentional omission of outside historical evidence or minor details surrounding any events in question. Furthermore, even possessing a document with internal inconsistencies does not necessarily refute the truth or the existence of paramount individuals, claims made, or events mentioned within the text(s). Writers could also choose not to write a series of events in chronological order or to formulate their ideas from their cultural background, but this does not make that particular narrative erroneous or the contents therein mythological.

    What if the Bible did indeed contain seemingly wrong information (this is not the case, though)? It is possible for any contradictory statements in Scripture to simply be figurative. They could even be minor or major divine mysteries. These happenings could either need further historical research or additional pondering for the sake of clarification and elaboration of any ambiguous text of the Bible or simply be beyond the scope of human comprehension. This is really no different than an atheistic evolutionist admitting to the existence of a mystery in data interpretation because of a difficulty such as an incomplete fossil record or biased data used in order to conduct an experiment. The atheist would not simply give on on his or her intellectually grounded beliefs altogether, just as a Bible-believing Christian should not easily relinquish his or her beliefs. Both sides must thoroughly investigate their positions in order to discover the truth.

    The Bible is not merely just the inspired text of the Christian religion. It is not just used for the foundation, construction, and representation of the correct doctrines of Christianity. The Scriptures are also a very accurate historical document and geological road map. So we can certainly view the Bible from the perspective of a reputable historian.