We’ve received many missives and questions squarely attacking the veracity of the bible. We’ll answer a few.
Question #1: Scholars who have had the rare privilege of studying the Bible have identified a whopping 14,800 mistakes and discrepancies. Although yes the bible is coherent, its history is an extremely convoluted one. I spent some time researching the subject a couple years ago and I must admit it’s quite the rabbit hole. How do you respond?
Answer #1: a) It is not a “rare” privilege to study the Christian bible. Everybody can and should and must. It’s the ONLY book with the truth.
b) The discrepancies are usually in translating words correctly from the Old Testament Hebrew and the New Testament Greek. See BAD TRANSLATION. And it’s quite doubtful that there are 14,000 mistakes in the bible. Seriously, why didn’t they make it 140,000 or 1 million while they were at it? Scholars are usually full of it, especially those who hate God.
c) The word of God is not a rabbit hole. If it feels like that, it’s because it’s on purpose. It’s God’s way of nudging us to investigate and connect His thoughts on whatever subject is being explored, and which are scattered throughout the bible. The Good Book may appear truncated and cryptic, that’s also because it’s a spiritual book that can only be fully understood with the help of its author, God. See The Word of God.
Question #2: I read several threads here and was astounded that someone speaking with ‘authority’ stated that the bible was historical fact! The bible is allegorical.
In fact, the garden of Eden, the great flood, etc. – all those stories were stolen from other middle eastern cultures. The idea that there are people in the 21st century who take these anecdotes literally is mind-boggling.
Biblical legend doesn’t equal historical fact.
Answer #2: We, on the other hand, are not astounded at all by your foolishness.
“The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’” Psalm 14:1
That’s the only way to classify the ‘authority’ behind such an idiotic theory.
You wrongfully assume God’s word to be false – as if God isn’t capable of choosing a few men to write His story, when mere mortals rely on historians to do the same.
Consequently, using your mind-boggling logic, Christopher Columbus, Johannes Gutenberg, plus every other important figure in human history are nothing but concocted characters, whose allegorical stories are meant to inspire stupid people.
Further, the bible didn’t steal anything from other cultures. THEY DID. They acted out God’s prophetic pronouncements. Read When Prophecies Echo.
Illogical argument of a prejudicial mind does not equal truth nor historical fact.
Question #3: “Jesus answered him, ‘Truly I tell you, this day you will be with me in paradise.'” Luke 23:43
There is a controversy about a possible discrepancy and where the comma should have been placed in His words. The meaning changes accordingly from “this day you will be in Paradise” to “I tell you this day.”
I don’t know if you agree with the new interpretation, but thought you might consider including it in one of your examples of Biblical mistranslations.
Paradise, so I read, was not a Hebrew but a pagan Greek concept. What is your thinking and research on that passage?
Answer #3: There’s no discrepancy at all, and paradise is not a pagan concept.
a) Whether the repentant thief would be in paradise “today” or “some other day” is not really an issue that deserves to be made a federal case out of. The fact of the matter still remains that the repentant thief would be in paradise – that day or the next, especially when…
“With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.” 2 Peter 3:8
However, our position is:
“Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.” Luke 23:43
Because why would Jesus say, “I tell you today, you’ll be…?” Didn’t Jesus know that what He was saying He was saying “that day” which was “today?” Was there some “other day” He was supposed to say it? It doesn’t make any sense.
So we’re quite sure that “today” was the appointed time Jesus meant when He promised the repentant thief paradise.
b) The Christian paradise is NOT a pagan notion.
Where Jesus is, everlasting life is as well: thus paradise is in the bosom of the Lord. In addition, there are many other verses that point to the Christian paradise reality, both in the Old and the New Testaments.
“To him who overcomes I will grant to eat of the tree of life which is in the Paradise of God.” Revelation 2:7
“And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.” Daniel 12:2
Pagan cultures were the ones that mimicked and enacted biblical prophecies, never the other way around.
Question #4: Why wasn’t the New Testament written in Aramaic or Hebrew? Many believe that the fact that it was written in Greek is a glaring discrepancy when one considers the spoken languages of the time.
Answer #4: The original non-translated bible is in Hebrew (Old Testament) and in Greek (New Testament). In Jesus’s time no one spoke Hebrew but Aramaic, as Jesus demonstrated on the cross: “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” (Matthew 27:46)
Why then wasn’t the New Testament written in Aramaic? Simply because Greek was the language of scholarship during the years of the composition of the New Testament from 50 to 66 AD.
“So the New Testament authors wrote in Greek,” explains The International Bible Society. “They did not, however, use really high-class or classical Greek, but a very common and everyday type of Greek. For many years some scholars ridiculed the Greek of the New Testament because many of its words were strange to those who read the writings of the great Greek classical authors such as Plato and Aristotle. But later many records were uncovered of ordinary people, and amazingly there were the same common terms used in everyday speech! The ridicule dried up accordingly.”
Question #5: The discrepancies you’ve discovered in the bible, listed in your main site of Biblicism Institute under Bad Translation, prompt one to question even following the bible, especially since God has apparently not brought man to make a faithful interpretation?
Answer #5: Why follow the bible? Because you should.
And yes, God has brought man to a faithful interpretation of it, even if you erroneously think He has not. As you yourself already attested, whatever inaccurate transliterations that currently exist in the many versions have been discovered and fixed in our Bad Translation section.
That alone should tell you that God is still watching over His word, even if those corrections have not yet been added to all published versions: that’s why you need to make a mental note of them for when you’re studying the word.
Besides, the entirety of the bible has 2 main purposes:
Those are coherently and faithfully interpreted and translated throughout the bible, no matter the version.
Question #6: Could there be manipulation at the root of some discrepancies in published bibles?
Answer #6: Yes, though it’s limited to the word Jew.
In all currently published bibles the word Jew is what is printed, instead of Judahite or Judean as it should be. However, in the 1985 New King James version, published by Thomas Nelson, Inc., there’s a glaring discrepancy:
“…the Judeans, who both killed the Lord Jesus and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they do not please God and are contrary to all men.” 1 Thessalonians 2:15
That’s the only place in that version where the word Ioudaios is rightly translated as Judean instead of the conspicuous word Jew.
Which prompts the following questions:
Did Jews bribe Thomas Nelson, Inc. to do it? If so, what did they stand to gain? And do the editors at Thomas Nelson, Inc. actually know that the word Jew is NOT in the bible?
All in all, it simply is deliberate manipulation. Because, simply put, the same Greek word Ioudaios is oddly translated two different ways in that version.
And the only place where it’s different is in that very uncomfortable and crucial verse where we are being led, like sheep to the slaughter, to envisage “Jews” (of today, of course) as not contrary to all men and not the killers of our Lord; while the “Judeans,” of the tribe of Judah, were the actual contrary ones who crucified the Lord and persecuted Christians.
Still, in other verses where the word Jew is maintained throughout, the Talmudic Rabbinists (aka Fake Hebrews or Jews) get to be seen as the Hebrews of old – a misappropriated appellation that is full of benefits for them, including the theft of Palestine to create modern-day Israel.
Consequently, yes, the editors at Thomas Nelson, Inc. do know that the Word Jew is NOT in the Bible, and yet they keep using it. See The Word Jew Is Not In The Bible.