If the Bible has many errors, contradictions and falsehoods, can it truly be the word of an all-wise God? Or is the Bible more a creation of fallible men who are expounding their own messages while claiming God’s inspiration and approval? The answer has profound implications for Bible believers and their claims about biblical inerrancy.
Whose Bible?
Before we attempt to answer the question whether the Bible was the divine word of God or a man-made myth (only men wrote the Bible – women were viewed as inferior and unworthy), we should first be clear about which Bible we are talking about. Surprisingly, Christian denominations cannot agree on what constitutes inspired Holy Scripture. Is it the Bible of Roman Catholics, Protestants or Orthodox Christians? Roman Catholics claim that the Bible contains 73 canonical (authentic) books, while most Protestants accept only 66 because they reject the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical books, and Orthodox Christians accept 76 books. Each denomination claims its Bible is the true word of God. Which one is to be believed?
Christian denominations in the world today agree that the New Testament contains 27 books, however there is little consensus among them as to what God’s word really means. Is it any wonder that with over 20,000 denominations, there are competing Christian interpretations about the means to salvation, atonement, the nature of the sacraments, prophecies, Christ’s Second Coming and other doctrines based on the Bible? If God is not the author of confusion or disorder as the Bible says (1 Corinthians 14:33), how is all this disagreement to be explained? Is it not more likely that the Bible is really the work of men, not an all-wise and all-powerful God? Surely God could have provided better guidance and clarity as to which scriptures should have been included in His book and what they mean.
How was the Bible compiled?
The Hebrew (or Old) Testament of 24 books was written from about 1,000 BCE (Before Common Era) to the beginning of the 1st century CE and was not formally agreed to by Jewish rabbis until about the 10th century CE. These books were accepted as canonical mainly because of traditional use. The early Christians used the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures known as the Septuagint (which included the Apocrypha) that was completed around 200 BCE. The Septuagint translation sometimes varies from the original Hebrew wording (e.g. the Greek version of Psalm 22 claimed by Christians to prophesize Jesus’ crucifixion, says in verse 16, “they pierced my hands and my feet”, but the Hebrew version says “they have hacked off my hands and my feet” (New English Bible translation)). This loss of limbs did not happen to Jesus at his crucifixion.
For the early Christians, deciding on what books to include in the New Testament was complicated. Jesus left no written material before his death about 30 CE. The 27 canonical books of the New Testament were written between about 50 to150 CE. Scholars can determine approximate dates of biblical manuscripts by the material used to write on, the style of writing, historical references in the text, etc. However, there were over 40 other Christian gospels, books and letters in circulation from the second to third centuries (e.g. Gospel of Peter, Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of the Ebionites, Acts of John, 3 Corinthians, etc.), before the canon of the New Testament was finalized late in the fourth century.
......
Modern translation bias
Variations in the Bible’s text are not just a result of limited access to the earliest manuscripts or poor translations of the original Hebrew or Greek. One modern translation, namely The New International Version (NIV), is a product of translators who are committed “to the authority and infallibility of the Bible as God’s word in written form.” (NIV Preface, p. xxxiv). These translators have access to the best manuscripts, yet it is disturbing to note what they sometimes choose to leave out or deliberately change in the accepted manuscript translations used in most modern Bible versions.
........
Conclusion
Humans throughout history have invented gods in their image – from Yahweh to Baal, from Zeus to Thor, from the Trinity to Allah. The Bible’s authors are no different. They borrow themes and myths from other cultures and over time develop their own fallible views about God, and ponder man’s relationship to the divine.
Unfortunately, the Bible soon begins with the terrible genocide of the world-wide flood and ends with the promise of another end of the world scenario at the Second Coming of Christ to judge mankind. Believers in Christ (only about 30% of the world’s population) will obtain eternal reward in heaven, but non-believers and sinners will suffer not just death (the ultimate punishment of the Old Testament), but this time they will face eternal punishment and torture in hell (Matthew 25:41-46; Revelation 14:9-11). Is this not more reflective of the word of vengeful men at a certain moment in history, than the eternal word of a loving and compassionate God?
To read the Bible as the literal, unerring, prophetic word of God rather than as a man-made religious myth, insults our knowledge of history, science and rational thought. The Book is more a history of the struggle of humans to make sense of their place in the world and the moral issues of their times. As such, the Bible is not the ultimate word, but only a tentative beginning. In essence, it is not God speaking, but man.