The integrity of Scripture stands at the heart of the Christian faith. As 2 Timothy 3:16 affirms, “All Scripture is inspired by God,” meaning it is the very breath of God, fully authoritative, wholly truthful, and entirely trustworthy. Nevertheless, skeptics and critics—ranging from secular historians and atheists to liberal theologians—have claimed that the Bible contains errors, contradictions, or inaccuracies. These alleged errors often focus on supposed discrepancies in historical accounts, numerical data, scientific claims, and theological statements. For the Bible-believing Christian who adheres to the historical-grammatical method and holds to the verbal plenary inspiration of Scripture, such accusations are not to be dismissed or glossed over but examined with rigor and precision.

This article offers a detailed defense of the inerrancy of the original Scriptures, demonstrating that what critics often present as errors are the result of misinterpretations, translation issues, or ignorance of ancient linguistic, cultural, and historical contexts. With a commitment to the authority and sufficiency of God’s Word, this study provides careful responses to major categories of alleged biblical errors.

Defining Inerrancy and the Nature of Scripture

Before addressing specific accusations, it is critical to define what is meant by “inerrancy.” Inerrancy asserts that the Bible, in its original autographs, is without error in everything it affirms, whether historical, theological, moral, or scientific. This does not mean that every copy or translation is error-free; rather, through the discipline of textual criticism, we possess a Greek and Hebrew text that reflects the original wording with 99.99% accuracy.

Inerrancy does not require modern precision in every detail, nor does it demand uniformity in literary style or perspective. The Bible is composed of 66 books written by around 40 human authors over approximately 1,600 years, yet it contains no factual contradictions or historical mistakes in its original text. Jesus affirmed the full truthfulness of Scripture (John 17:17) and not a single New Testament writer suggests that any portion of Scripture contains error.

Alleged Contradictions in the Gospels

One of the most common criticisms of biblical reliability concerns variations among the Gospel accounts. Skeptics often cite differences in chronology, wording, or the number of individuals present in various events. A proper examination shows that these are not contradictions but complementary perspectives.

Consider the resurrection narratives. Matthew 28:1–10, Mark 16:1–8, Luke 24:1–12, and John 20:1–18 present different details. For instance, Matthew mentions one angel (28:2), while Luke notes two (24:4). Is this an error? Not at all. Matthew does not say “only one” angel appeared. Where there are two, there is always one. Different evangelists emphasize different aspects based on purpose and audience.

Another example is the healing of the blind men near Jericho. Matthew 20:29–34 reports two men healed, while Mark 10:46–52 and Luke 18:35–43 mention only one, named Bartimaeus. Again, this is not a contradiction. Mark and Luke focus on the more prominent or vocal individual. Matthew includes both. The accounts are harmonious when one does not impose artificial expectations of exhaustive reporting on every Gospel writer.

Chronological differences, such as the cursing of the fig tree (Mark 11:12–14, 20–21 vs. Matthew 21:18–19), are often raised. However, the order of narration is not always meant to be strictly chronological. Ancient biographical writing allowed for thematic arrangement, as seen throughout both Testaments. When understood in this context, the Gospels present a consistent, reliable testimony to the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Numerical and Statistical Discrepancies

Critics frequently cite numerical differences between Old Testament accounts, such as the differing figures in 2 Samuel 24:9 and 1 Chronicles 21:5 regarding David’s census. The former states 800,000 valiant men in Israel and 500,000 in Judah; the latter gives 1.1 million in Israel and 470,000 in Judah. Is this a contradiction?

Not necessarily. These texts may be referencing different groupings: “valiant men” may be a subset of the total, or the Chronicler may include additional auxiliary forces not counted in Samuel’s record. Furthermore, ancient Hebrew numbering could be susceptible to scribal copying errors due to the similarity of numerical characters, though the textual tradition has preserved both readings.

Similarly, 1 Kings 7:26 says Solomon’s sea held “2,000 baths,” while 2 Chronicles 4:5 says “3,000 baths.” This can be reconciled by distinguishing between how much it normally held (2,000) and its maximum capacity (3,000). These are not errors but differences in descriptive focus.

Scientific Criticisms and Misunderstood Cosmology

Some have criticized the Bible for alleged scientific errors. One common target is the description of the sun standing still in Joshua 10:12–13. Critics claim this reflects a geocentric, primitive cosmology. However, this argument collapses under closer scrutiny. The text describes the event phenomenologically—as it appeared to the observer. Modern meteorologists still speak of “sunrise” and “sunset” without suggesting the sun revolves around the earth.

Moreover, the miracle involved divine intervention, not a natural phenomenon requiring scientific explanation. The assertion that this text is scientifically inaccurate presumes a naturalistic worldview that precludes the supernatural. That is not an error in Scripture but in the assumptions of the critic.

Genesis 1 is also frequently challenged for its creation order. Critics argue that plants appear before the sun (Genesis 1:11–19), which they claim is scientifically impossible. However, the text does not teach a scientific model but a divine creative order. Light existed before the sun, which is entirely possible if the source of light was initially independent of the sun—God Himself (Genesis 1:3). Furthermore, plant life does not require photosynthesis from the sun within a short timeframe of one literal day between verses 11 and 19.

Moral Difficulties and Ethical Objections

Certain biblical narratives are described as morally problematic—such as the commands to destroy the Canaanites (Deuteronomy 20:16–18) or imprecatory Psalms that call for judgment (Psalm 137:9). These are not errors but rather misunderstood in light of the holiness of God and the depravity of the Canaanites, who were steeped in idolatry, child sacrifice, and perversion.

God’s command to destroy the inhabitants of Canaan was a just act of judgment, not ethnic cleansing. Genesis 15:16 affirms that the “iniquity of the Amorite” had to reach full measure before judgment fell. The destruction was not indiscriminate but a judicial sentence executed by Israel under divine mandate. Furthermore, the context of the covenant and the uniqueness of Israel’s theocratic mission must be understood before drawing moral conclusions.

Imprecatory Psalms are similarly misunderstood. They are not expressions of personal vengeance but prophetic declarations of divine justice. In Revelation 6:10, the martyrs echo the same desire for righteous judgment. Such texts reflect the justice of God, not the vindictiveness of man.

Transmission and Textual Variants

Some claim that because we do not possess the original manuscripts, we cannot trust the current Bible. This assertion fails to acknowledge the unparalleled manuscript evidence and the precision of textual criticism. With over 5,800 Greek manuscripts of the New Testament and tens of thousands of Old Testament manuscripts in Hebrew and translations, the Bible stands alone among ancient documents.

The New Testament text is 99.99% certain, and no major doctrine is affected by any textual variant. The Old Testament, especially as preserved in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic Text, also maintains astonishing accuracy. Far from showing corruption, the manuscript tradition confirms the Bible’s preservation and the fulfillment of God’s promise: “The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever” (Isaiah 40:8).

Theological Consistency and Harmony

Critics have alleged contradictions in theological concepts—for example, justification by faith alone in Paul (Romans 3:28) versus justification by works in James (James 2:24). But the context resolves this easily. Paul addresses justification before God, apart from works. James refers to the demonstration of genuine faith through works, not its basis. James 2:22 even states that faith is “completed by his works.” There is no contradiction—only a failure of critics to read the text contextually.

Likewise, the doctrine of God’s immutability (Malachi 3:6) is said to conflict with passages where God “repents” or “changes His mind” (e.g., Exodus 32:14). Yet these are anthropomorphic expressions describing God’s relational dealings with humanity. They do not suggest a change in God’s nature, purposes, or decrees but reflect human perception of divine responsiveness.

Conclusion

When examined honestly and rigorously, alleged errors in the Bible dissolve under the light of careful exegesis, historical context, and logical consistency. The Bible does not contain contradictions, historical inaccuracies, or moral failings. What critics often identify as “errors” are instead misunderstandings rooted in ignorance of the original languages, failure to grasp cultural and literary conventions, or presuppositions hostile to divine revelation.

The believer can trust with full confidence that the Word of God is truth (John 17:17). It has stood the test of time, persecution, scrutiny, and criticism. It remains, as the Psalmist declares, “a lamp to my feet and a light to my path” (Psalm 119:105). The inerrancy of Scripture is not a mere theological luxury—it is the foundation of faith and the bulwark of truth in a world of deception.

You My Also Enjoy

Atheism: A Critical Biblical and Philosophical Analysis

See more

About the Author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS