It is an oft made claim that various Bible passages contradict each other and cause “problems” for Christians.
In fact, a quick Google search reveals entire websites devoted to highlighting these supposed “contradictions.”
With all of today’s Google scholars prowling around the internet, it’s no surprise that many of these “contradictions” repeatedly pop up, making life hard for the Christian apologist.
Of course many books have been written in defense of the Christian doctrine of scripture. I find myself agreeing with the Princeton theologians like Charles Hodge, and B.B. Warfield, as well as (and specifically) Cornelius Van Til, who in the tradition of the Dutch Calvinists, draws a particularly strong case.
A quick illustration will clarify the uniqueness of Van Til.
Suppose the Christian apologist is in a room with the non-Christian Google scholar (NCGS). The NCGS has a gun, filled with freshly googled Bible contradictions, primed and aimed straight at the heart of the apologist.
The apologist may dodge the first bullet. He may dodge the second. But, pretty soon, one of the bullets will hit him. I used to spend my time studying each and every supposed “contradiction” thought up by the NCGS in order to effectively explain it away, but inevitably, someone out there would always come up with one I hadn’t studied, and thus would consider the debate won.
After awhile, I got tired of all the elephant hurling and out of context quote mining. I eventually ran across the arguments of Van Til, and the Princeton Theologians.
Now, instead of dodging bullets, I find it much easier to wrest the gun away from the NCGS, and knock him out with it.
You see, the real conflict between the apologist and the NCGS is not one of content or “fact” but rather one of the interpretation of the content and “fact.” This is true at base with all conflicting worldviews.
I, as a Christian, have a completely different epistemology than that of the NCGS (many of which have no idea what epistemology even is.)
Thus, we will find ourselves arguing all day over every single fact of our existence. Suppose I adequately explain and harmonize every single word, jot, and tittle of the Bible to the NCGS? He would then go on to challenge me on every single fact of our existence. It would be a never ending collision between two opposing worldviews.
Much better, would be to directly attack the NCGS’s foundational assumptions that he uses to read the Bible to begin with, and, (like in the illustration) use those very assumptions against him, demonstrating that these very assumptions disqualify him from even talking about the Bible to begin with.
I’ll show how this is done specifically, in Vol II…assuming there is interest of course.
God Bless