HOW TO BE A BIBLICAL APOLOGIST
Over the years, I have run into numerous persons who have attempted to defend the Bible’s literal accuracy. These opponents have presented explanations that range in quality from truly inspired justifications to pitifully lame excuses.
For example, when one believer was confronted with the fact that the ancient temple was credited with containing enough raw materials for a building more than a thousand times its size, he replied, "Well, maybe it had a basement."
If you really want to believe in something, no matter how ridiculous, you can find a way. All you need is a little imagination, and the proper tools. So, in the interests of improving the debating quality of Biblical apologists, thereby providing the rest of us with a more sporting opponent, I have created a tool to assist them.
These eleven techiques are suitable for use, not only by Biblical apologists, but also by political propagandists, Mafia lawyers, and even errant husbands.
So, I proudly present, in a format suitable for clipping:
The Biblical Apologist's Toolkit
Excuse #1: The Bible was not speaking literally.This is probably the most widely used method of excusing the Bible. For example, in Ezekiel chapter 29, the Bible prophesies that Egypt would be destroyed by King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon.
Oops, that never happened. Therefore, this prophesy was symbolic. It didn't really mean that Egypt would be destroyed. It actually meant this: Since Egypt was a powerful nation of its day, it symbolized military might. Its foretold destruction meant that it was foolish for anyone to put their trust in military might.
So, whenever the Bible says something that is wrong, it can always be claimed that it was speaking symbolically. This excuse applies to hundreds, if not thousands, of Bible errors - and I am speaking literally, here.
Excuse #2: The Bible didn't really mean what it plainly said.
This excuse is very similar to the last one, but has a subtle difference. Instead of relying on symbolic interpretations, it basically says that the Bible uses unusual euphemisms.
For example, when the Bible says that Jephthah's daughter was offered up as a "burnt offering", this didn't mean that she became a human sacrifice. Since we all know that human sacrifices go against God's loving nature, it must mean something else. The phrase "burnt offering" must be a euphemism for some other sort of sacrifice. So, Jephthah's daughter must have become a servant in the temple, thereby sacrificing herself to God.
Here is another example. When God said to Adam, "for in the day that you eat of it you shall die", and then Adam proceeded to live for 950 years, eventually dying of natural causes, well, God obviously didn't mean that Adam would die that day. He meant that he would begin to die that day. He would lose immortality that day, and his future death would be assured.
Excuse #3: Words were used differently in Bible times.
In the book of Daniel, on at least five occasions, the Bible refers to Belshazzar as the son of King Nebuchadnezzar. History shows that Belshazzar was actually the son of Nabonidus, who was not related to Nebuchadnezzar, and ruled four kings later.
The explanation for this problem is very simple: in Bible times, the word “son” could refer to more than just the simple father-son relationship. In fact, I have seen this word interpreted by Biblical apologists as son, step-son, grandson, distant descendant, and unrelated successor.
This is a handy tool, but if it is really true, it seriously dilutes the message of the Bible, making it virtually meaningless. When the Bible says that Jesus was God’s son, what does it mean?
Excuse #4: There is a copyist’s error.
The Biblical account of David’s census sin is recorded in two places - 1 Chronicles chapter 21, and 2 Samuel chapter 24. These two accounts have numerous differences. For example, in one account, David buys a threshing floor for 50 shekels of silver. In the other account, the price is 600 shekels of gold. The explanation is that it is a simple copyist error.
This is a powerful tool and should be used with caution. The true Bible believer should admit to copyist errors very sparingly. After all, if there is one copyist error, there could be more, and there is no telling what fundamental scripture could actually turn out to be wrong. Besides, a copyist error is still an error in the Bible, and that’s impossible.
Excuse #5: History is wrong.
This is a rather bold statement, but I have seen it used many times. For example, the Bible story of the flood is contradicted by the written histories of several other civilizations that existed during the time period of the flood. So, since the Bible cannot be wrong, history must be wrong.
This explanation has been used to explain discrepancies in the length of the exile in Egypt and errors in the book of Daniel. In fact, some persons have even suggested that the prophecy of the destruction of Egypt actually came true - history just forgot to record it, or covered it up. Probably the most blatant claim of this type is the Jehovah’s Witness dating of the destruction of Jerusalem in 607 B.C. History clearly shows a date approximately 20 years later, but this doesn’t fit their chronology, so history must be wrong.
Excuse #6: One number includes another number.Here is an example of what I mean:
After Jesus’ death, his tomb is visited by some of his followers who find that he is missing. How many followers were present when this happened? Well, John tells us that it was just one; Matthew says it was two; Mark lists three persons, and Luke lists three by name (not the same three names as Mark), and he alludes to more.
So, there you have it. The definitive answer is that Jesus’ tomb was visited by one, two, three, and many followers. Which one is right? Well, since the Bible is infallible, they are all right.
You see, if we assume that there were ten followers present, then it is correct to say that there was one person present (and another, and another…). The extra persons are just not named. Likewise, there were certainly two persons there - with the proviso that there were eight more who were not mentioned.
This is a very convenient way of disposing of numerical inconsistencies. Unfortunately, it creates some problems. The Bible says that there were twelve apostles. Using this logic, it is possible that there were actually 65 apostles, but the other 53 aren’t mentioned.
Imagine what life would be like if everyone spoke like this. A serial killer could testify in court that he killed one person, simply failing to mention the others. The weatherman could predict a rainfall of one inch prior to a hurricane. After all, if ten inches of rain falls, then certainly, there must be one inch somewhere in there.
So, when the Bible records a number, it might really mean any number larger than the one cited. In real life, who talks like this?
Excuse #7: You can do something by allowing someone else to do it. In fact, you can do something passively by failing to prevent it from happening. You can even be dead when it happens and still be credited with the action. This might seem rather confusing, so, here is an example of what I mean.
Matthew tells us that, after Judas died, the Chief Priests took his betrayal money and used it to buy a field (Matthew 27:6,7). Acts 1:18,19 tells us that Judas himself bought the field with this money. Which one is right? Well, in the infallible Bible, both are right. Biblical apologists say that since the money belonged to Judas, it could be said that he bought the field, even though someone else carried out the transaction and Judas was dead at the time.
This logic can be carried through to an even greater extreme. The Bible tells us that God killed King Saul. It also tells us that Saul committed suicide and was killed in battle. It can be argued that, by not preventing Saul’s death, God had, in fact, killed him.
So, when the Bible says that someone performed an act, it might mean something totally different from what you think.
Excuse #8: Everything is relative.The book of Revelation ends with the phrase, “I am coming quickly”. Almost 2,000 years have passed since those words were written, yet there is still no sign of Jesus. Obviously, Jesus was just yanking our chain when he made this promise - unless you realize that time is very different for an immortal person. The Bible says that with God, a thousand years are as one day. So, Jesus has really only been gone about two days.
You will find this logic throughout the Bible. Whenever the Bible is grossly wrong in its time estimates, the claim is made that time is relative, and to an immortal person, every time period is short. However, if you apply this principle evenly, then the Bible’s prophesies and even it’s histories are meaningless. For example, did Methuselah really live to be 969 years old, or did he just have a really boring job and it seemed like a millennium?
Imagine what life would be like if everyone spoke like this. Measurements of long/short and early/late would depend on whether you were speaking from the perspective of a fruit fly or a mountain range. All time related words would need to be fixed to a specific point of reference. What if your wife told you to pick up your children right away, and you showed up five years late?
Really, when a statement is communicated, there are certain assumptions that are reasonable on the part of the receiver. If these assumptions are changed virtually at random, then speech has no real meaning. If the Bible’s words are this capricious, then it has no meaning, either.
Excuse #9: You can’t tell what a prophecy means until after it is fulfilled
In other words, whatever happens is what the Bible meant. This is quite possibly the stupidest statement that I have ever heard. Yet, I have personally seen this argument used on several occasions when defending apparent false Biblical prophesies.
The dictionary defines prophesy as: “To predict the future with certainty as if by divine inspiration.” If a prophesy cannot be understood until after it is fulfilled, then it is missing the elements of prediction, certainty, and future. Therefore, by definition, it is not a prophesy.
Excuse #10: If all else fails, change the Bible.
This is fairly drastic, and is only available to apologists with a lot of money. Nevertheless, it can be done.
Jehovah’s Witnesses have used this technique with great success. You see, they developed a lot of beautifully intricate doctrines, only to find that the pesky Bible doesn’t agree with them. So they published their own Bible, that corrects some of God’s mistakes.
Here is an example. Hebrews 12:23 makes reference to “the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven”, and to “the spirits of just men made perfect.” This is a thorny scripture for a group that does not believe in spirit life after death. So, they have changed this scripture in their Bible to say “the spiritual lives of good men”.
This technique can also be found in other translations to correct obvious errors in parallel accounts. A good example is the contradiction regarding who tempted David to take his census. One scripture says it was Satan, another says it was God. To fix this, one enterprising translation replaces the word “God” with the indefinite word “one”, explaining the reference to God in a footnote that is available only in its extended reference version. So, a person reading this version of the Bible would not even notice the error.
Excuse #11: The final cop out.
When every possible excuse fails, there is always one left: We don’t have enough information to reply to this problem, but we know that the Bible is correct in everything it says, so it must be right. The solution will be found eventually.
The apologist then goes on to cite an example of an apparent contradiction that turned out to be no contradiction at all. The Bible may have been exonerated by a new archeological find, or some other discovery. So, the reasoning goes, all other contradictions may similarly be explained in the future. We just need to have faith and wait.
This is a textbook example of circular reasoning. The Bible says it is right about everything, and since it is infallible, it must be right about this, too.
CertificationI conclude this list with my personal certification. I have seen every one of these arguments made in defense of the Bible. In fact, they have all been used many times. References can be provided upon request.