If I have found one verse in the Bk of Matthew to be in error, does that make the rest of the Bible in error?

Question

If I have found an error, would that be a just cause to consider the rest of the Bible fallible as well?

This is a for real issue with me and not just something to get attention, I am a firm believer in the Bible and this has me very upset! If you are interested please e-mail me for my answer. As to state the reason as well as the error is a bit lengthy. God bless you.

I can no longer reply to your queries via yahoo e-mail because so many people requested more details, it took 5 e-mails per person to send them due to yahoo's limited text per message that I have run out of my e-mail quota... sorry. You can e-mail me at [e-mail], though with the words "I am interested" in the subject line and I will send you clarification as soon as I receive your e-mail

My dear Isabella that was indeed a nice Roman Catholic apologetic for the Roman Church, however way off mark in regards to this problem as well as your Catholic bias being displayed. I have been an avid student of both personages Tyndale & Luther, as well as Desiderius Erasmus who was himself a devout Catholic and was the one who influenced both Tyndale and Luther so you are not telling me anything I didn‘t already know. More to the point however is that the error in essence states in fin, that if Matthew 1:25 is correct then Mary broke her vow to God, if not, then Matthew 1:25 slanders her good name. And the wording is the same in the Roman Catholic Bible as it is in the KJV my friend.

Thank you for your very informative input Bruce, nice job my friend, as well as accurate. Some people think I am attempting to disprove the infallibility of the whole Bible as it were. Far be it from the truth. I am just interested in this one particular verse, verse 25 in the first chapter. Also it's funny people say they don't want to get into apocrypha, because nearly the whole of the new testament concerning Mary, Joseph and Jesus as a child are in fact written from said apocrypha.

Jocko_Homo; Redaction criticism is the tool I used in finding this in the first place my friend…how have particular Gospel authors redacted the material they had at their disposal, whether from an earlier Gospel writer, from pre-Gospel written sources, or from oral tradition? Either Mary lied to God and broke her vow of life long virginity or Matthew 1:25 is slandering her good and Holy name.

Answer 1

I understand your frustration at what might seem to you as an error in Gods word. I have experienced the same frustrations with what I thought was an error or contradiction in Gods word. But the error or contradiction is not in Gods word it is in mans fallible reasoning of an infallible and Holy book written by God even though he used man as his keyboard. I sure would like to take a swing at this error that you feel you have found. Gods word is the one true thing that we have in this world of lies. I don't believe that man will ever be able to fully grasp and understand completely something written by God. Yet God has made much of his word extremely clear. People by nature, including myself can easily misinterpret the Bible due to many different factors, yet I have found that the more I read the Bible the more clear it becomes that the Bible is indeed very pure and very true. What Bible are you reading? I believe that the devil has inspired man to write so many different versions of the Bible so that there would be errors and man would than question the infallibility of Gods word, it’s the same trick he pulled on Eve when he said "Hath God said”?. That is why I strongly believe that the KJV Bible is the bible which God has preserved for man in the English language. For me I just had to remind myself of the truth that God is perfect and I am not. God knows everything and I do not. Also God has absolutely no reason to lie.

Answer 2

Fallible? Fallible on what? History? Science? Doctrine? Last time I checked, the doctrine of infallibility, in contrast to inerrancy, assumes the Bible is without error on issues of faith and practice, rather than history and science. Even if the Bible is fallible, that does not mean it is not reliable. For example, if I find one error in Plato's writings, does that debunk his status as one of the greatest philosophers to have existed? No.

Assuming a priori that the Bible is only inspired or historically reliable if it is inerrant is a false dichotomy.

The fact remains that even though there are some errors and contradictions in the Bible, many of the biblical texts, not least in the New Testament, agree with each other and even history on many levels, and the over all, reliable story of God and his interactions with mankind remains preserved to this day.

Answer 3

Matthew is a historical work, a biography. It was written by the disciple Matthew (a.k.a. Levi) or one of Matthew's disciples. Like any historical work, it may contain minor errors in fact. Historians compare the text with other contemporaneous history (e.g., Mark, Luke, and John) to work out the most likely facts.

That the Bible is inerrant means it is free of serious and substantial errors. For example, no Bible text contradicts Jesus teaching that he is God among us, the Son of God on earth. But if a name in the genealogy were incorrect, that would not be serious.

The inerrancy of the Bible is not a matter of faith, but a condition for its selection. Matthew had his own observations, other circulating texts (including Mark and Q), and the memories of his fellow disciples, including Mary herself. After any errors were corrected during the writing of the gospel, the scholars of the Church weighed Matthew's history against other competing works (several of which were imagined by tendentious Gnostics) in selecting Matthew for inclusion in the New Testament canon.

In general, the Bible must be read critically. Jesus demonstrated how, e.g., in Matt 19:

"Why then," they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?"

Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

In general, the gospel must be read as the heart of the Bible, with Old Testament history and New Testament commentary subservient to Jesus' teachings.

Cheers,
Bruce

Answer 4

You have to give the quote. Just because you think it's an error doesn't make it so. Too many people misquote, take out of context, and just plain don't understand spiritual concepts. Of all places to find an error, I've never heard it from Matthew. You have to give the exact scripture, it you truly are serious about getting an answer. God bless

Answer 5

Lets start by identifying the verse.

It is no secret that there are a few copyist errors and some translation mistakes in the Bible - you know, we are imperfect humans. But there is nothing in the Bible extreme enough to affect doctrinal and theological issues. The Bible is trustworthy and fully reliable.

BTW the original manuscripts are infallible.

Answer 6

Many Greek scholars and Bible translators acknowledge that John 1:1 highlights, not the identity, but a quality of “the Word.” Says Bible translator William Barclay. Scholar Jason David BeDuhn adds: “In John 1:1, the Word is not the one-and-only God, but is a god, or divine being.” Or to put it in the words of Joseph Henry Thayer, a scholar who worked on the American Standard Version: “The Logos [or, Word] was divine, not the divine Being himself.” When Jesus is referred to as a god, It's a little "g". When Jehovah is referred to as God, it's a big "G".

Answer 7

What kind of error, can you be more specific?

Remember that they were written by humans, and that they weren`t written today and many symbolic meanings mean differently. Also the Bible isn`t one book but 72/73 (some people think a book is devided by two and other think they`re two books) so to proof that the entire Bible is false you have to find at least 72 mistakes.

Answer 8

I'd love to hear what this 'error' is. I've known people (myself included) going through the Bible with a fine tooth comb to try find an error, thus disproving it's infallibility. What exactly is this 'error' that everyone's missed?

Answer 9

No.

First, you must be able to identify the error as *indisputably* an error. Frankly, if you *had* discovered some error, I am quite certain that you would have shared it with us. If you achieve this first requirement, you have succeeded in proving only that your translation has a single error (in translation).

Second, you must be able to prove that the error is *indisputably* present in the original language manuscripts (all of them). If you achieve this requirement, you have succeeded in proving only that our existing manuscripts of Matthew contain a single error.

Third, you must be able to prove that the error is present in the original manuscript, the "autograph", of Matthew. Assuming that you are able to discover this manuscript, authenticate it and prove that it contains the same error. you will have succeeded in proving that the book of Matthew is in error and uninspired.

Fourth, you must prove the *same* thing for *every* single book in the bible. After (and only after) you have accomplished this, you will have proven that the bible, as a whole, is in error.

Jim, http://www.jimpettis.com/wheel/

Answer 10

No, it does not.
And it probably isn't an error in the first place. If this is really bothering you, study redaction criticism. I can't emphasize that enough - they should be preaching redaction criticism from the pulpits.