Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible Chapter 3

8/9/2019 Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible Chapter 3

1/14

OHAPTER III.RESULTS OF THE DISCREPANCIES.

the effect of the discrepancies, inand to the moral " , - .UCLec '


2/14

42 DISCREP ANCIES OF THE BIBLE.us substantially intact, is a conceded point. In all but a fewunimportant cases, the genuine reading is settled beyond dispute.The candid and scholarly Bleek 1 a s ~ e r t s that "the Hebrewmanuscripts have been preserved unaltered generally,. and thisin a measure of which we find no second example in otherworks which have ~ e n multiplied and circulated by numerousmanuscripts."

Keil : 2 "The Old Testament, like all the other books ofantiquity, has been propagated by transcription. And thus ithas happened, even in spite of the great care with which theJews, who were filled with unbounded reverence for the holyscriptures, watched over their preservation and transmissionwithout injury, that they could not escape the common lot ofall ancient books. In the course of repeated copying manysmall errors crept into the text, and various readings came intoexistence, which lie before us in the text as it is attested in therecords belonging to the various centuries.... The copyistshave committed these errors by seeing or hearing wrongly, byfaithlessness of memory, and by other misunderstandings; yetnot arbitrarily or intentionally. And by none of them havethe essential contents of scripture been endangered."Even De Wette,S comparing the Egyptians, Chaldeans, andPhoenicians with the Hebrews, observes, "From the former,either all the monuments of their literature have perished tothe last fragment, or only single melancholy ruins survive,which in nothing diminish the loss of the rest; while, on thecontrary, from the latter there is still extant a whole library ofauthors, so valuable and ancient that the writings of the Greeksare in comparison extremely young." This is a very sih'TIif-icant concession from one of the leaders of modern rationalism.

Gesenius 4 says, " To state here in few words my creed, as tothe condition of the Hebrew text in a critical respect. It can-

1 1nll'oc1. to Old Test., ii. 365. Introd. to Old Test., ii. 2940, 295.3 Introcl. to Old Test., i. 23 (Parker's edition).4 Biblical RepositOl"y, iii. 401.


3/14

RESULTS OF THE DISCREPANCIES. 43not be denied, that. through the a n x i o ~ s care of the Jewishcritics, the text has been in general very well preserved."In the Hebrew manuscripts," says Prof. Stuart,l" that havebeen examined, some eight hundred thousand various readingsactually occur, as to the Hebrew consonants. How many asto the vowel-points and accents, no man knows. And the liketo this is true of the New Testament. But, at the same time,it is equally true, that all these taken together do not changeor materially affect any important point of doctrine, precept, oreven history. A great proportion, indeed the mass, of variations in Hebrew manuscripts, when minutely scanned, amountto nothing more than the difference in spelling a multitude ofEnglish words. What matters it as. to the meaning, whetherone writes honour or honor, whether he writes centre or center?"Such scholars as Buxtorf, Bleek, Havernick, Keil, and others,affirm that the Jews took such extraordinary care in copyingtheir sacred books, " that it was a practice to count not only thenumber of verses, but also that of t.he words, and even of theletters of the various books, in order to ascertain the middleverse, the middle word, aud the middle letter of each book."

Keil 8 remarks that the Masora, a rabbinic critical workupon the Old Testament, contains an "enumeration of theverses, words, and letters of each book; information as to themiddle word and middle letter of each book; enumeration ofverses which contain the whole consonants of the alphabet, oronly so many of them; and also of words which occur so manytimes in the Bible with this or that meaning, and of wordswritten' plene,' or ' defective.' "

Parker/ in De Wette, gives, from Bishop Walton, a list ofthe number of times which each Hebrew letter occurs in theOld Tastament. The same list may be found in Menasseh benIsrael's Conciliator.5

1 HiRtol'Y of Old Test. Canon, p. 192. Revised ed. p. 118. Bleek's Intl'Oduetion to Olll Test., ii. 451, 452. Introd. to Old Test., ii. 316. Introduction to Old Test., i. 851. 5 Vol. i. p. 250.


4/14

44 DISC REP ANCIES OF THE BIBLE.

carried accuracy that borderedreason to believe, that no work of antiquity has descended tothe present age so free from alteration, as the Hebrew Bible."

The erudite translator 2 of Outram says, "There are notwanting proofs of the most scrupulous care of the Hebrew texton the part of the Jews." " No evidence has been adduced oftheir alteration of any part text." I t

bC;l U U ' l U l J L l ~ and minutesacred books from variation or

C[12:erI3jXU1C'les and " v ~ r i -better estab

than that of any other ancient book. No one of theso-called" classics," not Homer nor Herodotus, compares favorably, in this respect, with the New Testament. Says Prof.Stowe/ "Of the manuscript copies of the Greek Testament,from seven hundred to one thousand of all kinds have been

leastby critics, and of

0W,m,'''HU years old, andyears old;reach the antiquity

is very smallof the Greek Testament."

ilfty are more

]mmll"(0C[ years, andwith those

Among the Greek classical writers, Herodotus and Plato areof the first importance. The earliest manuscripts of Herodotusextant are, one in the Imperial library at Paris," executed inthe twelfth century"; one in the Florentine library, whichl\'Iontfaucon assigns to the tenth century, and one in the libraryof Cambridge, may possibly

Criticism and Interpretation,Modern Judaism,IIlstory of Books of edition).


5/14

RESULTS OF THE

manuscripts of the New

45the earliest

Oxford, and

Alexandrian, written about A.D. 350; the Vatican, written aboutA.D. 325; the Sinaitic, of date equally early; the Ephraimmanuscript, "probably somewhat later than the Alexandrian,but of great critical value"; and, the Beza manuscript, datingabout A.D. 490.2 Other scholars substantially concur in theseAIJord 3 and Scrivener Alexandrian

fifth century; that 4,00-500.find five

youngest of whichyeaTs (If which may havewllO had stwled tile original manuscriptstles themselves.

hundred'1WC1J,xr"a by personswritten by the apos-

So far, therefore, as an authenticated and settled text isconcerned, the classics are very far behind the New Testament:;" There is not," says Tregelles,G " such a mass of transmissionalevidence in favor of any classical work. The existing manu-

L H ' H J u \ I ' L l l ~ and Thucyc1ic1es enough whenof those of the "

Transmission ofSec, also, Alford, rn)lCgo'l1lenapels, pp. Scrivener, Criticism

3 Prolegomena to Four Gospels, p.107.4 Criticism of New Test., p. 82.

276-278; COll-Gl'eek Four Gospp.76-103.

Dr. Bentley, in his annihilating reply to Collins, speaking of the mannscript copies of Terence, the oldest and best of which, now in the Vaticanlibrary, has" hnndreds of errors," observes, " I myself have collated several, and do affirm that I have seen twenty thousand varions lections in 'thatlittle so big as the New morally sum,that Tel'ence with that

yet Terence is oneB.cmarks Upou a late Discourse,Historic Evidence, p.

many for the


6/14

46 DISCREPA.NCIES OF THE BIBLE.In the fitting words of Scrivener,! "As the New Testament

far surpasses all other remains of antiquity in value and inter-est, so are the copies of it yet existing in manuscript, anddating from the fourth century of our era downwards, farmore numerous than those of the most celebrated writers ofGreece or Rome. Such as have been already discovered andset down. in catalogues are hardly fewer than two thousand;and many more must still linger unknown in the monasticlibraries of the East. On the other hand, manuscripts Of themost illustrious classic poets and philosophers are far rarer andcomparatively modern. We have no complete copy of Homerhimself prior to the thirteenth century, though some considera-ble fragments have been recently brought to light which mayplausibly be assigned to the fifth century; while more than onework of high and deserved repute has been preserved to ourtimes only in a single copy. Now the experience we gain, froma critical examination of the few classical manuscripts thatsurvive, should make us thankful for the quality and abundanceof those of the New Testament. These last present us with avast and almost inexhaustible supply of materialsfor tracing thehistory, and upholding (at least within certain limits) the purityof the sacred text; every copy, if used diligently and with judg-ment, will contribute somewhat to these ends. So far is thecopiousness of our stores from causing doubt or perplexity tothe genuine student of holy scripture, that it leads him to rec-ognize the more fully its general integrity in the midst ofpartial variation."

With equal felicity and truthfu41ess, Isaac Taylor,2 on theproof of the genuineness of the scriptures, observes: "And asthe facts on which tIns proof depends are precisely of the samekind in profane, as in sacred literature, and as the same princi-ples of evidence are applicable to all questions relating to thegenuineness of ancient books, it is highly desirable that the proof

1 Criticism of New Test., pp. 8,4. History of Transmission of A.ncient Books, p.


7/14

RESULTS OF THE DISCREPANCIES.of the gCXlUlllCll.ess the sacred writings

part only of a

47

antiquity.For it is strengthand completeness of the proof which belongs to this particularcase, can be duly estimated. When exhibited in this light, itwill be seen that the integrity of the records of the Christianfaith is substantiated by evidence in a tenfold proportion morevarious, copious, and conclusive 1 than that which can be adducedin support of other ancient writings. If, therefore, thequestion importance than whatmay attach literary inquiry, the strictjustice of regarded, the """,,mC>H.H,Lv.y

,and Christian could nevertill thespurious." .

Nor does the Bible suffer by comparison with books of laterdate. For the text of Shakespeare, which has been in existenceless than two hundred and fifty years, is "far more ullcertainand corrupt than that of the New Testament, now over eighteencenturies nearly fifteen of only inmanuscript. of collators m-deed has formidable array , inthe Greek scriptures, butwhich have el.aim to be received,ously affect the sense, is so small thatcounted upon the fingers. With perhaps a dozen or twenty'exceptions, the text of every verse in the New Testament maybe said to be so far settled by the general consent of scholars,that any dispute as to its meaning must relate rather to the interpretation of the words, than to any doubts respecting thewords in everyone of thirty-seven probably a hundred still in

'l;he italics are ourown.


8/14

48 DISCREPANCIES OF THE BIBLE.dispute, a large proportion of which materially affect the meaning of the passages in which they occur."l

The probability that trivial variations would be found inconsiderable numbers will be seen when we reflect that, according to Prof. Norton's2 estimate, there were, at the end ofthe second century, as many as s'ixty thousand manuscript copiesof tlle Gospels in existence. That these variations are of slightimportance we have already seen; so that in spite of the "fiftythousand various readings"8 of which we are often told, hemust be very ignorant or very mendacious who represents thetext of the New Testament as in a dubious and unsettled state.Its antiquity and all other circumstances being taken into theaccount, there is no other book which compares with it inpossessing a settled and authenticated text.

The famous Bentley,. one of the ablest critics England hasever seen, observes: "The real text of the sacred writers doesnot now (since the originals have been so long lost) lie in anylingle manuscript or edition, but is dispersed in them all. 'Tiscompetently exact indeed, even in the worst manuscript nowextant; nor is one article of faitll or moral precept either perverted or lost in them, choose as awkardly as you can, choosethe worst by design, out of the whole lump of readings." Againhe adds, "Make your thirty thousand (variations) as manymore, i f numbers of copies can ever reach that sum; all thebetter to a knowing and serious reader, who is thereby morerichly furnished to select what he sees genuine. But even putthem into the hands of a ,knave or a fool, and yet with themost sinistrous and absurd choice, he shall not extinguish thelight of anyone chapter, nor disguise Christianity but thatevery feature of it will be the same."

1 North American Review, quoted in Stowe's Origin and History of Booksof Bible, p. 82.

9 Genuineness of the Gospels, i. 50-53. '8 See as to the probable number, Scrivener's Criticism of New Test., p.8

, I Remarks upon a late Discourse of Free Thinking, Part i. Sec.


9/14

RESULTS OF THE DISCREPANCIES. 49When men seek to impugn the credibility of the Bible, by

alleging" discrepancies" and" various readings," we may safelyanswer, with Prof. Stuart,! that they are so easily accountedfor, and of so little importance, that "they make nothing ofserious import against the claims which the matter, the manner,and the character of the scriptures prefer as the stable groundof our belief and confidence aud obedience."

Very pertinently says Dr. Hodge,2 "These apparent discrep-ancies, although numerous, are for the most part trivial; relat-ing in most cases to numbers or dates. The great majority ofthem are only apparent, and yield to careful examination.Many of them may be fairly ascribed to errors of transcribers.The marvel and the miracle is, that there are so few of anyreal importance. Considering that the different books of theBible were written not only by different authors, but by menof all degrees of culture, living in the course of fifteen hunch'edor two thousand years, it is altogether unaccountable that theyshould agree perfectly, on any other hypothesis than that thewriters were under the guidance of the Spirit of God. In thisrespect, as in all others, the Bible stands alone. . . . . The errorsin matters of fa_


10/14

50 mSCREPANCIES OFor at least

transposition of in grammar,in the use of one wOTCl for another of a similar meaning, andin changing the position of worc1s in a sentence. But by allthe omissions, and all the additions, contained in all the manuscripts, no fact, no doctl'ine, no duty prescribed, in om' authorized version, is rendered either obscure or doubtful."2, the text of

in it.felicitously remarks,

discoverec1,Prof. Bush 1

nnmllC'I 'c"Tc contrarietyof God appeal::!hows at least with what confidence the bookto our reason on the ground of the general evidence of its ori

gin, exhibiting, as it does, such cxamples of literal self-conflictin particular passages. A work of imposture could not affordto be thus seemingly indifferent to appearances."

vVe thus see how the mighty moral prestige of the Bibleobjections presumptions in

its truth of our proposition obvious whenthe influence both upon in

upon mankind.f 'n lI1l11mll ' l i tc lT furnishes,

inst:fnces of men once dishonest, turbulent, profane, sensual, ordrunken, who, under the influence of the Bible, have thoroughlyreformed their conduct and life, and become as remarkable formeekness, benevolence, purity, and self-control as they hadpreviously been llotoriolls for the opposite traits.

who have recognizedto its

Notes on Exodus,

H l" U G ' " ~ v of the Bible,many of the

most powerfulI ,H I 1 0 "H" ' , l , and scholars


11/14

OF THE DISC REP ANCIES. 51whom the e"er seen. to

; Bacon, Newton,Locke, Hale and GrotiusWashington and 'Vilberforce.

Had the Bible been, as some assert, full of irreconcilablediscrepancies and insoluble difficulties, it could scarcely havecommanded the homage of such minds and hearts as these.For, it is not extravagant to say that these men were as acutein detecting imposture, and as competent to discriminate betweentruth and are, in our own Bishop of

Somerset.of the Bible renovate

and to theof India and need but

allude to the marked difference between nations which havereceived the Bible and those which have rejected it, - betweenPrussia and France, between England and Spain. On a candidsurvey of the field, we see the correctness of Chancellor Kent'ssaying: "The general diffusion of the Bible is the most effectualway to humanize mankind; and exalt thegeneral the justprecepts

temperance,relations of social and

by John Locke, scrip-tures are one of the greatest blessings which God bestows uponthe sons of men, is generally acknowledged by all who knowanything of the value and worth of them."

vVe, therefore, deem the position an impregnable one, thatall the discrepancies and objections which the teeming brainand infidelity have conjure up

not in any essentIul dctract fromvolume, nor wonderful

power.Illjjdcl]ty furnish any substitute Bible. I t


12/14

52 DISCREPANCIES OF TEE BIBLE.points us all in vain to Confucius, Zoroaster, and the Vedas, tothe cold and arrogant teachings of positivism, to the barrennegations and ever-discordant utterances of rationalism. Neverbook spake like the Bible. .No other comes home to the heartand conscience, with light and power and healing as does this.I t teaches man how to live and how to clie.

;A celebrated infidel is said to have exclaimed in his lastmoments, " I am about to take a leap in the dark." Cast theBible aside, and every man at death takes a "leap in the dark."

In the language of an eminent writer,! " Weary human naturelays its head on this bosom, or it has nowhere to lay its head.Tremblers on the verge of the dark and terrible valley whichparts the land of the living from the untried hereafter, takethis hand of human tenderness, yet godlike strength, or theytotter into the gloom without prop or stay. They who looktheir last on the beloved dead listen to this voice of soothingand peace, else death is no uplifting of everlasting doors, and noenfolding in everlasting arms, but an enemy as appalling tothe .reason as to the senses, the usher to a charnel-house wherehighest faculties and noblest feelings lie crushed with the animal wreck; an infinite tragedy, maddening, soul-sickening-a'blackness of darkness forever.' "

" Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto mypath." 2

We cannot but agree with Lord Chief Justice Hale, that"there is no book like the Bible for excellent learning, wisdom,and use"; we must, with Sir Isaac Newton, " account the scriptures of God to be the most sublime philosophy," and to exhibit"more sure marks of authenticity than any profane historywhatsoever."

In considering the solutions hereafter proposed, the legitimate force of a hypothesis should be kept in mind. I f a

1 Dr. Rorison, in ~ p l i e s to Essays and R e Y i e w ~ pp. 8411, 8U(2d edition.) Pe. c x i ~ . 105. .


13/14

RESULTS OF THE DISCREPANCIES. 53certain hypothesis meets. the exigencies of a given case, then,unless it can be proven false or absurd, its logical value is to setaside any and all objections, and to secure a strong presumptionin its own favor.1 . For instance, it is said: "Here is a case inwhich the Bible contradicts itself." We reply: "Here is ahypothesis which serves to explain and reconcile the disagreement." Now, unless our hypothesis can be proven untrue orirrational, it stands, and the objection is effectually met. Insuch cases, the burden of proof devolves upon the objector.

The solutions proposed in the following pages are hypothetical;though, in the majority of cases, the probability amounts toalmost absolute certainty. In offering these solutions, weneither assert nor undertake to prove that they are the only,or even the actual solutions; we merely affirm that they arereasonable explanations of each case respectively, and, for"aught that can be shown to the contrary, they may be the realones. Therefore, according to the principles of logic andcommon sense, they countervail and neutralize the discrepancieswhich are adduced, and leave the unity and integrity and divineauthority of the sacred volume unimpaired.

The Discrepancies of Scripture may, perhaps, be most suitably arranged under three heads: 2 the Doctrinal, including1 Prof. Henry Rogers well says, "The objector is always apt to take itfor granted that the diserepancy is real; though i t may be easy to supposea (,ase (and a possible case is quite sufficient for the purpose) which wouldneutralize the objection. Of this perverseness (we can call it by no othername) the examples are perpetual...... It may be objected, perhaps,

that the gratuitous supposition of some unmentioned fact - which, ifmentioned, would harmonize the apparently counter-statements of twohistorians - cannot be admitted, and is, in fact, a surrender of the argument. But to say so, is only to betray an utter ignorance of what theargnment is. If an objection he founded on the aUeged absolute contradiction of two statements, it is quite sufficient to show any (not the real,but only a hypothetical and possible) medium of reconciling them; andthe objection is iu all fairness dissolved; ancl this would be felt by thehonest logician, even if we did not know of any such instances in pointof fact. 'We do know, however, of many." -Reason and Faith, pp. 401-403 (Boston edition).

2 For other methods of classification, see Davidson's Sacred Hermeneutics, p. 520.


14/14

54 DISCREPANCIES OF; the Ethical,

numbers,a vast and incongruous mass of materials as has

accumulated during the investigation, it has seemed well nighimpossible to make a rigorously exact and clearly-definedclassification. Obviously, many of the following cases might,from their complex or feebly marked character, fall equallywell in some other, or in more than one, of the divisions. Insuch arrangement has which seemedmost obvious. The or important

difftenlt passage has class to whichbe referred.been lost in and nicety,

it is believed that much has been gained in simplicity, convenience, and practical utility, by abandoning the attempt at acomplex, logical classification, and grouping the discrepanciesunder it few characteristic heads.

Documents

Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible Chapter 3