Warren Christian Apologetics Center
Affirm. Defend. Advance.
Simple Logo.jpg

Articles - The Bible

The Bible does Not Contradict Itself!

Thomas B. Warren
(1920-2000)

 

   In a recent article the charge is made that the Bible contradicts itself. As incredible as such may seem to faithful Christians, the writer of that article claims to be a member of the Lord’s church.

   The purposes of this article are: (1) to categorically deny the charge that the Bible contradicts itself, (2) to point out some implications of that charge, and (3) to make an appeal to brethren everywhere to awaken to the insidious danger which is posed to the Lord’s church by men who write such articles (as that referred to in the opening sentence) and by the journals which publish them.

   1.  Denial of this charge against the Bible. The article charges that the Bible contradicts itself. With every fiber of my being, I deny this charge, and, in counter to that charge, I charge the writer of that article is a contradictor (a “gainsayer,” Titus 1:9) of the Bible in that he falsely charges both the word of God and God Himself.

   2.  Some implications of the charge. To charge that the Bible contradicts itself is to imply a number of other propositions which are devilish in their essential nature.

(a)       To hold that the Bible is the word of God (which the writer of the charge claims to do) and then to charge that the Bible contradicts itself is to charge God with being a liar. In contrast to this blasphemous implication, the Bible plainly teaches that God does not lie—ever! (Hebrews 6:18; Titus 1:2; 1 Samuel 15:29). If the charge that the Bible contradicts itself is true, and if the Bible is the word of God, then “God” (the “God” implied by the article) is not God (the one described in the Bible). If the charge is true, then the “God” in whom the writer of the charge claims to believe is not worthy of worship. And, if God is not worthy of worship, then “Christianity” is a farce—a fake religion which is not worthy of the espousal of anyone. But, since it is the case that any doctrine which implies a false doctrine is itself false, then, since the charge that the Bible contradicts itself implies a false doctrine, the charge that the Bible contradicts itself is itself false. The Bible does not contradict itself! Stated in a more precise logical formulation, the matter comes to this:
(a).      If the proposition “the Bible contradicts itself” is true, then God is not worthy of worship;
(b).      The proposition, “God is not worthy of worship” is false;
(c).      Therefore, the proposition “the Bible contradicts itself” is a false proposition and should be rejected by all. 
(d).      To compound the blasphemy involved in this charge, I point out that to charge that the Bible contradicts itself is to imply that any and every proposition which might be conceived can be proved by the Bible! I do not lightly make this counter-charge. I can prove my charge against the charge that the Bible contradicts itself. This is the case simply because the affirmation of a logical contradiction implies any proposition! If one affirms (as the writer of the article under discussion does) that the affirmation of a logical contradiction is true, then he is further claiming (by implication) that any conceivable [i]

               Thus, if, as the aforementioned article charges, the Bible contradicts itself (a counter-factual hypothesis), then (as can be seen from the proof given in the footnote below), the Bible could be used to “prove” such propositions as the following:
(1).      The devil created God;
(2).      The devil is wiser, better, and more powerful than God;
(3).      Jesus Christ is not the Son of God;
(4).      No such person as Jesus of Nazareth ever existed;
(5).      Every Christian will be lost in Hell forever,
(6).      And every atheist and whoremonger will be in “Heaven” forever.

Hundreds, even thousands, of other such propositions, could be written as implications of this ungodly charge that the Bible contradicts itself is itself false.

   Brethren, the time for merely wishing that such writers (and the journals which publish their articles) will “go away” is past. We have no reason to doubt that certain men in the church are doing all they can to persuade members of the church: (1). To regard the Lord’s church as merely a denomination among many other equally valuable denominations, (2) to regard biblical “truth” as being merely relative (or subjective) and (3) to hold that, even if the truth were objective, no one could learn it anyway.

 __________

[i] For those who are interested in considering those technical details here is that proof. (cf. Sharvy, Outline of Logic) The following two arguments show that from the same premise, contradictory conclusions may be drawn properly.

1.  X ~ X/ ⸫ Y

2.  X   1, Simplification.

3.  X V Y 2, Addition.

4.  ~ X 1, Simplification.

5.  Y     3, 4 Disjunctive Syllogism.

Thus, from the self-contradictory compound proposition X ~ X, we have shown that proposition Y follows. But we can also show that the contradictory of Y (i.e. ~ Y) can also be deducted from X ~ X. Here is the way it is done:

1.  X ~ X/ ⸫ ~ Y

2.  X   1, Simplification.

3.  XV ~ Y  2, Addition

4.  ~ X  1, Simplification

5.  ~  Y  3, 4 Disjunctive Syllogism.

So, from the self-contradictory compound proposition ( X ~ X), I have deducted (validly) both Y and its contradictory, ~Y. From this fact, it follows that any proposition logically follows from a logical contradiction.

 

 

The above article was first published in The Spiritual Sword, Vol. 6 No. 3, April 1975, pages 3-5.