That the Scriptures are completely accurate and reliable is evident to those who study them, but the critic still points to alleged discrepancies and apparent inaccuracies. Is it so? True, there might be copyist errors without endangering even one doctrine. However, the more we learn, the more we discover that these supposed errors reveal not the unreliability of the Scriptures but the insufficiency of human knowledge. Look at some of these passages.
Chronological and Numerical Difficulties
1) The Exodus to the Temple. Apparent chronological and numerical discrepancies are often a source of difficulty to the Christian, but are usually capable of a very simple explanation. In 1 Kings 6:1, for example, the Holy Spirit declares that Solomon commenced to build the temple 480 years after the exodus from Egypt. From the figures given by the Apostle Paul in Acts 13:17-22, however, the interval between the two events appears to be much longer, and careful calculation shows that the period was not 480 but 584 years. When the book of Judges is examined and the periods of Israel’s subjection to heathen nations and the period of Abimelech’s usurpation are added together, the total is found to be 114 years, or the exact difference between the two figures. There is thus no error, for in 1 Kings 6:1, the periods of Israel’s apostasy are ignored as valueless in the sight of God.
2) Numbering of the People. At first sight, the figures given in 2 Samuel 24:9 and 1 Chronicles 21:5 appear to be mutually contradictory, but the inconsistency vanishes when it is realized that Samuel gives the number of warriors in Israel and the total number of men in Judah, whereas Chronicles gives the total number of men in Israel and only the number of warriors in Judah.
3) Plague of Shittim. A similar difficulty is found by a comparison of Numbers 25:9 and 1 Corinthians 10:8. No contradiction is here, however, for while the first passage states the total number of deaths, the second gives merely the number in one day.
4) Ornan’s Threshing Floor. In 2 Samuel 24:24, David is said to have paid Ornan fifty shekels of silver for his threshing floor, but in 1 Chronicles 21:25 the price is given as six hundred shekels of gold. The accounts are not irreconcilable, though. As Dean Kirkpatrick has pointed out, “The immediate purchase of the threshing floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver was a distinct transaction from the subsequent purchase of ‘the place’–that is, the whole area upon which the temple was erected–for six hundred shekels of gold.”
5) Abraham’s Sepulcher. Referring to Abraham’s sepulcher, Stephen, in Acts 7:16, declared that it was purchased from the sons of Emmor of Sychem. In Genesis 23:17, it is said that the patriarch purchased the cave of Ephron the Hittite for a sepulcher. There is no real difficulty here. The two passages evidently refer again to two different transactions. In the sepulcher of Genesis 23, Abraham buried the body of Sarah; in the sepulcher of Acts 7, Jacob’s sons were buried. It is clear that there were two distinct sepulchers, and that they were purchased on different occasions.
Hezekiah’s Tribute
There are many apparent discrepancies which disappear on closer examination. For example, in 2 Kings 18:14, it is stated that Hezekiah paid to Sennacherib a tribute of 300 talents of silver and 30 talents of gold. In the Assyrian record, on the other hand, the tribute is said to have been 800 talents of silver and 30 talents of gold. This apparent discrepancy was repeatedly quoted as evidence of the unreliability of the Bible, until later discoveries showed that 300 Hebrew talents of silver were the equivalent of 800 Assyrian talents. Again the accuracy of the Word of God was proved, to the discomfiture of its opponents.
Sargon of Assyria
Up to a century ago, the reference in Isaiah 20 to Sargon, King of Assyria drew the ridicule of skeptics upon the prophecy. The Bible mentions this monarch only once and profane history never referred to him at all. It seemed fairly clear that no king of Assyria named Sargon had ever lived and that the Scriptures had made a mistake. Excavations at Khorsabad in 1842, however, resulted in the unearthing of the palace of a king named Sargon and detailed Assyrian records were discovered there which vindicated in toto the words of the Scriptures.
The Hittite Empire
Another stumbling block was formerly to be found in the reference in 2 Kings 7:6, to “the kings of the Hittites,” about whom nothing was then known. The critics declared emphatically that no empire of the Hittites had ever existed. Again the spade validated the veracity of the Word of God. Excavations at Carchemish and the discovery of the Hittite cuneiform archives at Boghazkeuid in 1907 produced evidence that the unknown Hittite empire was one of the greatest of ancient history. Indeed, Prof. Hogarth declares that “the northern half of Syria, northern Mesopotamia, and probably almost all Asia Minor were conquered by the Hatti before 1350 bc, and rendered tributary; Egypt was forced out of Asia; the Semitic settlements on the twin rivers and the tribes in the desert were constrained to deference or defense.” In view of the description given by H. G. Wells in The Outline of History, no scholar would now question the accuracy of 2 Kings 7:6.
The Murder of Zacharias
In His terrible condemnation of the Jews in Matthew 23:35-36, the Lord Jesus Christ referred to the murder of “Zacharias, son of Barachias…between the temple and the altar.” This appears to be a serious error, for it is evident from 2 Chronicles 24:21 that the father of the Zacharias who was slain in the holy place was not Barachias but Jehoiada. From one of the Jewish targums, however, we find that another Zacharias was slain in the temple–one who was none other than the prophet Zechariah, described in Zechariah 1:1 as “the son of Berechiah.” Our Lord made no mistake; He reminded His hearers of a fact with which they were well acquainted.
Belshazzar
“In that night was Belshazzar the king of the Chaldeans slain.” This reference in Daniel 5:30 to “Belshazzar the king” was for centuries regarded as evidence of the unreliability of the book of Daniel. Throughout secular history, there was no mention of an individual named Belshazzar, and the last king of Babylon was proved to be not Belshazzar, but Nabonidus. Moreover, the latter, far from having been killed in Babylon, surrendered to his conquerors at Borsippa.
The mystery was solved in 1876 by Sir Henry Rawlinson’s discovery of a large number of cuneiform tablets in Babylon. From these it became apparent that Belshazzar was the son and heir of Nabonidus and that he was actually ruling in the capacity of regent in Babylon during his father’s absence, so that he might reasonably have been described as king. The reference to him in Daniel 5 as Nebuchadnezzar’s son is in conformity with the general Semitic custom of describing a descendant as a son. The fact of the regency, of course, explained the second difficulty that it was the third, and not the second, place in the kingdom which he offered to Daniel (Dan. 5:29). Again the accuracy of the Bible is confirmed.
Conclusion
The difficulties to which reference has been made are naturally only a few among the many which continually arise in the study of the Word and in the conflict with its opponents. It would be foolish to deny that there are difficulties. Indeed, as Dr. Griffith Thomas has said, “In giving to us His Word, God has not been pleased to make everything easy and obvious at once…the presence of difficulties in the Bible is itself an indication that the Bible is something more than a human book, and contains a divine revelation of truth that is beyond man’s unaided powers of discovery.” Many of the apparent difficulties of the Bible, however, yield to careful and painstaking study, and the few mentioned may serve as illustrations of the inerrancy and divine accuracy of the Holy Writ, and be an encouragement to fuller trust in the Word.