It is factual that the Bible contradicts itself. These errors are either part of the original documents, or else are transcriber errors. Since this is unknown, we assume in the favor of Christianity that these are transcriber errors.
It seems, then, that you believe two things: first, that a group of men who were doing all that they could to prevent the Bible from accumulating errors were unable to find assistance from God in this matter (John 14:13) and ultimately failed at their task; and second, that an ancient being who is described as clever at every opportunity and who is malicious to the gospel is somehow unable to at least match the blunders of the men who were doing their best to prevent errors from accumulating. If God allows men to corrupt the Bible, but prevents Satan from doing so, then it is natural to believe that God is impeding Satan's free will to the point that Satan can only do what God wants him to do, which is to say that Satan acts on God's behalf. If, on the other hand, God allows anything to happen to the Bible, and does not interfere, then you can be assured that the Bible says exactly what Satan wants it to say.
At the very least, we know we should treat the Bible like you would treat any document that is confirmed to contain both true and false claims: you have to meticulously comb over every claim and consult your own intellect to determine the truth value of each claim. Because with contradictions, you lose the "because it's in the Bible" defense. Why do you believe in the Flood? Because it's in the Bible? Well, contradictions are in the Bible, do you believe those are true, too? Clearly not, so you cannot use "because it's in the Bible" as an answer for belief. On some level you must use your own reasoning. Does your own intellect tell you it is reasonable to believe in talking donkeys?
There is another issue you really ought to use your own intellect on. It is regrettable and also somehow amusing to me, as a US citizen and former Christian, that the two documents I used to revere the most - the Bible and the Declaration of Independence - were written by racist, sexist, conquesting, genocidal, slave-driving rapists. The Declaration of Independence, though, does not claim divine authority - or if it does, I think we tend to ignore that. So why, when you understand that a group of ancient savages drafted a system of morality and a proposed method of atonement, do you believe that adherence to these principles is in any way reasonable?
It seems, then, that you believe two things: first, that a group of men who were doing all that they could to prevent the Bible from accumulating errors were unable to find assistance from God in this matter (John 14:13) and ultimately failed at their task; and second, that an ancient being who is described as clever at every opportunity and who is malicious to the gospel is somehow unable to at least match the blunders of the men who were doing their best to prevent errors from accumulating. If God allows men to corrupt the Bible, but prevents Satan from doing so, then it is natural to believe that God is impeding Satan's free will to the point that Satan can only do what God wants him to do, which is to say that Satan acts on God's behalf. If, on the other hand, God allows anything to happen to the Bible, and does not interfere, then you can be assured that the Bible says exactly what Satan wants it to say.
At the very least, we know we should treat the Bible like you would treat any document that is confirmed to contain both true and false claims: you have to meticulously comb over every claim and consult your own intellect to determine the truth value of each claim. Because with contradictions, you lose the "because it's in the Bible" defense. Why do you believe in the Flood? Because it's in the Bible? Well, contradictions are in the Bible, do you believe those are true, too? Clearly not, so you cannot use "because it's in the Bible" as an answer for belief. On some level you must use your own reasoning. Does your own intellect tell you it is reasonable to believe in talking donkeys?
There is another issue you really ought to use your own intellect on. It is regrettable and also somehow amusing to me, as a US citizen and former Christian, that the two documents I used to revere the most - the Bible and the Declaration of Independence - were written by racist, sexist, conquesting, genocidal, slave-driving rapists. The Declaration of Independence, though, does not claim divine authority - or if it does, I think we tend to ignore that. So why, when you understand that a group of ancient savages drafted a system of morality and a proposed method of atonement, do you believe that adherence to these principles is in any way reasonable?
Jesus is like Pinocchio. He's the bastard son of a carpenter. And a liar. And he wishes he was real.
