BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS: WISDOM LITERATURE AND THE NEW TESTAMENT

I was looking at the homepage of American Atheists and saw their latest list of Bible contradictions. I had already dealt with most of them in various previous posts (see “Apologetics: A Study Outline” for a key). But there were three that I had never before addressed, and they all fell into the same category: comparisons between a passage from one of the Wisdom Books and one from the New Testament.

Making these sorts of comparisons is probably even worse than trying to compare apples with oranges. In the first place, the concept of progressive revelation within the Bible is well established. That basically means that God chose to conceal certain truths from the Jews during Old Testament times and only give hints of what was to come. But with the coming of Jesus to earth, these previously hidden truths began to become manifest in his life, teachings, and through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit on Jesus' followers. Thus, what to an outsider appears to be a rank contradiction, is in fact exactly what would be expected taking this fact into account.

But it is even more dangerous to take a poetic passage in the OT Wisdom Literature and try to get it to match up exactly with a literal teaching given in the New Testament. That is because there is little in common between the very natures of the revelations and the way they are presented.

The first example of a supposed contradiction is in comparing Job 7:9, in which the title character says there is no escape from Sheol (the land of the dead), and John 5:28-29, in which Jesus states that the dead can be resurrected. Whereas Jesus is presenting a straightforward teaching, Job is doing nothing of the sort. Heavenor characterizes Job's comments as “the wild, whirling speeches of a desperate man” whose words should not be taken as “cool and calculated.” Actually, except for the very beginning and end of the book, we find Job and his friends both floundering about in vain attempts to understand the reason why Job has been chosen by God to suffer. Only the reader knows the real answer.

This whole book is a play written in verse, much as the plays of Shakespeare. In neither case should we expect it to consist of declaratory statements that fully reflect the view of the author. Actually, there is a close similarity here between Job and Hamlet. The latter, in his famous soliloquy ponders, as does Job, his present situation and wonders whether he might not be better off dead. But then he says, “To die, to sleep, perchance to dream. Ay, there's the rub; for in that sleep of death what dreams may come.” In other words, maybe I wouldn't be better off dead after all because that might not be the end of my conscious existence, and who knows what would happen then; it might be even worse.

One demonstration of Job's confused thinking process can be seen by comparing Job's parroting the “ancient perspective” (in Hartley's words, but note my emphasis) on death but then reflecting a contradictory view in passages such as Job 14:7,14; 19:25-27; and 26:6. In those latter passages, it appears that Job is reflecting more of an alternative viewpoint on the afterlife, which happens to be also present in other places within the OT scripture and will recur full-blown in the NT in passages such as John 5:28-29.

P.S. Johnston describes the situation as follows: “For most of the OT, death leads to a shadowy, insubstantial existence in the underworld, called Sheol...Thus persistence in Sheol is closer to 'non-life' than afterlife. However, a few texts imply that the underworld is not hidden from Yahweh (Job 26:6; Ps 139:8). Although these do not posit any meaningful contact with the dead, they may hint at alternative views, albeit faintly.” Some of these alternative views are found in Isaiah 12:1-2; 24:22; 26:19; 66:24; Ezekiel 37; Daniel 12:2; Psalm 16:10-11; 49; 73; and Ecclesiastes 3:17.

The sum total of the OT passages above demonstrate adequately that this “alternative view” in which the possibility of resurrection is admitted leads fairly naturally to Jesus' teachings and life in which the reality of the resurrection is not only clearly taught (as in John 5:28-29) but also demonstrated by Jesus' own example. And as is fairly obvious, Jesus was practically paraphrasing Daniel 12:1-3 in its comment regarding some of the dead going “to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.”

The next two passages contrasted by American Atheists are:

    Ecclesiastes 1:4 – “A generation goes, and a generation comes, but the earth remains forever.”

    II Peter 3:10 – This passage describes the coming Day of the Lord when the present heaven and earth will pass away.

There is a lot I could say regarding these two passages, but I will try to be more succinct than I was in discussing the previous “contradiction.” For one reason, the same principles apply regarding any sort of one-to-one comparison between a NT passage with one from the OT and between poetic and prosaic verses. But there is an added complication present in regard to the Book of Ecclesiastes.

In this book of “anti-wisdom,” worldly wisdom (that which is “under the sun” and limited by man's present perspective) is being constantly contrasted with our attitude as theists who realize that there is more to existence than is presently observable by us. In the opening passage, it is the view of a rather wordly-wise sage that is being expressed. But even there, the emphasis of the author in v. 1:4 is not to make any inspired statement regarding the duration of the earth's existence. Instead it is to contrast the fleeting nature of our individual lives with the seemingly eternal nature of the physical creation.

In II Peter 3, the emphasis is also on the fleeting time each of us has on earth and the necessity of utilizing it wisely (See especially verses 11-12). But this time around, there is an added dimension in that Peter knew from Jesus' teachings that the present earth and heaven would disappear in the future whenever God decrees it. In fact, if you look at II Peter 3:4, there Peter denounces those who still cling to the idea that present conditions on earth will persist forever. And to do it, he quotes those people as saying, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since our ancestors died, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation!” (NRSV)  It sounds an awful lot like Ecclesiastes 1:4, doesn't it?

The final paired passages I would like to discuss here are quoted from KJV as found on the American Atheist homepage under the strange title THE HOLY LIFE:

    “Go thy way, eat thy bread with joy, and drink thy wine with a merry heart…” — Ecclesiastes 9:7

    “…they that rejoice, as though they rejoiced not…” — I Corinthians 7:30

It is almost impossible to guess what sort of a contradiction they expect us to see here with such a truncated quote from I Corinthians. But by reading a little more from that verse and accompanying context, it is becomes clear. In the more extended passage, the whole of chapter 7 constitutes Paul's reply to some questions that the Corinthian church had asked him regarding marriage. We don't know the exact nature of those questions, but Paul makes some pronouncements regarding the inadvisability of marriage in light of the hastening end times. You really need to read the whole chapter to get the gist of what he is saying.

The overall theme is perhaps expressed best in v. 17: “Let each of you lead the life that the Lord has assigned, to which God called you.” However, Paul admits several times that some of his advice is just his own personal opinion, not a directive from God. And that includes his comments in vv. 25-31 of which the American Atheists cite but part of one verse. Paul also says that his advice is “for your own benefit, not to put any restraint upon you...” (v. 35)

I find it interesting that there is actually more agreement than disagreement between Ecclesiastes and I Corinthians than there is any contradiction. The background of both passages reflects the question of how to live your life knowing that it could end at any minute. Also, just as the bottom line in Paul's thought is to “lead the life that the Lord has assigned,” the Teacher of Ecclesiastes says that “God has long ago approved what you do.”

And Ecclesiastes is not at all recommending pursuit of debauchery and unfettered pleasure. Instead it recommends an enjoyable life in the company of your lifelong partner in life (v. 9), just as Paul does. In addition, it is not just a life of pleasure that Ecclesiastes describes but also a life of meaningful work in the time you have on earth (v. 10). Similarly, Paul cautions that the important thing is not to be in love with the things of the world, but concentrate on working to please God (as in v. 34).

In conclusion, I would have to say that the above “contradictions” are not at all as absurd as most I have seen from anti-Christian sources on the internet. But nonetheless, each one fails to take anything but a simple-minded approach to the Bible and almost totally ignores the individual contexts of the passages quoted.