TRICKS ATHEISTS USE

In attempting to discredit the inspiration of the Bible, atheists resort to a number of deceptive tricks. I guess I should be open to the possibility that some of their errors were made in ignorance. However, if people engage in making public pronouncements concerning any subject, it behooves them to at least become a little knowledgeable about that subject first.

I have tried to expose the faulty reasoning behind a number of specific “errors” and “contradictions” in the Bible which one may find in the writings of atheists in their books, internal publications, and on the internet. Many of these rebuttals may be found on my blog by searching for the keyword “Contradictions” or looking at the list included in the post “Apologetics: A Study Guide.”

Before considering specific misleading techniques present in non-believers' arguments, I should first point out that you may run across posts on-line titled something like “Bible Error #3,726.” Of course, the authors don't actually have that many errors to point out, but it immediately gives the reader the impression that even if you manage to discredit this particular “error,” they can give you at least 3,725 more with which to wrestle. It is exactly the same as saying, “Where there's smoke, there's fire” although in truth, there may not even be any smoke to begin with.

1. Use of the King James Version to make a point.

I know that many Christians rely exclusively on this translation. However, there are many cases where one can be easily misled by either the archaic language in which it is written or the ignorance of the original 1611 translators as to the preferred text and understanding of the Greek and Hebrew words. When in doubt, it does not hurt to consult a more modern rendering.

2. Refusing to take into account the nuances of the original Greek and Hebrew words.

This technique is sometimes related to the one above, and there are many variations possible. I ran into this one while in junior high school when a friend of mine pointed out the inconsistency of the Bible in commanding us not to kill while at the same time we inadvertently “kill” numerous micro-organisms in our body every day. If I had known a little more about languages at that time, I could have responded that there are many different Hebrew words translated as “kill,” and the one in the Ten Commandments refers specifically to a human being purposely killing another human being unlawfully.

3. Comparing apples and oranges.

This is an extremely common method used by atheists to point out contradictory statements found in different parts of the Bible. And it can take various forms. At times, it involves a direct comparison of a comment in the OT with one in the NT, in which case the concept of progressive revelation by God usually explains the difference. Another type of unfair comparison involves that between books and passages in the Bible of entirely different genres in order to make a point.

4. Reading poetic and figurative passages as if they were meant to be literal.

This happens to be one trait that often unites such strange bedfellows as fundamentalist Christians and militant atheists. I have met Christians who were convinced that all of Jesus' parables must have actually taken place historically – “otherwise He would be a liar.” But when one takes that unsupported stance, it actually plays right into the hands of atheists who have been known to state that Jesus believed strongly in the institution of slavery in all its worst forms since so many of his parables feature cruel slave owners.

5. Extrapolating to an unjustified conclusion.

A writer in one atheist publication made the statement that since Jesus ratified the OT law as still being in effect, that means that he was in favor of the death penalty for such offenses as a child talking back to his parent or someone being found guilty of adultery. There are a number of things wrong with such faulty reasoning, but one only has to point to the story in John 8 concerning Jesus and the adulterous women to give the lie to that statement.

6. Ignoring the immediate context.

Unfortunately, it is not only atheists who are guilty of this obvious mistake. Christians sometimes do the same thing, and Jehovah Witnesses have completely mastered the subject. But when in doubt concerning the validity of a criticism against the Bible, the first thing you should do is back up at least a few verses earlier and look for the most obvious meaning the verse has in its slightly larger setting.

7. Making unreasonable demands of historical proof.

Time after time, confident statements by atheists or liberal scholars regarding the unhistorical nature of biblical passages have been overturned when more archeological evidence came to light. And more is being uncovered every day. Books have literally been written documenting this trend in which minimalism (assuming something in the Bible is a lie unless absolutely proved otherwise) has bitten the dust repeatedly in the light of additional information.

Most of the historical objections to the Bible by past and present critics follow this same pattern: making unfounded deductions before all the evidence is in. So keep in mind this general principle: “Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” And since in archeology, the evidence is never all in, we should be rightly suspicious of any absolute statements from that quarter that deny the historical accuracy of the Bible based on something that isn't there.

Similarly, it is quite easy to state that, for example, Abraham never existed or that Nicodemus was an imaginary person conjured up to make a doctrinal point, simply on the evidence that we have no evidence (outside the Bible) that they ever existed. This sort of argument hangs on the unrealistic assumption that whichever character or event appearing to be important to a biblical author must have been equally important to contemporary historical writers of neighboring cultures. That sort of assumption is pure nonsense, as any historian can tell you.

8. Demanding that the Bible use scientific terminology in describing physical phenomena as well as exhibiting the same degree of scientific knowledge that we possess.

The problem with the first demand is that the Bible describes phenomena in terms of what is observed to take place, not according to the mechanisms bringing about the phenomena in the first place. Each approach is valid, but the first approach is timeless while the second, more scientific, approach will always be in flux as new information comes to light. So we cannot fault the biblical authors for stating that the sun set, for example, since we say the same thing today.

The related issue concerns the amount of scientific knowledge we expect out of the Bible. One example is the oft-cited criticism that Jesus was incorrect in stating that the mustard seed is the smallest seed on earth since there is a smaller seed found in South America. There are several ways to counter this objection, but the most obvious one is that Jesus' parable would have been totally meaningless to his audience if he had cited that particular seed unknown to them rather than one with which they were very well acquainted. The whole intent of the Bible is not to impart scientific knowledge which we can find out on our own, but to share spiritual truths instead.

9. Mathematical precision of the sort we use today is also expected out of the biblical text.

There are a number of criticisms of this type leveled against the Bible which I have dealt with elsewhere. But suffice it to say that almost all of them can be answered in one or more of the following ways:

Admission that there is no redundancy built into numbers as there is for words. Thus, ancient manuscripts of the same text may disagree on the exact intended number in some cases.

Recognition that Hebrew numbers are written using letters just as the Romans did. Thus, what looks like a number may, or occasion, actually be a word instead.

Treating some numbers in the Bible, especially recurring ones, as rounded-off approximations or symbolic rather than exact numerals.

10. Confusing description with prescription.

Many of the criticisms leveled at the Bible from a moral viewpoint are guilty of this mistake. Just because there are horrific events such as rape, cannibalism, and murder described in the Bible, that certainly doesn't mean that the Bible is an immoral book or that God is a moral monster. And yet this is a common accusation made by atheists.

11. Making unreasonable demands on characters in the Bible.

Does the fact that Paul did not picket Caesar's palace demanding an immediate end to slavery mean that he cared little about the abuses of that system? Of course not! All that sort of action would have done is to get him quickly executed, probably along with all his followers. Instead it was the spread of Christianity due to the work of those such as Paul which would eventually lead to the downfall of slavery by changing the hearts of people.

12. Rewriting history to cast doubt on the canon of Scripture itself.

Some militant atheists attempt to cut out the root of Christianity by presenting a highly skewed version of the events which led to canonization of the particular books found in today's Scripture. Thus, they portray a conference of high-ranking archbishops taking a vote on which books to include. And by a narrow margin, influenced by the Roman Emperor Constantine, they came up with the list we have today. And from that point on, all the many competing scriptural writings of the time were condemned to be burned as heretical.

In reality, that fictionalized version of history is a lot closer to what happened to the Quran instead. Quite some time after Muhammed's death, one of his chief followers decreed that all the various manuscripts of that writing in existence throughout the Muslim world be collected and burned. Then he himself produced what he said was the only true Quran and demanded that all subsequent copies adhere to it precisely.

If you want to get a much better picture of the real process of the Bible's canonization, F.F. Bruce's excellent book The Canon of Scripture is an excellent place to go. And if that doesn't convince you that the early church made a wise choice in excluding the number of other religious writings circulating at the time, try reading some of them and you will see why they are not in our Bible. There are several compilations of these books available under names such as The Apocryphal Gospels or Lost Books of the Bible.

13. Stating their atheistic presuppositions as if that proved them.

Some prominent atheists simply proclaim what their belief is without any substantiating evidence as if that alone is enough to close the matter. For example, magician Penn Jillette of Penn and Teller was quoted as saying, “There is no God, and that is a fact.” Or you can just look at the astronomer Carl Sagan' famous pronouncement: “The cosmos is all there is or was or ever will be.” I'm not quite sure whom they hope to convince by such dogmatic statements, but I suppose some people will be wowed simply by the fame of these experts in other fields.

The above may serve as a handy checklist to consult whenever you come across a difficult question concerning the Bible posed by a non-believer. And if the criticism doesn't appear to fit into any of the above categories, just contact me and I will try to help. After all, I have at least 3,713 more basic errors that atheists commit.