I recently heard this guy speaking concerning the Biblical text. The clip begins by saying,
"All you have to do to find discrepancies in the Bible is read it horizontally". He then proceeds with the purpose of his discourse to belittle the Bible by pointing out numerous contradictions as a conglomerate of confusion. This statement does not come from just anybody, but a well-studied and educated scholar with his eyes wide open.
However, in all his brilliance, he betrays his own intelligence with that leading statement. It's a trick of the trade that speakers use to distract their audience. It is a "slight of hand" way of placing in your mind the obvious, he is saying, "If you are smart like me", you will see it too. To see otherwise, well, you would be like all those dumb people who have missed the obvious for years, after all, all you have to do is read it horizontally!
The reason I suggested he had betrayed his own intelligence is that he could have taken the subject in a serious scholarly manner, which he is fully capable of doing while considering the weight of his subject and all the people it would affect. Instead, he chooses another path. It's not as if he is the only one that reads horizontally, Thomas Paine was reading horizontally 200 years ago and someone will be reading horizontally 200 years from now. I have already written before on this subject, to read those articles simply click the following links. "Contradictions" The Crucifixion "Contradictions" The Genealogy of Jesus and "Contradictions" 2 Samuel 24:1 and 1 Chronicles 21:1
You see, it's not a matter of intelligence, if it was, people like me would be in the intellectual poor house and at the mercy of such scholars as this. Fortunately, he's not the only brilliant mind out there. It is helpful to consider how other brilliant minds have approached these obvious contradictions, remember, all you have to do is read horizontally.
Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1626), known as the father of the scientific method, wrote, "There are two books laid before us to study, to prevent our falling into error; first, the volume of Scriptures, which reveal the will of God, then the volume of the Creatures, which express His power."
John Locke (1632-1704), the noted English philosopher, wrote: "The Bible is one of the greatest blessings bestowed by God on the children of men. It has God for its author, salvation for its end, and truth without any mixture for its matter. It is all pure, all sincere; nothing too much; nothing wanting."
The noted French writer and philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) wrote: "The majesty of the Scriptures strikes me with admiration, as the purity of the Gospel has its influence on my heart. Peruse the works of our philosophers; with all their pomp of diction, how mean, how contemptible, are they, compared with the Scriptures! Is it possible that a Book at once so simple and sublime should be merely the work of man?"
One in his own camp, the brilliant German scholar and philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) said: "The existence of the Bible, as a book for the people, is the greatest benefit which the human race has ever experienced. Every attempt to belittle it is a crime against humanity."
The great Scottish novelist and poet Sir Walter Scott (1771-1832) would draw our attention to the deep study and observation of which the scripture has undergone throughout history when he wrote:
"The most learned, acute, and diligent student cannot, in the longest life, obtain an entire knowledge of this one Volume. The more deeply he works the mine, the richer and more abundant he finds the ore; new light continually beams from this source of heavenly knowledge to direct the conduct, and illustrate the work of God and the ways of men; and he will at last leave the world confessing that the more he studied the Scriptures the fuller conviction he had of his own ignorance, and of their inestimable value."In similar admiration, William Gladstone (1809-1898), famous 19th-century British prime minister, said: "I have known 95 of the world's great men in my time, and of these, 87 were followers of the Bible. The Bible is stamped with a Specialty of Origin, and an immeasurable distance separates it from all its competitors."
What name is more recognizable in the last century as Wernher von Braun (1912-1977), regarded as the father of the American space program, wrote, "In this age of space flight, when we use the modern tools of science to advance into new regions of human activity, the Bible, this grandiose, stirring history of the gradual revelation and unfolding of the moral law, remains in every way an up-to-date book."
The reading of the Bible has always been a part of and considered the source of success of this great nation, Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924), 28th U.S. president, stated: "I have a very simple thing to ask of you. I ask every man and woman in this audience that from this day on they will realize that part of the destiny of America lies in their daily perusal of this great Book." Of course, he never wanted them to read it horizontally!
The Bible has always been considered the cornerstone upon which our foundation of government rests. Harry Truman (1884-1972), 33rd U.S. president, said: "The fundamental basis of this nation's law was given to Moses on the Mount. The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teaching we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul. I don't think we emphasize that enough these days. If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally end up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in the right for anybody except the state."
To quote from more scientific minds, Sir John Ambrose Fleming was an English engineer and physicist who invented the first thermionic valve or vacuum tube, designed the radio transmitter with which the first transatlantic radio transmission was made, and also established the right-hand rule used in physics stated:
“There is abundant evidence that the Bible, though written by men, is not the product of the human mind. By countless multitudes, it has always been revered as a communication to us from the Creator of the Universe.” Joseph Lister, was a British surgeon, medical scientist, experimental pathologist, and a pioneer of antiseptic surgery and preventative medicine. In all his brilliance, he was unable to read horizontally, “I am a believer in the fundamental doctrines of Christianity.”
Max Karl Ernst Ludwig Planck was a German theoretical physicist whose discovery of energy quanta won him the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1918, he would state: “Both religion and science need for their activities the belief in God, and moreover God stands for the former in the beginning, and for the latter at the end of the whole thinking. For the former, God represents the basis, for the latter, the crown of any reasoning concerning the world-view.”
Michael Faraday, one of the most influential scientists in history, was an English scientist who contributed to the study of electromagnetism and electrochemistry, he said: “The book of nature which we have to read is written by the finger of God.” However, it must not be read horizontally.
Matthew Fontaine Maury was an American oceanographer and naval officer, who served the United States and then joined the Confederacy during the American Civil War. He was nicknamed "Pathfinder of the Seas" and is considered a founder of modern oceanography, he states: “The Bible is true and science is true, and therefore each, if truly read, proves the truth of the other.”
James Clerk Maxwell was a Scottish physicist with broad interests and the scientist responsible for the classical theory of electromagnetic radiation, which was the first theory to describe electricity, magnetism, and light as different manifestations of the same phenomenon, he would state: “Almighty God, who has created man in Thine own image, and made him a living soul that he might seek after Thee, and have dominion over Thy creatures, teach us to study the works of Thy hands, that we may subdue the earth to our use, and strengthen the reason for Thy service; so, to receive Thy blessed Word, that we may believe on Him whom Thou has sent, to give us the knowledge of salvation and the remission of sins. All of which we ask in the name of the same Jesus Christ, our Lord.”
I think that is sufficient to make the point a statement like,
"All you have to do to find discrepancies in the Bible is read it horizontally" is
intellectually dishonest and demeaning to one's audience. Let's consider briefly his content following that statement, which consisted of comparing the accounts of the Crucifixion of Christ in the different Gospels. His sole source of argument is that they don't agree, suggesting Mark says this and Matthew says something else. Luke mentions this and John tells a different story. On the other hand, I have heard arguments from the same camp discredit the Gospels because they were too consistent in their accounts. They point out they can't be original accounts, they must have copied from each other or there would have been more variation in the accounts. Well, which is it?
You see, it's really not about the consistency of the text, it is about the text itself. They don't believe it, don't like it, some even hate it, and feel they must discredit it in whatever way they can. As I said, the speaker has a brilliant mind and everything he states is true. He craftily presents his facts to bring his audience to a predetermined conclusion, thus the reason for his leading statement. He is aware other scholars are also aware of the same facts and will totally disagree with his synopsis. He is also aware much of his audience is not. He is drawing upon confirmation bias we all have a tendency to reach for knowing many in the audience are already looking for such affirmation. They will readily receive it, he is also hoping to plant seeds of doubt in the minds of those who are not so informed or familiar with the text. That is the way this game is played.
In his discourse, he craftily drops a comment concerning variations in the original Greek to help bolster his assertions. However, he is not privy to any variations in any of the Greek texts that have not been identified, studied, and resolved for centuries. Learned men have studied these texts for centuries, every serious attempt in which the scripture has been translated into another language, the original languages have been sought and examined. Every time there is a serious attempt at a new English translation, the original languages are sought, compared, and studied. What is the result of all this research? We have the scripture in numerous languages from numerous periods of unrelated history, and hundreds of years of this strenuous effort has never produced any other rendering of the Bible than the one that is available in various languages today. Again, he knows this, thus he makes his approach in such a way as to turn his audience in another direction.
Sometimes it is argued that the brilliant minds of the past were simply captives of their times. If they had the information available to them that is available today from all the new scientific discoveries, they would have departed from their belief in the scriptures too. Two hundred years ago Thomas Paine made the same arguments without the new scientific discoveries. Today the same argument is being made with them, yet to no avail. Brilliant minds that believe are still not deterred, brilliant minds that do not believe still try and discredit the text, two hundred years from now the same arguments will be set forth, not because the new discoveries have discredited the text, but because they don't believe and don't like the text.
We must also consider, we don't all have brilliant minds, that is for the few. What about the rest of us, what are we to do? We can't read the original languages, and we can't fathom all the new scientific discoveries that are being put forth. Are we at the mercy of the brilliant minds of the world? Perhaps in many respects, we are, but as far as the text is concerned, even I can read it even if it is horizontal.
As I read, I can recognize if Mark mentions one thing and Matthew another, it does not mean they disagree. It could simply mean one chose to say this about the event and the other chose to say something else? I understand that different things are important to different people and they record the same thing placing different emphasis on their observations. I also know in the same location 20 feet can make a difference in whether one hears a statement or does not hear the statement in order to record it. I also know that within that 20 feet, one can hear one thing and another hear something entirely different from another audible source occurring at the same time during the same event. I also know one can record his visible recollection of the happening at an event, such as who was there, how many, what the surrounding looked like, whether it was noisy or quiet, and a person of interest talking or refraining from speaking. Then another person arrives at the same event 15 minutes later, and there are different people visible, doing different things in different places, where it was quiet 15 minutes ago now something has happened and people are noisy. A person that was refraining from speaking may now be giving a discourse.
Years later one reading their accounts of the event would be foolish to say, that event couldn't have happened like that, here is another account and it says different people were there, one is saying a person is speaking and the other is saying that person was quiet. All you have to do to find discrepancies is to read their statement horizontally! That is why non-brilliant people have read the Gospels for years with a clear understanding. They logically know and understand how fluent life is.
But we have those crafty brilliant folks who like to sway our minds to their own purpose. They make such statements as, "People for years have taken events from the different Gospels and put them together, and you can do that if you want to, but by doing so you are making up your own Gospel." They present the statement to infer that the Gospel is not true because it has been made up of four different Gospels. However, if you are not brilliant and crafty, you might want to talk to everyone you can who knows anything about an event. You might be able to come up with a more defined description of the event instead of understanding it from a single source. I know it's not much, but it's all we non-brilliants have to get by on.
May God bless,
David
