ENCYCLOPAEDIA OF BIBLE DIFFICULTIES ON NEW TESTAMENT
Gleason W Archer’s Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (two editions considered
in this work) is one of the books at the forefront of religious systems that
allege that there is no error in the Bible for it is the word of God. Let us
quote from the book and put this claim to the test. We are considering
some letters and writings of the New Testament.
QUOTE: 1 CORINTHIANS 8:4 - If idols are nothing, why does God condemn idolatry?
PROBLEM: Paul affirms here that "an idol is nothing in the world." Yet the Bible
repeatedly condemns idolatry (cf. Ex. 20:4), and even Paul said there are demons
behind idols (I Cor. 10:19). Is he then claiming that demons are nothing?
SOLUTION: Paul does not deny the existence of idols, but simply their ability to
affect mature believers who eat meat that has been offered to them (cf 8:1). It
is not the reality of idols, but their divinity which Paul denies. The devil
does deceive idolaters (1 Cor. 10:19), but he cannot destroy the meat which God
has created and pronounced good (Gen. 1:31; 1 Tim. 4:4), even if someone else
has offered it to an idol.
COMMENT: It is warning that any god beside God is useless and demons cannot do a
good job of substituting for non-existent gods.
QUOTE: JAMES 1:15 - If God doesn't tempt anyone, then why did He tempt Abraham?
PROBLEM: The Bible says "God tempted Abraham" (Gen. 22:1, KJV), and Jesus taught
His disciples to pray to God, "do not lead us into temptation" (Matt. 6:13). How
then can James say of God, "nor does He Himself tempt anyone" (James 1:13).
SOLUTION: God did not tempt Abraham (nor anyone) to sin. Rather, He tested
Abraham to see if he would sin or be faithful to Him. God allows Satan to tempt
us (cf. Matt 4:1-10; James 4:7; 1 Peter 5:8-9), but James is correct in saying,
never does God "Himself tempt anyone." God cannot be tempted by sin, since He is
absolutely and unchangeably perfect (Matt 5:48; Heb. 6:18), nor can He tempt
anyone else to sin (James 1:13). When we sinful human beings are tempted, it is
because we allow ourselves to be drawn away by our own lustful desires (James
1:14-15). The source of temptation comes from within, not from without. It comes
from sinful man, not from a sinless God. While God does not and cannot actually
tempt anyone to sin, He can and does allow us to be tempted by Satan and our own
lustful desires. Of course, His purpose in permitting (but not producing or
promoting) evil is to make us more perfect. God allowed Satan to tempt Job so
that Job could say "When He has tested me, I shall come forth as gold" (Job
23:10). God allowed evil to befall Joseph at the hands of his brothers. But in
the end Joseph was able to say to them, "you meant evil against me; but God
meant it for good" (Gen. 50:20).
COMMENT: We tend to think of an evil deed as a real evil and which leads to God
later having to find ways of disabling it and neutralising it and bringing good
out of it. But here we are told that you can mean evil while God means good by
it. That is a totally different concept. It amounts to saying evil is not really
evil.
QUOTE: On the subject of the Bible saying you should pray for one whose sin
leads to death, “Whatever John envisioned, there is no reason that it could not
refer to a sin so serious that it would eventuate in physical death. Paul
mentioned that the Corinthians had so participated in the Lord's Supper in an
unworthy manner that some were sick and others were dead as a result (1 Cor.
11:29-30). In fact, the priests Nadab and Abihu were smitten dead for their
disobedience to the Lord (Num. 3:4), as were Ananias and Saphira for their sin
(Acts 5:1-9). So, it is entirely possible that John has some such serious sin in
mind here whereby the believer is turned over to Satan for "the destruction of
the flesh, that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus" (1 Cor.
5:5).”
COMMENT: To say it refers to a sin that may lead to you being saved if you are
killed by it virtually could endorse suicide. And if John had such a sin in mind
he would not have said there is no point in praying. He would have seen that as
grounds for more praying. Rather than suppose damnation starts when you die,
early Christianity says damnation starts when you are alive and just fulfilled
when you die. It is an affirmation of the doctrine that there is no salvation
for the person who living or dead makes a final choice against God.
QUOTE: The rite of circumcision (i.e., the surgical removal of the prepuce) was
intended as a sign and a seal of the covenant relationship between God and the
believer. Even as a wedding ring is a sign and seal of the total and exclusive
commitment of the bride and the groom to each other so long as they both shall
live, so the sacramental removal of this portion of the male organ was a
blood-sealed testimonial that the believer had turned his life over to the Lord,
with the commitment to live for Him and in dependence on His grace for the rest
of his earthly life. As a seal the act of circumcision amounted to a stamp of
ownership on the Old Testament; it testified that he belonged not to the world,
Satan, or self, but to the Lord Yahweh who had provided for his redemption.
COMMENT: New Testament doctrine is that circumcision is nothing unless treated
as prayer. It says it is no good for all who get circumcised break God's law and
make the circumcision mean nothing.
QUOTE: Does 1 Corinthians 7 refer to divorce at all? Apparently not. The Matthew
passages speak of remarriage after the original couple has broken up (under the
law of Moses, the guilty party in such a case was to be executed by stoning,
along with the paramour; cf. Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:24). But 1 Corinthians 7 makes
no reference to a second marriage on the part of the innocent partner. On the
contrary, it says quite specifically in v.11: “But if she [the separated wife
who is a Christian] ...
COMMENT: The 1 Corinthians 7 is about the right of pagans to end a marriage by
mutual consent if one of them becomes Christian. It refers to separation not
divorce. Notably Matthew is so strict about marriage that it would rather see a
man or woman free to remarry upon the execution of their spouse. It prefers
murder to divorce.
QUOTE: God is good, devoid of all evil or deceit. Is He that way because some
outside force has so conditioned Him that He could not be anything but good? Or
is God good because He chooses to be good and wills to reject evil? One may
raise a real question as to whether there could be any moral yardstick outside
of God by which His goodness could be measured or evaluated. But surely God’s
will is unfettered and undetermined by any outside authority or power.
COMMENT: In principle, it does not matter how God gets his authority to lay down
morality as long as he has it. This argument is obsessed with stopping at God.
That is its downfall. It is as silly as saying the dinner you need to keep
yourself alive gets its value from being a dinner. It does not. Its source is
important for what if the meat is not meat but some kind of synthetic material
that will not nourish?
QUOTE: In Galatians 3:16 Paul referred to the promises made to Abraham in
Genesis 13:15 (after he had returned from his sojourn in Egypt) and in Genesis
22:18 (after he had returned from Mount Moriah and the near sacrifice of his son
Isaac: “And in your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because
you have obeyed My voice” NASB). If Isaac was about twelve at the time of the
near sacrifice...
COMMENT: The New Testament is clear that God rewarded Abraham for being willing
to kill Isaac. It is total rubbish that the New Testament is softer and more
liberal than the Old. This link with Abraham is a core teaching of the New
Testament and Christianity which marks them as unworthy of respect and credence.
QUOTE: Revelation 16:8–10 we read of the true reaction of fallen man toward
divine punishment: The fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and the sun
was given power to scorch people with fire. They were seared by the intense heat
and they cursed the name of God ...they refused to repent or glorify him. The
fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and his kingdom was
plunged into darkness. Men gnawed their tongues in agony and cursed the God of
heaven because of their pains and their sores, but they refused to repent of
what they had done (NIV).
COMMENT: The idea is that God punishes you in Hell and instead of admitting its
your due you rebel and get more engrained in evil and sin. Revelation may not be
describing an afterlife Hell here but it remains true that it is indeed Hell it
is on about.
QUOTE: In view of all this explicit evidence from the text itself as to Petrine
authorship, we are forced to conclude that the author of this epistle made such
a definite claim to being the apostle Peter himself that it would have been
grossly fraudulent and deceptive on his part if the epistle were not
authentically Petrine. If it was not really by him, it should not be used or
respected by the church at all; and it is unwarranted hypocrisy to use it for
preaching purposes, for it should be removed from the New Testament altogether
as a sheer imposture. It would be hard to conceive of any valid revelation of
divine truth as emanating from such a dishonest pen.
COMMENT: Well said. The liberals who try to justify what they think is an
imposture being in the Bible would make your blood boil.
QUOTE ABOUT HOW IN THE NEW TESTAMENT: the calling of a soldier is
considered an honorable one, if carried on in a responsible and lawful fashion
(Matt. 8:5; Luke 3:14; Acts 10:1–6,34–35). Paul even uses the analogy of
faithful service in the army as a model for Christian commitment (2 Tim. 2:4),
without the slightest suggestion of reproach for military service.
COMMENT: We need to know that for the allegation that Christianity is pacifist
or that Christ was is very rife despite being utter nonsense.
QUOTE: As for the 144,000 who appear in Revelation 14:1–5, the identity in
number suggests (though it does not necessarily prove) an identity in
constituency. In other words, it looks as if these represent the raptured church
COMMENT: The rapture is an unbiblical fantasy. The text if referring to raptured
people is referring to Jews!
QUOTE ABOUT SATAN GOING TO HEAVEN TO GOD TO ACCUSE PEOPLE: Satan has been
officially expelled from heaven, but he still actually has access there. Several
places in Scripture present the idea that Satan has access to the presence of
God in order to accuse the saints. In Zechariah 3:1 we find a vision of Joshua
standing before the angel of the Lord with Satan on his right hand accusing him.
Revelation 12:10 identifies Satan as the accuser of the brethren "who accused
them before our God day and night." Apparently, as the prince of the power of
the air (Eph. 2:2), Satan has had opportunity to appear before God for the
purpose of accusing God's people of sin. This is what he is doing against Job in
both Job 1:6 and 2:1.
COMMENT: Christians don’t want to think that the damned or the evil spirits can
get into Heaven. It contradicts the claim that Hell is about quarantining the
bad away from the God forever. It contradicts what Jesus is about - saving means
quarantining and protecting from sin. But the text says what it says. Jesus was
a fake.
COMMENT: Maybe it is the same with Jesus. The New Testament does not always try
to make him likeable and does seem to describe behavior on his part that can
only be called immoral.
All attempts to prove that Jesus the Bible (the Bible calls Jesus the word of
God and calls itself that too so in a sense it is claiming to be Jesus) is the
word of God fail because the Bible contradicts itself and attempts to hide this
are stupid, irresponsible and are fabricated. Disgusting is the only way
to describe such determined efforts to defend and promote and use for worship
such a twisted volume as if the blood splatters on it do not count.