He said that his pastor had showed him a contradiction in the King James Bible. (Great "man of faith.") He asked if I could explain it. As he began to tell me the contradiction, I , being familiar with the argument, finished quoting it.
"Oh, you know about it then?" he asked.
"Sure," I replied.
"What's the answer?" he urged expectantly.
"I don't know," I answered, knowing what I had just done to his faith in me. (In me, that is.)
I explained my reply to him as I will now explain it to you.
NO ONE can have ALL of the answers. There are two reasons for this.
First, if I or any other defender of the Authorized Version had ALL of the answers, we would be GOD. But there are innumerable differences between our infinite GOD and His finite creatures. Thus, although some can have many answers, and a few can have a great many answers, no one can have ALL of the answers.
Second, and most importantly, if we could get ALL of our questions answered then concerning the Bible issue, we would be walking by sight not by faith. (Hebrews 11:6, II Corinthians 5:7)
I believe there will always have to be some questions which remain unexplainable by our human reason. This would make our FINAL judgment on the infallibility of the Bible contingent on the reliability of God's statements such as Psalm 12:6,7 and Matthew 24:35 instead of the education and intellect of our favorite "defenders of the faith."
Of course, the proponent of the Authorized Version feels a little vulnerable with this conclusion. Knowing that our antagonists will be quick to exploit what they perceive as a hole in our armor. BUT a resort to "faith" as our final and "last ditch" defense is not as inconsistent or precarious as it first might seem.
Not inconsistent, because, as previously stated, God would rather we have faith in Him in the face of the unexplainable, as so many of the Old and New Testament saints have exhibited, than to have faith in our own human ability to "find an answer" concerning difficult passages.
It is certainly not precarious in that it does not leave us at the mercy of our vindictive opponents. For believing in the perfection of a Book which we can hold in our hands is surely not as vulnerable as a professed faith in the perfection of some lost originals.
The reason most critics are so vehement about the infallibility of the originals is because they know that the originals can NEVER be produced, so their faith can never be tried or upended.
We are willing, on the other hand, to take the abuse from our "self conceited brethren" and give answers for our reasonable faith in a tangible Book rather than in an idealistic original. We need not apologize.