First of all, I agree that Christian fundamentalists have had a tendency to apply the idea of inerrancy in ways which are at times difficult to defend.  Simplistic ideas of inerrancy have, at times, painted believers into a corner.  There has been a tendency to over-literalize, especially when using apocalyptic texts such as Revelation and Zechariah.  There has been the tendency to use Genesis as a scientific text, when it was not the intention of the authors of Genesis to write a scientific treatise.  There has been the tendency of some fundamentalists to sweep under the rug issues such as textual variants, and interpolations (later additions).  Another issue that Fundamentalists have created for us is their lack of understanding of the importance of genre in interpretation.  For example, when David said “Against you, you only have I sinned,” he writing a poem expressing his emotion and is speaking in hyperbole.  Technically, what he said there is not literally true!  David sinned against Uriah and against Bathseeba.  There are many difficulties in defending a wooden definition of infallibility, which Christians ought to be aware of and to be prepared to correct and even, in some cases, to defend against.

Having said that, however, I believe that there are no bona fide contradictions in the Bible.  I have spent hundreds of hours tracking down many dozens of claims of inherent biblical contradictions, and I have found there to be no true contradictions.  Literally, none.   If you go to my website, and look in the “Supposed inconsistencies” section of the Q & A’s you will find hundreds of articles in which I carefully and systematically defend the Scripture against claims of contradictions.  One principle I use there is that the benefit of the doubt should ALWAYS be given to the possible lack of contradiction.  An apparent contradiction is not necessarily a true contradiction.   For example, I have told some people that I was born in Fairfield, Connecticut.  I have told other people that I was born in Norwalk, Connecticut.  Both are true!  I lived in Fairfield when I was born, but the actual birth took place in a hospital in near-by Norwalk. We do not always resolve all possible seeming contradictions in all of our statements.  This is completely normal in human communication.  Applying this basic concept, there is no contradiction between Matthew 27:3-10 with Acts 1:18-19.  In fact, I have already responded to this claimed contradiction.  Also, I have published a book in which I address many of the most common false claims of contradiction in the Bible in my book, “Field Manual of Christian Apologetics,” available at www.ipibook.com   I am copying and pasting below:

Question:

I have found seemingly two different versions of Judas Iscariot’s death.

Version 1 in Matthew 27:3-6 NIV Judas Hangs Himself When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders. 4 “I have sinned,” he said, “for I have betrayed innocent blood.” “What is that to us?” they replied. “That’s your responsibility.” 5 So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself.       Version 2 in Acts 1:18-19 NIV 18 With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. 19 Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.

I found that Luke and Matthew say different things about Judas’ death. Is this only a figure of speech? Your thoughts Dr. Oakes?

Answer:

The two accounts are readily seen to not be in contradiction. Apparently, Judas hanged himself (Matt 27:5). After his dead body hung for an undisclosed amount of time, his body was cut down. When it hit the ground it burst open and all his intestines spilled out (Acts 1:18). There is no contradiction between these two accounts. In fact, as is so often the case, the one passage explains the other, and the two in combination make more sense than either alone.  Matthew 27:5 explains Acts 1:18. Normally, when bodies fall they do not split open, but the body of a person who has hanged himself and hung for a significant amount of time is far more likely to split open, as the body would swell significantly with time. The two Bible accounts simply supply different, but non-contradictory details. Either way, karma certainly had nothing to do with it. If a skeptic tries to point out a contradiction, you should give him this explanation (that he hanged himself and that his body split open when he was cut down).

John Oakes