Dr Paul Allen

  Since the biblical text is a composite document that contains portions of oral tradition, legal pronouncements, historical chronicles, poetry, prophecy, and wisdom literature, it is a standard conclusion among scholars that several groups of editors at one time or another had a hand in creating what eventually became the canonical text of the Bible.  One group collectively known as the “Deuteronomistic Historian” has been identified as responsible for much of the material contained in the books from Deuteronomy through 2 Kings.  This so-called Deuteronomistic history contains distinctive and identifiably consistent vocabulary, syntax, themes, stylistic formulas, and a well-defined theological perspective on the events in Israelite history. It is also clear from its emphasis on Jerusalem as the place where “God’s name dwells”—and its generally positive presentation of the Davidic dynasty of rulers—that the Deuteronomistic Historian is a scribal voice from the Southern Kingdom of Judah

Does the Bible contain contradictions, inexact measures, and perhaps actual errors? And, if so, does this mean that the Bible isn’t real history? There’s something about coming to the end of a film or book and finally understanding the baffling details that have previously made no sense. Like the "Last kingdom" - Different incidents are explained, problems are ironed out, and everything comes to a satisfactory ending. But viewers or readers hate stories that conclude with unanswered questions and inconsistencies, so editors try to eradicate any such untidiness. So well-edited books leave no loose ends and contain no contradictions. Critics of the Bible sometimes mistake it for this kind of literature. They know the claim that the Bible is inspired by God (2 Tim 3:16), so they think that its narrative should be tidy, self-explanatory, and self-consistent. However, ancient historians know that potential contradictions and apparent mistakes are normal in true histo