Problem: Many alleged Bible contradictions can be answered logically by noting that two or more passages of Scripture may refer to the same word (or idea), but use the word in different senses. If a man leaves home during the middle of flu season and tells his wife, “I am thankful I’m not sick,” but then turns to his son, who just ransacked the living room while looking for his toy light saber, and says, “I am sick of seeing such a mess,” no one would accuse the father of being dishonest. He obviously used the word “sick” in two different senses. English-speaking Americans living in the twenty-first century understand the flexibility of language. American use of the word “bad” is a prime example of the elasticity of our language. Bad literally can mean “bad” (as in the “bad dog” who ate a student’s homework), or it can mean the very opposite: bad can mean “good.” A basketball fan watching a player make ten 3-pointers in one game may truthfully say: “That guy is bad!”—meaning, he is a very good basketball player. Unfortunately, critics of the Bible’s inspiration accept the freedom of language in today’s world (and they often take such freedom themselves), but they will not allow the ancient biblical writers the same liberty.