Problem: In one area of Scripture, it appears that a son will bear the sins of his father, yet in other areas, it seems that that is not the case. So which is it? The answer lies, as always, in examining the context of the statements. Ultimately, the Bible has no internal contradiction. It just takes looking and reading to figure things out.
Problem: Paul boasted here when he declared, “I labored more abundantly than they all.” In 2 Corinthians 11:16, Paul even admitted that he was bragging, claiming that none of the other apostles had anything on him (cf. 2 Cor. 12:11). But Paul himself admitted that boasting was wrong and “that no flesh should glory in His presence” (1 Cor. 1:29). And Proverbs exhorts, “Let another man praise you, and not your own mouth” (Prov. 27:2).
Problem: Some critics have suggested that the fact that only a few saw Jesus after His resurrection indicates that He was essentially invisible to the human eye, and only materialized to a few people on select occasions. But this is contrary to the orthodox contention that Jesus’ resurrection was literal and physical.
Problem: Some critics have attempted to cast doubt on the validity of Christ’s resurrection by insisting that He appeared only to believers, but never to unbelievers. Is this so?
Problem: Many have argued that there is a necessary contradiction between 1 Corinthians 15 and Galatians 1. In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul received a creed (formulaic statement of belief) and passed it on to the Corinthians. This creed was probably composed shortly after Jesus‘ crucifixion by various Christians. Many scholars argue that Paul likely received this creed from the Jerusalem apostles (cf. Gal. 1-2). However, Paul says in Galatians 1:11-12 that he did not receive the Gospel from man.
Problem: Scholars claim that this excerpt from 1 Corinthians 15 is actually a very early Christian statement of faith. Is this the case?
Problem: Paul says that salvation is conditional on following Christ (“if you hold fast the word”). He also questions whether they were even Christians in the first place (“unless you believed in vain”). Doesn’t this threaten the doctrine of eternal security?
This isn’t a difficult issue at all. On the one hand, God is not the author of confusion: “For God is not a God of confusion but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints,” (1 Cor. 14:33). The context of this verse is dealing with the gift of tongues as were spoken in Christian churches in its early years.
Problem: Paul writes, “The women are to keep silent [Greek sigaōpronounced see-GAH-oh] in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak [Greek laleō; pronounced la-LAY-oh], but are to subject themselves, just as the Law also says. 35 If they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church” (1 Cor. 14:34-35). Are women allowed to speak during Bible studies or not? Does the OT Law really teach that women should be silent?
Problem: Paul writes, “Tongues are for a sign, not to those who believe but to unbelievers” (1 Cor. 14:22). However, usually when non-Christians see Christians speaking in tongues, this seems bizarre, and it pushes them away from Christianity. Why does Paul write this?