However, in the Old Testament, there are several times when men are said to have seen God. See Gen. 32:30, Ex. 24:9-10, 33:11, Judges 13:22, Isa. 6:1, Dan. 7:9. Some of these are clearly "visions." The others are called "theophanies" in which God appeared in appearance as having corporeity, in transiently-assumed visible human form. In other words God appeared to men in the Old Testament in a visible material form so they could see Him, however they were not seeing God in His true essence as spirit. I believe it can be shown that the theophanies of the Old Testament were pre-incarnate appearances of Jesus the Messiah.

           John 1:18 is true as no man has or can see God in His true essence as spirit.

           Man lives in a limited physical and material world God created that exists materially in time and space. God is not limited by time, matter or space, as He is a spirit being. The spiritual world in which the Lord exists in is not like this physical world we live in. We, being material, cannot see the spiritual world. The only reference in the Bible that gives any description is John 3:8, which says that the Spirit is like the wind, we can see its effects but not the wind itself.

           If the Bible contains errors, then none of it cannot be trusted. It is interesting to me, and I believe reveals the true carnal nature of man, that he spends so much time trying to find some obscure discrepancy and ignores the great volume of unquestionable truth that man is a sinner and needs to be saved. 1 Cor. 2:14, says a carnal the Word of God is "foolishness" to the carnal man, and that he cannot understand the Word of God because it is spiritually discerned. God has provided the way that a man by believing God and in His Son the Lord Jesus Christ, can repent of his sin, and accept God's unmerited favor (Grace) and receive forgiveness of sin and eternal life. The effort to prove God wrong is a futile pursuit. If a man could prove God wrong, he would in fact be cutting himself off from his only means of salvation.

           There are a number of books written on the subject. One I use often is "An Examination of the Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible" by John W. Haley. The book addresses hundreds of alleged discrepancies and gives clear explanations.

           Let me conclude by saying that there are many things about God we do not know because God has chosen not to reveal them to us. I cannot explain the Trinity, but it is a true fact because God has revealed it to us. Most things we know about God are "revealed" truth. That means that from man's knowledge, experience and intelligence he cannot arrive at a true understanding of who and what God is apart from God revealing it to him. Even in our material world we have much we do not understand. For example: No one on the earth can truly explain gravity. We see its effects and what it does, but we cannot see it or even explain it. We accept it because it is revealed to be real because we see what it does. In a similar way, we believe in God, because we can see what He has done and what He has revealed to us, although we cannot physically see Him.

           Matthew 27:5, says that Judas took the thirty pieces of silver and went and hanged himself. Acts 1:18-19, says he purchased a field with the silver and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.

           Neither of these statements excludes the other from being true. Matthew does not deny that Judas hanged himself and afterwards his body fell and burst asunder, he just does not mention it. Peter who is preaching in Acts 1, does not say that Judas did not hang himself previous to his fall, he just does not mention it. Let me ask you a question, did not Matthew and Peter know the circumstances first hand. And did not all the people in Jerusalem know what happened also? Each writer under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit was led to record the details of the event as applied to his account. Why would Peter (Peter told Luke who wrote Acts) or Matthew, who were both eye witnesses make up a false tell. Also, both Luke (who wrote Acts) and Matthew had access to the other's Gospel. They were both written around 60-61 AD. Luke got his information directly from Peter whom he knew personally. Why did they not correct one another if there was a discrepancy or why did not the men of their day make note of the supposed error. Also, all the manuscripts have the same rendering of each account.

           Let me add also this vital point...both Gospels were written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and it was God who determine what would be recorded in each account. The Bible clearly states that God superintended the writing of this two Gospels and certainly God made no error (2 Tim. 3:16-18, 2 Pet. 1:21).

           Probably Judas went and first took the money back to the temple. However, this was "blood money" and the temple officials could not lawfully put it in the treasury of the temple. So refusing to keep it he went out and spent it buying a "potters" field which was to be used for burying poor people. Some believe that it was actually the priests who purchased the field in Judas's name. It is a idiom of Scripture by which an action is sometimes said to be done by a person who was the occasion of its being done. Either case is plausible and neither account is a contradiction of the other.>

           Could not Judas have hanged himself and then the rope broke and he fell and burst open, or that his body decomposed and later fell broke open. Could not that have been what the people Peter was address would best remember?

           We see in different daily news accounts different eye witnesses giving different details of the same event and we accept it for what it was...two eye witnesses who reported different details of the same event. Where is the discrepancy? Where is the evidence from history that anybody until modern times even questioned these two accounts of the same event. The answer is there is none.

           You said, "I am curious if these are errors or inaccuracies show that there are small errors in the Bible." I say, still there are no errors. The error is in judging God's Word to be in error without a thorough investigation and discounting what God said about Him preserving His Word without error.

           God does not tell us to believe the Bible in blind faith, but to test it and examine the great and overwhelming evidence of its infallibility. As I said before, I have studied the Bible for over twenty years, and I have never found any supposed discrepancy that did not have a clear explanation.

           God first gave the Sabbath as a duty to man in the book of Exodus. It is true that the Sabbath originated at the completion of the creation (Gen.. 2:1-3), but that was God's rest, not man's. There is no record in Genesis that God gave the Sabbath to man, and there is no record of men keeping the Sabbath before Israel in the wilderness. Neh. 9:13,14 plainly states that the Sabbath was first given to Israel. Some teach that men kept the Sabbath from the days of Adam onward, but this is contrary to the Bible's own record.

           Ex. 31:12-18 says the Sabbath was a special sign between God and Israel. If mankind in general had been given the Sabbath following creation, it could not have been a sign for Israel. The fact is that the Sabbath belongs to the nation Israel and not to any other people. It is also important to note that the Sabbath will be an eternal possession of Israel (Ex. 31:16). This sign will never be annulled or transferred to another people. This explains why the prophets foretell that Israel will keep the Sabbath even after the kingdom of Christ is established on earth (Isa. 66:23). It also explains why Jesus Christ mentioned the Sabbath in His prophecies of the Tribulation (Matt. 24:20). Israelites in the land of Palestine still keep the Sabbath today.

           In their writings to the churches, the Apostles only mentioned the Sabbath three times. (1) The Sabbath is a symbol of salvation rest in Christ (Heb. 4). (2) The N.T. believer is not bound to keep the Sabbath (Col. 2:9-17). (3) The N.T. believer has liberty in the matter of holy days (Rom.. 14). Those who teach that the Sabbath is binding upon the Christian, are teaching contrary to what the Apostles taught.

           Why, then, did Jesus keep the Sabbath? He kept the Sabbath for the same reason He kept all the other Mosaic laws. He also observed the feasts. Jesus did these things because He was born a Jew, born under the law, that He might fulfill it and redeem His people from its penalty and bondage (Gal. 4:4; Rom.. 9:5)

           The New Testament clearly says believers in the churches, worshiped on the first day of the week Sunday.

           Please note the following:

           Christians worship the Lord on this day because of the following Bible facts:

BIBLE EVIDENCE THAT EARLY CHRISTIANS WORSHIPPED ON SUNDAY:

1. On the first day Jesus rose from the dead (Mark. 16:9).
2. On the first day Jesus first appeared to his disciples (Mark. 16:9). 3. On the first day Jesus met with the disciples at different places and repeatedly (Mark. 16:9-11; Mt. 28:8-10; Luke . 24:34; Mark. 16:12-13; John. 20:19-23).
4. 4. On the first day Jesus blessed the disciples (John. 20:19).
5. On the first day Jesus imparted to the disciples the gift of the Holy Spirit (John. 20:22).
6. On the first day Jesus commissioned the disciples to preach the gospel to all the world (John. 20:21; with Mark. 16:9-15).
7. On the first day Jesus ascended to Heaven, was seated at the right hand of the Father and was made Head of all (John. 20:17; Eph. . 1:20).
8. On the first day many of the dead saints arose from the grave (Mt. 27:52-53).
9. The first day became the day of joy and rejoicing to the disciples (John. 20:20; Luke . 24:41).
10. On the first day the gospel of the risen Christ was first preached (Luke . 24:34).
11. On the first day Jesus explained the Scriptures to the disciples (Luke . 24:27,45).
12. On the first day the purchase of our redemption was completed (Rom.. 4:25).
13. On the first day the Holy Spirit descended (Acts. 2:1). Pentecost was on the 50th day after the Sabbath following the wave offering (Leg. 23:15,16). Thus Pentecost was always on a Sunday.
14. The Christians met to worship on the first day (Acts. 20:6,7; 1 Col. 16:2). Sunday is "the Lord's Day" (Rev. 1:10)

           Since those days, the vast majority of Christians have always met to worship on the Lord's day. They do this in honor of the resurrection of their Savior. Christ was in the tomb during the Sabbath, and rose as the firstborn from the dead on the first day. The Sabbath signifies the last day of the old creation (Gen. 2:2). Sunday is the first day of the new creation.

HISTORICAL EVIDENCE THAT EARLY CHRISTIANS WORSHIPED ON SUNDAY.

           Following are quotes from what are called the church fathers of the end of the 1st Century and later and show it was the practice of the early church worship on Sunday:

The Epistle of Barnabas (about A.D. 100). "Wherefore, also we keep the eighth day with joyfulness, the day also on which Jesus rose again from the dead."

The Epistle of Ignatius (about A.D. 107). "Be not deceived with strange doctrines, nor with old fables, which are unprofitable. For if we still live according to the Jewish Law, we acknowledge that we have not received grace ... If, therefore, those who were brought up in the ancient order of things have come to the possession of a new hope, no longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the Lord's Day, on which also our life has sprung up again by Him and by His death."

Justin Martyr (about A.D. 140). "And on the day called Sunday all who live in cities or in the country gather together in one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read. ... But Sunday is the day on which we all hold a common assembly, because it is the First day of the week on which God ... made the world; and Jesus Christ our Savior on the same day rose from the dead."

Bardesanes, Edessa (A.D. 180). "On one day the first of the week, we assemble ourselves together."

Clement of Alexandria (A.D. 194). "He, in fulfillment of the precept, according to the gospel, keeps the Lord's Day [the Lord's day refers to the day He arose which is Sunday]... glorifying the Lord's resurrection in himself."

Tertullian (A.D. 200). "We solemnize the day after Saturday in contradiction to those who call this day their Sabbath."

Irenaeus (about A.D. 155-202). "The Mystery of the Lord's Resurrection may not be celebrated on any other day than the Lord's Day, and on this alone should we observe the breaking off of the Paschal Feast."

Cyprian (A.D. 250). "The eighth day, that is, the first day after the Sabbath, and the Lord's Day."

Apostolic Constitutions (A.D. 250). "On the day of the resurrection of the Lord--that is, the Lord's Day--assemble yourselves together without fail, giving thanks to God and praising Him for those mercies God has bestowed upon you through Christ."

Anatolius (A.D. 270). "Our regard for the Lord's resurrection which took place on the Lord's Day will lead us to celebrate it."

Peter, Bishop of Alexandria (A.D. 306). "But the Lord's Day we celebrate as a day of joy, because on it, he rose again."

           In closing God says in Colossians 2:16 "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days."

           Christians, not being Jews and under the law, worship on Sunday the day the Lord Jesus arose from the grave, victorious over sin and death. Keeping the Sabbath was part of the Old Testament Law. Note what God says:

Romans 6:14 "For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace."
Galatians 5:18 "But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law."

           Well this is a brief answer, but I think covers the matter and I certainly hope it answers your question and helps you with the matter. Sadly, many sincere people are misled and make much of worshipping on the Sabbath, but as you see it was not a command given to Christians and was not practiced in the early church who met on Sunday.

Exodus 15:6  "Thy right hand, O LORD, is become glorious in power: thy right hand, O LORD, hath dashed in pieces the enemy.",  

Psalms 77:10  "And I said, This is my infirmity: but I will remember the years of the right hand of the most High.";     Isaiah 48:12-13  "Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am he; I am the first, I also am the last. Mine hand also hath laid the foundation of the earth, and my right hand hath spanned the heavens: when I call unto them, they stand up together."

2 Corinthians 6:7  "By the word of truth, by the power of God, by the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left")

The right hand was used to show loyalty, "raise you right hand" ; of hospitality "waving or saluting  with the right hand", of being trust worthy:

   Genesis 14:22  "And Abram said to the king of Sodom, I have lift up mine hand unto the LORD, the most high God, the possessor of heaven and earth, "

           Standing or being seated at one's right hand is regarded as  place of honor:

Acts 5:31  "Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins." 

           The Bible says that Jesus is at the right hand of God.  

Hebrews 12:2  "Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God."

1 Peter 3:22  "Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him."

           In a nutshell there are more than 5000 manuscripts dating from the 1st Century onward with which modern translations can be compared and their accuracy determined. In addition, there are large numbers of Lectionaries (1st and 2nd century sermons or written lessons) which quote a great portion of the Bible. Almost all the New Testament and a part of the Old Testament can be found in these documents. The Dead Sea Scrolls contain almost all the Old Testament and predate the time of Christ. Thus, we are not lacking in manuscript evidence from which we can make comparisons.

           I realize that many of the modern (recent) translations do not have the accuracy of the King James Version of the Bible which is based on the Greek "Textus Receptus." In fact all modern translations are based on the faulty work of two unsaved men named Westcott and Hort. Their method of examining the Bible is called "Higher Criticism" and they accepted many of the errors of the early Catholic scribes and others which put them in their translations. Any knowledgeable Christian rejects these corrupt translations.

           Some have made critical statements and brought the King James Version into question. In truth there are few places in the KJV that are at variance with the the Greek manuscripts. They are so few that they are minuscule and involve spelling, numbers, etc. The location of each one is known and we know what the original said. Not one of them affects any doctrine of the Bible. Nothing is lost or changed. Also, many Bibles will identify these variant readings in their marginal notes.

           For example Rev. 22:19, the verse should read "tree of life" not "book of life." We know how this happened. Erasmus who translated what has been called the Textus Receptus (Received Text) used the Latin Vulgate to translate the Book of Revelation, because he did not have any Greek manuscripts of it available. He used the Latin Vulgate which was translated from the Greek New Testament. In Latin there is only one letter different between the words "tree" and "book." All the Greek manuscripts say "tree." Thus, we know we have a copyist error. Nothing has been lost, as we know where and what the correct reading is. It affects no doctrine and also we know how it should read. Scholars know that there is only variation in about 3 per cent of the of the Bible. The three percent are all copyist errors or variants in spelling punctuation and etc. It is just not true that we have lost the true Bible. Modern publishers have produced versions which contain mis-translations. However, we know how and where they went amiss. As a Bible believing Christian, and pastor, I warn men of these corrupted translations.

           However, to say the Bible cannot be trusted because someone has released a poor translation of it is totally inaccurate and untrue. A translation can be a poor one, but it does not effect the fact there is an accurate translation in English, which is the King James Version. Also, there are 6000 extant Greek manuscripts that exist which we can use for comparison. These have not and will not be lost. God promised to preserve His Word for us and that is "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." (Matthew 24:35) "But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you." (1 Peter :25)

           I believe in the biblical doctrine of the inspiration of Scripture. This doctrine is referred to as "verbal plenary inspiration." Verbal refers to the very words of the Scriptures and the word "plenary" means "full" and when combined they mean that every word of Scripture was inspired by God.

           The Bible passages that teach this truth say, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Timothy 3:16) The phrase "given by inspiration of God" literally means, "God-breathed."

           Further the Bible says, "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." (2 Peter 1:21) God-breathed the very word of God in full expression of His thoughts in what the writer of Scripture wrote. This means that every word that was written was the mind of God without error. In other words, although the Bible was penned by men, it was superintended by God without any error.

           God guided them in the choice of every word and expression. This does not mean God did not allow for personality and cultural background of the writer to be used in expressing God's words. God allowed the writers to express His thoughts in the writer's own way.

           The key to this matter is what the Bible says about itself. It tells us how men were able to write God's very word. II Tim. 3:16, states ALL Scripture was "God-breathed." Of the many men who God used to write the Bible it can be found that they all had something in common and that was God spoke through them! The Bible is in complete unity and order with itself. All the sixty six books agree with the others, and there is not even one contradiction. If the Bible were the product of man and God had not completely directed the whole of the writing over the 1500 years it was being written, it could not have such unity. But you see God was the Author of the Bible, and His process of directing the writers produced a complete and correct revelation. Man does change, but God never changes, past, present or future. The Bible is a perfect Book in the original autographs, and is perfectly preserved today.

Note what Romans 1:18-32, and John 3:16-19 says:

Answer:   

         Think with me a little.  The Bible tells us that God is love and that He is just.    Would it be an act of love or justice to punish innocent people?    Of course the answer is no....and when we read such an account as this we must  consider that truth and that makes us understand that those that God punished must have deserved that punishment.   Think....upon what criteria did God choose these 70 K and not others?   There were 400 k people in Israel and most of Israel were not effected.    Clearly knowing the character and nature of God that He cannot do wrong, precludes us making the conclusion by reading this that He was in error.     Even though the account does not state this, clearly those that died were corrupt and were living in gross sin.    God stopped their sinning by death and thereby lessened their judgment and protected the rest of Israel from destructive results of their sins in their society.      God certainly would have preferred that they turn from their evil ways that was destroying themselves, their families and nation, but God will not violate a man's will.    When David asked God to stop the pestilence, God showed mercy and granted his request.    God made us free agents and will not force people to do right.   God knew that those who were punished  would not turn from their sins, so in an act of mercy He stopped their harmful behavior.