Reason 4 refuted: The psychological power of contradiction lists outweighs their actual evidential force; contradictions would not disprove inspiration anyway

Mike makes several layered points. (1) A genuine contradiction requires an actual logical contradiction, not merely a surface difference. (2) Differences between manuscript copies are expected and are separate from the inspiration question. (3) Answers to contradiction charges are inherently more complex than the questions — a 30-second charge may require a 4-minute answer; this does not mean the contradiction is real. (4) The psychological power of a long list is what skeptics rely on — the sheer number creates a sense of security even if individual items are all answered. Mike notes that popular skeptics like Bart Ehrman and Dan Barker give weak individual examples; the strategy is quantity over quality. (5) Crucially: even if some contradictions were real and irreconcilable, this would not disprove inspiration — it would only require revisiting one's definition of inerrancy. Fulfilled prophecy and divine foreknowledge arguments for inspiration would remain unaffected. (6) Some apologists avoid contradiction lists entirely because engaging them feels endless. Mike has addressed many specific ones in his Evidence for the Bible video series. Specific examples treated briefly: the number of men killed by David's chief captain (textual variant issue), Abraham justified by faith or works (reconciled by reading James 2 in context — justification before God vs. demonstration to humans), and Isaac called Abraham's 'only son' (a title of covenantal promise, not a biological claim).