F
follower of Christ
Guest
Genesis one is a play by play account.OnTheFence said:
Genesis Two is an overview that is more directed at mans creation and the details thereof.
.
Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
Genesis Two is an overview that is more directed at mans creation and the details thereof.
.
E
Elijah674
Guest
And these K.J. verses, which ones do these ones believe'ism in, huh?
Here is a verse of some controversy.
Luke 23
[38] And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.
[39] And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.
[40] But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation?
[41] And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss.
[42] And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.
[43] And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
Verse 43 has the coma in the wrong place by uninspired ones who added all the numbers chapters titles periods and the like. It should read like this:
[43] And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee To day, shalt thou be with me in paradise.
OK: Can we know that this is the way it is to be read for sure?? There is only one way, Matt. 4:4 + 2 Tim. 3:16! In John 20 we see many Truths! One is why Christ was not recognized when He appeared to Mary. One other is the time of day that it was that this took place. And another is where the 'men' were at at this time, & for what reason. You can read it for yourselves. I will just underline the facts.
But what will have more emphasis is the proof that Christ indeed did not say as many teach about the repentant thief going right to heaven at death, and the reason being was that Christ did not Himself go right back to heaven!
John 20 (in part)
[1] The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.
[2] Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.
...
[11] But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping: and as she wept, she stooped down, and looked into the sepulchre,
[12] And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.[13] And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto them, Because they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him.
[14] And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus. (Remember it was yet dark & she was crying!)
[15] Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away.
(OK: This is the third day most teach, but take notice in verse 17 below which are Christ's Words, and that He did not, nor did the thief go directly to heaven. And who did mess up where the coma was put! Some one was responsible for that teaching, but it was not the Holy Spirits Inspiration!)
[16] Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.
[17] Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. [18] Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her.
[19] Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.
Lots of truth in this chapter! Think, when you Love Christ as did Mary, and she had all the His 7th Day Sabbath duties prepared on the 6th day of preparation before His Sabbath, when the sunset that day, and the first day began, how long would you have waited to anoint His body for burying?
And the day 'always' started at what time? See Gen. 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, day six found man created, and the next day was the Lords 7 DAY Sabbath.
SO.. Do we K.J. ones believe Christ or man additions?
--Elijah
Here is a verse of some controversy.
Luke 23
[38] And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS.
[39] And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.
[40] But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation?
[41] And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss.
[42] And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.
[43] And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
Verse 43 has the coma in the wrong place by uninspired ones who added all the numbers chapters titles periods and the like. It should read like this:
[43] And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee To day, shalt thou be with me in paradise.
OK: Can we know that this is the way it is to be read for sure?? There is only one way, Matt. 4:4 + 2 Tim. 3:16! In John 20 we see many Truths! One is why Christ was not recognized when He appeared to Mary. One other is the time of day that it was that this took place. And another is where the 'men' were at at this time, & for what reason. You can read it for yourselves. I will just underline the facts.
But what will have more emphasis is the proof that Christ indeed did not say as many teach about the repentant thief going right to heaven at death, and the reason being was that Christ did not Himself go right back to heaven!
John 20 (in part)
[1] The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.
[2] Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.
...
[11] But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping: and as she wept, she stooped down, and looked into the sepulchre,
[12] And seeth two angels in white sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.[13] And they say unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? She saith unto them, Because they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him.
[14] And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus. (Remember it was yet dark & she was crying!)
[15] Jesus saith unto her, Woman, why weepest thou? whom seekest thou? She, supposing him to be the gardener, saith unto him, Sir, if thou have borne him hence, tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away.
(OK: This is the third day most teach, but take notice in verse 17 below which are Christ's Words, and that He did not, nor did the thief go directly to heaven. And who did mess up where the coma was put! Some one was responsible for that teaching, but it was not the Holy Spirits Inspiration!)
[16] Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.
[17] Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. [18] Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her.
[19] Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you.
Lots of truth in this chapter! Think, when you Love Christ as did Mary, and she had all the His 7th Day Sabbath duties prepared on the 6th day of preparation before His Sabbath, when the sunset that day, and the first day began, how long would you have waited to anoint His body for burying?
And the day 'always' started at what time? See Gen. 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, day six found man created, and the next day was the Lords 7 DAY Sabbath.
SO.. Do we K.J. ones believe Christ or man additions?
--Elijah
Matthew 28:1-10 says that when Mary Magdalene went to the tomb that she was told by an angel that the Messiah had risen and would be seen in Galilee. Matthew then says that she ran "with great joy" to tell the disciples and while on the way that she met the Messiah (this occurred before she got to the disciples).
However, John 20:1 and 2 say that when she came to the tomb and didn’t find the Messiah there, that she ran to the disciples and told them that He had been taken away and that she didn’t know where He was. In Matthew she knew where He was (or at least had been) and where He would be, but in John she didn’t.
How can this be reconciled?
However, John 20:1 and 2 say that when she came to the tomb and didn’t find the Messiah there, that she ran to the disciples and told them that He had been taken away and that she didn’t know where He was. In Matthew she knew where He was (or at least had been) and where He would be, but in John she didn’t.
How can this be reconciled?
Bob Carabbio
Member
Responding ONLY to the question stated in the Title line - i.e. "Are there contradictions in the Bible?"
IF a "Contradiction" is defined as "Two statements in the Bible which deliver DIFFERENT and unreconcilable facts about the same situation, then YES!!! there are verbal contradictions in the Bible - one example of which would be a situation like Abijah's Mother -
2CH 11:18 And Rehoboam took him Mahalath the daughter of Jerimoth the son of David to wife, and Abihail the daughter of Eliab the son of Jesse;
19 Which bare him children; Jeush, and Shamariah, and Zaham.
20 And after her he took Maachah the daughter of Absalom; which bare him Abijah, and Attai, and Ziza, and Shelomith.
21 And Rehoboam loved Maachah the daughter of Absalom above all his wives and his concubines: (for he took eighteen wives, and threescore concubines; and begat twenty and eight sons, and threescore daughters.)
22 And Rehoboam made Abijah the son of Maachah the chief, to be ruler among his brethren: for he thought to make him king.
2 CH 12:16 And Rehoboam slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David: and Abijah his son reigned in his stead.
13:1 Now in the eighteenth year of king Jeroboam began Abijah to reign over Judah.
2 He reigned three years in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Michaiah the daughter of Uriel of Gibeah. And there was war between Abijah and Jeroboam.
So was Maachah, Absalom's daughter, or Michaiah, Uriel's daughter Abijah's mother??
What the IMPORTANCE of this amounts to is that many of us Who've been Christians WERE TAUGHT that the KJV (quoted in this case) was TOTALLY WITHOUT ERROR of fact - even the PUNCTUATION was "Inspired". AND furthermore if there WAS any "error of fact" - however miniscule, then THE ENTIRE BIBLE couldn't be trusted.
BUT - that "train" has done Left the station, y'all, and like it or not there ARE "Errors of fact" in the Bible.
Google Biblical contradictions for lists of 'em (not all of which are actual contradictions).
Is it a problem???
Only if YOU decide to make it one. The Holy Spirit is STILL available to us, and he's available for comment to give wisdom - WHENEVER we desire it Singlemindedly.
IF a "Contradiction" is defined as "Two statements in the Bible which deliver DIFFERENT and unreconcilable facts about the same situation, then YES!!! there are verbal contradictions in the Bible - one example of which would be a situation like Abijah's Mother -
2CH 11:18 And Rehoboam took him Mahalath the daughter of Jerimoth the son of David to wife, and Abihail the daughter of Eliab the son of Jesse;
19 Which bare him children; Jeush, and Shamariah, and Zaham.
20 And after her he took Maachah the daughter of Absalom; which bare him Abijah, and Attai, and Ziza, and Shelomith.
21 And Rehoboam loved Maachah the daughter of Absalom above all his wives and his concubines: (for he took eighteen wives, and threescore concubines; and begat twenty and eight sons, and threescore daughters.)
22 And Rehoboam made Abijah the son of Maachah the chief, to be ruler among his brethren: for he thought to make him king.
2 CH 12:16 And Rehoboam slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David: and Abijah his son reigned in his stead.
13:1 Now in the eighteenth year of king Jeroboam began Abijah to reign over Judah.
2 He reigned three years in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Michaiah the daughter of Uriel of Gibeah. And there was war between Abijah and Jeroboam.
So was Maachah, Absalom's daughter, or Michaiah, Uriel's daughter Abijah's mother??
What the IMPORTANCE of this amounts to is that many of us Who've been Christians WERE TAUGHT that the KJV (quoted in this case) was TOTALLY WITHOUT ERROR of fact - even the PUNCTUATION was "Inspired". AND furthermore if there WAS any "error of fact" - however miniscule, then THE ENTIRE BIBLE couldn't be trusted.
BUT - that "train" has done Left the station, y'all, and like it or not there ARE "Errors of fact" in the Bible.
Google Biblical contradictions for lists of 'em (not all of which are actual contradictions).
Is it a problem???
Only if YOU decide to make it one. The Holy Spirit is STILL available to us, and he's available for comment to give wisdom - WHENEVER we desire it Singlemindedly.
Pard
Member
The Bible is without contradictions. The Bible is directly inspired by God. This means that God used the authors as tool to put pen to paper. It was not the words of men, but God's own. It also would make a mockery of the Holy Spirit, if the Bible proved even one single contradiction because it is through the Spirit that God convened with the authors.
If someone could prove without a shadow of a doubt that there is a contradiction in the Bible I think I would have to up and leave Christianity, however, there is no contradiction, so there is no worry of that happening.
If you come across a supposed contradiction than you need to be a diligent workman and study the Word of God until you can find an answer. Approach this problem with pray. And remember that many supposed contradictions in the Bible, even though they may appear to be real at this time will show themselves as false later on.
If someone could prove without a shadow of a doubt that there is a contradiction in the Bible I think I would have to up and leave Christianity, however, there is no contradiction, so there is no worry of that happening.
If you come across a supposed contradiction than you need to be a diligent workman and study the Word of God until you can find an answer. Approach this problem with pray. And remember that many supposed contradictions in the Bible, even though they may appear to be real at this time will show themselves as false later on.
Bob Carabbio
Member
In that case -
Explain the one I submitted. There are plenty of others.
Probably in some cases "copyist errors" - but "errors" none the less.
Incidentally the denominational statements of many groups that claim the the bible is "Verbally inerrant" (like the Assemblies of God) have added the disclaimer: "In the original autographs" to their statements - in recognition that the Bible that WE have in 2010 is NOT totally inerrant verbally.
Naturally that point is moot, since there ARE NO "Original Autographs".
Explain the one I submitted. There are plenty of others.
Probably in some cases "copyist errors" - but "errors" none the less.
Incidentally the denominational statements of many groups that claim the the bible is "Verbally inerrant" (like the Assemblies of God) have added the disclaimer: "In the original autographs" to their statements - in recognition that the Bible that WE have in 2010 is NOT totally inerrant verbally.
Naturally that point is moot, since there ARE NO "Original Autographs".
Last edited by a moderator:
Pard
Member
Bob,
There is no problem in the two verses you showed. Abijah's father was Rehoboam (2CH 11:20). Abijah's mother was Maachah(2CH 11:20). Maachah was also known as Michaiah (2CH 13:2). Maachah's father was Uriel (2CH 13:2) and her mother was Tamar (2Sam 14:27). Tamar's father was Absalom (2Sa 3:3).
Genealogies can be a tough one. I understand where you saw a contradiction, but fear not, all is well with God's Word!
My friend, I would be more than happy to tackle some more of your so called contradictions! Anything to help a brother in Christ come closer to the truth of God.
As for that thing about the Assemblies of God, my pastor and I talked about that and we are both disgusted with AG for doing such a thing without giving us reasonable time to pack our bags and leave AG!
There is no problem in the two verses you showed. Abijah's father was Rehoboam (2CH 11:20). Abijah's mother was Maachah(2CH 11:20). Maachah was also known as Michaiah (2CH 13:2). Maachah's father was Uriel (2CH 13:2) and her mother was Tamar (2Sam 14:27). Tamar's father was Absalom (2Sa 3:3).
Genealogies can be a tough one. I understand where you saw a contradiction, but fear not, all is well with God's Word!
My friend, I would be more than happy to tackle some more of your so called contradictions! Anything to help a brother in Christ come closer to the truth of God.
As for that thing about the Assemblies of God, my pastor and I talked about that and we are both disgusted with AG for doing such a thing without giving us reasonable time to pack our bags and leave AG!
Last edited by a moderator:
Pard
Member
Could you better state the problem? Because I do not see any problem when I read the passages you asked me to read.
Pard,
re: “Could you better state the problem?â€
I’m afraid I don’t see how I could state the situation any better. Matthew has Mary leaving the tomb believing that the Messiah was alive and would be seen in Galilee, whereas John has her leaving the tomb without that belief.
re: “Could you better state the problem?â€
I’m afraid I don’t see how I could state the situation any better. Matthew has Mary leaving the tomb believing that the Messiah was alive and would be seen in Galilee, whereas John has her leaving the tomb without that belief.
Pard
Member
I see your problem, sorry.
In John when Mary sees the angels and then Jesus that is describing the events in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The problem is that John also distinguishes the first and the second time the woman went to the tomb, while in the other three they only talk about the second time the woman go to the tomb.
It's not the greatest answer, detail wise, but that is how it is. Remember there are four separate men who write the account of Jesus, they obviously had different opinions on what was important and what was not important and Matthew, Luke, and Mark did not, apparently, feel it was important to describe the woman coming and going.
My other piece of evidence against this is pure logic. If this was a real contradiction the atheist community would be all over it, in my search for this contradiction elsewhere I could not find a single place that even mentions it, so that tells me right off the bat it is simply a misunderstanding on your part.
Keep them coming, I'd love nothing more than to help brothers and sisters in Christ to see the Word more clearly! It is my God given mission in life, as He has wished me to become a pastor for His flock.
In John when Mary sees the angels and then Jesus that is describing the events in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The problem is that John also distinguishes the first and the second time the woman went to the tomb, while in the other three they only talk about the second time the woman go to the tomb.
It's not the greatest answer, detail wise, but that is how it is. Remember there are four separate men who write the account of Jesus, they obviously had different opinions on what was important and what was not important and Matthew, Luke, and Mark did not, apparently, feel it was important to describe the woman coming and going.
My other piece of evidence against this is pure logic. If this was a real contradiction the atheist community would be all over it, in my search for this contradiction elsewhere I could not find a single place that even mentions it, so that tells me right off the bat it is simply a misunderstanding on your part.
Keep them coming, I'd love nothing more than to help brothers and sisters in Christ to see the Word more clearly! It is my God given mission in life, as He has wished me to become a pastor for His flock.
Bob Carabbio
Member
"Abijah's father was Rehoboam (2CH 11:20)."
True
Abijah's mother was Maachah(2CH 11:20).
True
Maachah was also known as Michaiah (2CH 13:2).
Possibly - but this could be a "Rationalization". Why would I assume from the Word that Maachah = Michaiah??
"Maachah's father was Uriel (2CH 13:2)"
The Bible says that Michaiah's father was Uriel. You have apparently assumed that the two names belong to the same person in order for Maachah's father to be Uriel. Why would you do that?
"and and her mother was Tamar (2Sam 14:27)."
The scripture given doesn't indicate that to be true, and only indicates that "Tamar" was Absalom's Daughter (who was raped by Absalom's brother Amnon and "Remained desolate" (2 Sam 13:20). So no indication is given WHO "Maachah's mother" was.
"Tamar's father was Absalom" (2Sa 3:3).
True, but the Cite doesn't say that - only that Absalom was David's Son, and His mother was Maacah, the king of Geshur's daughter.
Notably the NKJV MODIFIES the text in 2 Chronicles to read "the granddaughter" of Absalom (which would be a textual error in the KJV which doesn't list Maachah as a "Daughter of Absalom".
So you haven't alleviate the confusion over who Abijah's Mother was. nor have you demonstrated the absence of error, even though you did expose another error:
Absalom didn't HAVE a daughter named Maachah as the KJV states He did.
And so the KJV is in error calling her Absalom's daughter. (yes, "bath" can indicate anything from a "Daughter" to a "cousin" or a "polite address").
And while we're at it - how about:
2KI 24:8 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.
2CH 36:9 Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.
So how old was Jehoiachin when he was made king??
True
Abijah's mother was Maachah(2CH 11:20).
True
Maachah was also known as Michaiah (2CH 13:2).
Possibly - but this could be a "Rationalization". Why would I assume from the Word that Maachah = Michaiah??
"Maachah's father was Uriel (2CH 13:2)"
The Bible says that Michaiah's father was Uriel. You have apparently assumed that the two names belong to the same person in order for Maachah's father to be Uriel. Why would you do that?
"and and her mother was Tamar (2Sam 14:27)."
The scripture given doesn't indicate that to be true, and only indicates that "Tamar" was Absalom's Daughter (who was raped by Absalom's brother Amnon and "Remained desolate" (2 Sam 13:20). So no indication is given WHO "Maachah's mother" was.
"Tamar's father was Absalom" (2Sa 3:3).
True, but the Cite doesn't say that - only that Absalom was David's Son, and His mother was Maacah, the king of Geshur's daughter.
Notably the NKJV MODIFIES the text in 2 Chronicles to read "the granddaughter" of Absalom (which would be a textual error in the KJV which doesn't list Maachah as a "Daughter of Absalom".
So you haven't alleviate the confusion over who Abijah's Mother was. nor have you demonstrated the absence of error, even though you did expose another error:
Absalom didn't HAVE a daughter named Maachah as the KJV states He did.
And so the KJV is in error calling her Absalom's daughter. (yes, "bath" can indicate anything from a "Daughter" to a "cousin" or a "polite address").
And while we're at it - how about:
2KI 24:8 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.
2CH 36:9 Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.
So how old was Jehoiachin when he was made king??
Last edited by a moderator:
Pard
Member
I'll answer the other contradiction later, I am tired and don't think I can start it right now! I can, however, answer your problems that remain.
Not a rationalization, it is a fact. Consult any Biblical family tree and you will find this to be the case. Just look at the text!
His mother was also known as Michaiah, along with Maachah. Pretty obvious... And so we do not get confused with all the names, the "His" is referring to Abijah, just to clarify! It was not uncommon for people to be known by two different names then. Look at Abraham's wife, wasn't she given two names?
Because Michaiah is the same person as Maachah, like I said, consult any theologian, genealogy, or commentary and they will tell you the same thing as I am telling you. Though I think I may be nicer than a theologian would be :D
Sorry, that was an unneeded extrapolation. I can either explain it or we can let it be since it does not pertain to this at all. I was just trying to be thorough.
Again, I didn't have to bring this up, I was trying to be thorough. So we can let this go or I can explain it. Your choice!
This is an easy misunderstanding. The Bible often calls someone the daughter or the son of so and so, they mean grandson or granddaughter. It is a very common thing. The KJV is not wrong as this is what the Hebrew reads, but the NKJV is not wrong because this what the Hebrew means.
If you are having a difficult time with the genealogies I can recommend some websites that make it way easier. I use one of them. Also there are entire books dedicated to helping you understand the genealogies and also the Hebrew way of saying things (like the daughter meaning granddaughter thing).
There are no contradictions in the Bible, just places that give some people trouble. If we pray on a supposed contradiction God is more than willing to help us validate His Word!
Now some, but not all (and frankly not any I think you will bring up), supposed contradictions may seem true but that is when based on what we can see around us in the world today. Time and time again God has revealed the Bible to be true when people bring error against it!
Not a rationalization, it is a fact. Consult any Biblical family tree and you will find this to be the case. Just look at the text!
His mother was also known as Michaiah, along with Maachah. Pretty obvious... And so we do not get confused with all the names, the "His" is referring to Abijah, just to clarify! It was not uncommon for people to be known by two different names then. Look at Abraham's wife, wasn't she given two names?
Because Michaiah is the same person as Maachah, like I said, consult any theologian, genealogy, or commentary and they will tell you the same thing as I am telling you. Though I think I may be nicer than a theologian would be :D
Sorry, that was an unneeded extrapolation. I can either explain it or we can let it be since it does not pertain to this at all. I was just trying to be thorough.
Again, I didn't have to bring this up, I was trying to be thorough. So we can let this go or I can explain it. Your choice!
This is an easy misunderstanding. The Bible often calls someone the daughter or the son of so and so, they mean grandson or granddaughter. It is a very common thing. The KJV is not wrong as this is what the Hebrew reads, but the NKJV is not wrong because this what the Hebrew means.
If you are having a difficult time with the genealogies I can recommend some websites that make it way easier. I use one of them. Also there are entire books dedicated to helping you understand the genealogies and also the Hebrew way of saying things (like the daughter meaning granddaughter thing).
There are no contradictions in the Bible, just places that give some people trouble. If we pray on a supposed contradiction God is more than willing to help us validate His Word!
Now some, but not all (and frankly not any I think you will bring up), supposed contradictions may seem true but that is when based on what we can see around us in the world today. Time and time again God has revealed the Bible to be true when people bring error against it!
Pard
Member
It's a translation error that has been fixed in newer Bibles and updates to the Bible. No one said translations cannot have some minor errors to them (unless you are one of those KJV'ers), it is the original manuscripts that are the word of God. An example is the JW bible, they claim it is from the original, but it is a twisted book.
Actually, it is interesting that some Bible translators kept using this even after Darby showed their error WAAAAY back in the day! The problem is that in Hebrew numbers can become very complicated because they are actually a compilation of letters, since Hebrew does not have a separate set of characters just for representing numbers.
I do not mean to be rude, but if you wish to keep bringing up supposed contradictions, would you mind avoiding Kings and Chronicles? I ask this only because these books have maybe 7 or so of these translation errors. Also, much of these two books are genealogies and genealogies are often misunderstood because they are one of the harder things to read since they require some knowledge of Hebrew tradition (like the daughter/granddaughter thing).
seekandlisten
Member
I was reading through this thread and thought I'd reintroduce this point raised by Ret earlier in the thread. It could be a good point to take into consideration for those trying to reconcile the Bible with the observable age of the earth.
I will now address the topic of this thread in my next post.
cheers
seekandlisten
Member
Alright I'll try and post these contradictions in a way that is easy for others to respond to. Some of them are simple one's and could be the result of simple scribal errors and translations from the many manuscripts to what we hold now as the Bible others my raise more questions but I'm interested in how some answer them so here we go with a few to start off.
#1 - Is God a God of war or peace? Exodus 15:3/Romans 15:33
#2 - Is Joseph's father Jacob or Heli? Matthew 1:16/Luke 3:23 (I've seen this one brought up lots)
#3 - Is Jesus equal to or lesser than the Father?
John 10:30 - "I and the Father are ONE."
John 14:28 - "Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I."
Now this one simply becomes a contradiction to those who hold Jesus to be God and agree with the trinity doctrine. I don't want to get into that debate but I am interested in the reply, but if it simply comes down to using the trinity as your solution to the contradiction that is sufficient without going into great detail.
"Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong." - Ayn Rand
cheers
#1 - Is God a God of war or peace? Exodus 15:3/Romans 15:33
#2 - Is Joseph's father Jacob or Heli? Matthew 1:16/Luke 3:23 (I've seen this one brought up lots)
#3 - Is Jesus equal to or lesser than the Father?
John 10:30 - "I and the Father are ONE."
John 14:28 - "Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I."
Now this one simply becomes a contradiction to those who hold Jesus to be God and agree with the trinity doctrine. I don't want to get into that debate but I am interested in the reply, but if it simply comes down to using the trinity as your solution to the contradiction that is sufficient without going into great detail.
"Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong." - Ayn Rand
cheers
seekandlisten
Member
#4 - Which came first beasts or man? Genesis 1:25-26/Genesis 2:18-19
#5 - Did Solomon have 40 thousand stalls or only 4 thousand? 1 Kings 4:26/2 Chronicles 9:25
#6 - Is it a good thing to be wise or not?
Proverbs 4:7 - "Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding."
Ecclesiastes 1:18 - "For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow."
1 Corinthians 1:19 - "For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."
#5 - Did Solomon have 40 thousand stalls or only 4 thousand? 1 Kings 4:26/2 Chronicles 9:25
#6 - Is it a good thing to be wise or not?
Proverbs 4:7 - "Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding."
Ecclesiastes 1:18 - "For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow."
1 Corinthians 1:19 - "For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."
seekandlisten
Member
#7 - Was Mary impregnated by a human or a ghost/spirit? Acts 2:30/Matthew 1:18
#8 - Are we accountable for the sins of our fathers or not? Isaiah 14:21/Deuteronomy 24:16
#9 - This is always a good one, why is the bat a bird according to Leviticus and Deuteronomy?
#10 - Did fowl come from the water or the ground? Genesis 1:20-21/Genesis 2:19
#11 - Do the righteous live or not? Psalm 92:12/Isaiah 57:1
#12 - What exactly were Jesus' last words? Matthew 27:46,50/Luke 23:46/John 19:30
#13 - Was there 7 or 3 years of famine? 2 Samuel 24:13/1 Chronicles 21:11
#14 - Who was responsible for moving David to anger, God or Satan? 2 Samuel 24:1/1 Chronicles 21:1
That should be enough to provide some discussion for a little bit. I do have more I'll present later.
cheers
#8 - Are we accountable for the sins of our fathers or not? Isaiah 14:21/Deuteronomy 24:16
#9 - This is always a good one, why is the bat a bird according to Leviticus and Deuteronomy?
#10 - Did fowl come from the water or the ground? Genesis 1:20-21/Genesis 2:19
#11 - Do the righteous live or not? Psalm 92:12/Isaiah 57:1
#12 - What exactly were Jesus' last words? Matthew 27:46,50/Luke 23:46/John 19:30
#13 - Was there 7 or 3 years of famine? 2 Samuel 24:13/1 Chronicles 21:11
#14 - Who was responsible for moving David to anger, God or Satan? 2 Samuel 24:1/1 Chronicles 21:1
That should be enough to provide some discussion for a little bit. I do have more I'll present later.
cheers
handy
Member
handy
Member
I do like the Ayn Rand quote, btw