What about all those contradictions in the Bible?

[geometer]

carm.org/bible-difficulties/joshua-esther/how-many-baths-2000-or-3000

How many baths, 2,000 or 3,000?

1. 2,000 baths (1 Kings 7:26) - “And it was a handbreadth thick, and its brim was made like the brim of a cup, as a lily blossom; it could hold two thousand baths.”
2. 3,000 baths (2 Chronicles 4:5) - “And it was a handbreadth thick, and its brim was made like the brim of a cup, like a lily blossom; it could hold 3,000 baths.”

It appears that the difference in numbers is do to a copyist error. The characters used for the numbers 2,000 and 3,000 are similar. = 2,000 and = 3,000. A tired copyist could easily mistake one for another.1

I believe that the correct measure is 2000 bath. There are more measures of the object given which would suggest that it held 2000 bath. There was a complaint made by Petr Beckman that the other measues given: ten cubits from brim to brim, and thirty cubits measued round about, meant that they were using these two to give us a measure if pi as equal to 3. This is of course complete nonsense, because the text states that it had a brim and it was measued with a line. Obviously the line was stretched around under the brim to get the 30 cubit measure. Petr claimed that it had no brim, and gave no reason for this assertion.

His nonsense went far and wide. For awhile he was being quoted by every liberal on earth.

 

[ckempston]

If the flood had been local why didn’t God tell Noah to simply move?

My personal opinion is that it didn’t happen, or, if it did happen, it did not happen chronologically where it appears in the Bible, or that it was simply an embellished story to teach a moral lesson. If the flood was global, why do we have records from existing civilizations before, during, and after this period? The history of human migrations is well documented, even if it is still being refined. It is impossible that the flood was universal (i.e. covered the whole earth, killed humans and animals except those on the ark, etc.).

 

[Mark77]

Some potential explanations here:

bringyou.to/apologetics/bible.htm

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

Mark

 

[NDfan]

John’s Gospel implies that at the time of the trial the Jewish leaders had not yet eaten the Passover meal and explicitly states just prior to his sentencing “And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour.” This places the crucifixion on Nisan 14, since the law mandated the lamb had to be sacrificed between 3:00 pm and 5:00 pm and eaten before midnight on Nissan 14. This understanding fits well with Old Testament typology, in which Jesus entered Jerusalem to identify himself as the Paschal lamb on Nisan 10, was crucified and died at 3:00 in the afternoon of Nisan 14, at the same time the High Priest would have sacrificed the Paschal lamb, and rose before dawn the morning of Nisan 16, as a type of offering of the First Fruits.

John 13:1-4a states that the supper was before the feast:
“Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end. And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray him; Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God; He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments.”

Matthew 27:62 is the day after the burial:
“Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate”

Mark 15:42 dates His crucifixion on the preparation day too…
“And now when the even was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath,”

Luke 23:54
“And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on.”

John 19:42
“There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews’ preparation day”

As far as I can see there is no contradiction in the timelines… The last supper was before the feast of the passover on Nisan 13 (see John 13). The crucifixion was on the day of preparation (Nisan 14) and the burial was on the day after (see Matthew 27, Mark 15, Luke 23 and John 19).

Janet no there is a clear contradiction that we need to contend with here.

Matthew 26:17 says: "On the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the disciples came to Jesus and asked, ‘Where do you want us to make preparations for you to eat the Passover?’ " So the synoptic Gospels seem to indicate that Jesus and his disciples ate the “Last Supper” meal on the evening beginning Nisan 15 not 14. This is when the Jews would have been eating their Passover meal—on the beginning of the first day of Unleavened Bread. Also recorded in Mark 14:12-16 and Luke 22:1, 7-8.

However, John clearly states that the Jews had not eaten the Passover meal, even though it was the morning after Jesus’ arrest. We go to John 18:28 which says: “Then the Jews led Jesus from Caiaphas to the palace of the Roman governor. By now it was early morning, and to avoid ceremonial uncleanness the Jews did not enter the palace;** they wanted to be able to eat the Passover**.” John 19:14 says that the day during which Jesus was crucified was only the “Preparation day of Passover Week.” By John’s Gospel Jesus ate the Last Supper meal one day earlier than the Jews ate the Passover meal.

We know Passover was used to describe the entire Festival of Unleavened Bread not just Passover day. So Jesus’ eating of a “Passover meal” could have occurred at any time during the festival season. But the time of the traditional eating of the Jewish Passover which is on the evening of the beginning of the first day of Unleavened Bread happened just as Jesus was being placed in the tomb. So the chronological question about Jesus’ eating the Last Supper remains.

As stated above some scholars propose a double passover. Others claim that Jesus held a secret passover which is against Jewish regulations. So it could have been a passover with intent but without the lamb. This makes sense given there’s no mention of a lamb at all within the last supper. In this case Jesus would have been crucified at the same time the passover lambs were being slaughtered.

PEACE

 

[Graubo3]

SSTeacher,

When I used to read Sacred Scripture with the ‘literal’ lense, I always wondered exactly who it was that Cain should fear.

Peace, Graubo

 

[Janet1983]

My personal opinion is that it didn’t happen, or, if it did happen, it did not happen chronologically where it appears in the Bible, or that it was simply an embellished story to teach a moral lesson.

There are quite a few flood legends apart from the Bible that have survived and many are very similar… Why should all these stories coincide if there had not been a flood?
China: The family of “Fuhi” was saved. Fuhi, his wife, three sons and three daughters survived in a boat while the whole earth was flooded. He and his family repopulated the world…
Chaledean: Xisuthrus was warned by the god Chronos of a coming flood and he was told to built a boat. He built the boat and him, his family, friends and two of each animal survived. When the waters receded they let some birds loose. THey came back. He tried again with the same result. When he tried the third time the birds did not return. Assuming the water had dried up the people got out of the boat and offered sacrifices to the gods.
In India Manu and his family survived. In Greece it was Deucalion and his wife Pyrrha. The Aztec Tapi and his wife survived a global flood.

Nearly all stories have this in common:

1. The flood was caused, because mankind somehow displeased a divine being.
2. Only a small number of humans were saved.
3. An ark was built to save the hero.
4. Birds were sent out after the flood to determine whether the water had subsided.
5. Sacrifices were offered to placate the “gods” after the flood.

This is exactly the scenario we would expect if a flood had indeed destroyed nearly all of mankind. The fact that the stories vary in some ways from the Bible is also to be expected.

 

[Volodymyr_988]

SSTeacher,

When I used to read Sacred Scripture with the ‘literal’ lense, I always wondered exactly who it was that Cain should fear.

Peace, Graubo

His younger brothers who were not important enough to mention. Holy Writ never mentions that there were no other people.

Like most of the Bible, only the important or interesting people were mentioned.

 

[ckempston]

There are quite a few flood legends apart from the Bible that have survived and many are very similar… Why should all these stories coincide if there had not been a flood?

Because flooding is something that nearly all cultures experienced.

China: The family of “Fuhi” was saved. Fuhi, his wife, three sons and three daughters survived in a boat while the whole earth was flooded. He and his family repopulated the world…
Chaledean: Xisuthrus was warned by the god Chronos of a coming flood and he was told to built a boat. He built the boat and him, his family, friends and two of each animal survived. When the waters receded they let some birds loose. THey came back. He tried again with the same result. When he tried the third time the birds did not return. Assuming the water had dried up the people got out of the boat and offered sacrifices to the gods.
In India Manu and his family survived. In Greece it was Deucalion and his wife Pyrrha. The Aztec Tapi and his wife survived a global flood.

Your examples cause more problems for a literal reading of the Biblical flood; they don’t solve them. You’d expect something similar of all cultures that lived in and around Mesopotamia (which is true of the Chaldeans), which is explains some of the similarities. Their stories are similar because their cultures were geographically close.

Nearly all stories have this in common:

1. The flood was caused, because mankind somehow displeased a divine being.
2. Only a small number of humans were saved.
3. An ark was built to save the hero.
4. Birds were sent out after the flood to determine whether the water had subsided.
5. Sacrifices were offered to placate the “gods” after the flood.

Um, this list is pretty false. The only thing that you’ll find in common is that there was some kind of flood. The sacrifices and boats are particular of a couple of the stories, but not all of them.

This is exactly the scenario we would expect if a flood had indeed destroyed nearly all of mankind. The fact that the stories vary in some ways from the Bible is also to be expected.

No, actually, it’s not, at least not if the chronology is anywhere near correct in the Bible. There was no flood around the time that Noah should have lived. By the time Noah lived, humans had populated the entire planet for thousands of years. There was no flood that destroyed all of mankind except for one family. Period.

 

[zerinus]

It’s likely that many readers of the Bible have encountered passages in it that are difficult to understand. Have you ever encountered anything in the Bible that you consider constitutes a true contradiction?

Inquiringly,
Mick

I don’t believe there are any true contridictions in the Bible; but there are plenty of apparent ones. A Google search will provide you with plenty of examples. Here are a couple that came at the top of the search list:

A List of Biblical Contradictions (1992)

Bible Inconsistencies: Bible Contradictions?

zerinus

 

[zerinus]

carm.org/bible-difficulties/joshua-esther/how-many-baths-2000-or-3000

How many baths, 2,000 or 3,000?

1. 2,000 baths (1 Kings 7:26) - “And it was a handbreadth thick, and its brim was made like the brim of a cup, as a lily blossom; it could hold two thousand baths.”
2. 3,000 baths (2 Chronicles 4:5) - “And it was a handbreadth thick, and its brim was made like the brim of a cup, like a lily blossom; it could hold 3,000 baths.”

It appears that the difference in numbers is do to a copyist error. The characters used for the numbers 2,000 and 3,000 are similar. = 2,000 and = 3,000. A tired copyist could easily mistake one for another.1

Hey, fm, why did you remove that nice Mormon pic from your sig? I am disappointed!

zerinus

 

[DeRonde]

It’s likely that many readers of the Bible have encountered passages in it that are difficult to understand. Have you ever encountered anything in the Bible that you consider constitutes a true contradiction?

Inquiringly,
Mick

**There are no contradictions in Scripture; if there appears to be one; then you have not done your homework…for it is the reader that makes the error not God. Everyone of you should be ashamed of yourselves for even thinking there could be an error; if there was it would be a transposed by a human; not by God.

SSTeacher…what is a “evangelical Protestant”? I saw that in your profile and was wondering what that meant to you.**

 

[ckempston]

**There are no contradictions in Scripture; if there appears to be one; then you have not done your homework…for it is the reader that makes the error not God. Everyone of you should be ashamed of yourselves for even thinking there could be an error; if there was it would be a transposed by a human; not by God.

SSTeacher…what is a “evangelical Protestant”? I saw that in your profile and was wondering what that meant to you.**

So, if there’s a problem due to a scribal error, does the writing cease to be scripture due to that scribal error? I’ll give you time to get off your high horse and answer that question.

Personally, I haven’t seen any Christians suggest that there are actual errors or contradictions, just that there are things where we don’t know the answer.

 

[geometer]

Personally, I haven’t seen any Christians suggest that there are actual errors or contradictions, just that there are things where we don’t know the answer.

In the book of Numbers, I believe it states that God ordered a census, and in another place it states that Satan ordered the census…

 

[ckempston]

In the book of Numbers, I believe it states that God ordered a census, and in another place it states that Satan ordered the census…

Actually, you’re referring to the census of David in 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles. I actually saw a very good explanation for that quite recently. Most of these problems come in to play because we have a Western, 21st century world-view, and those in the Bible, especially the Old Testament, were basically very Eastern in their philosophies and worldviews. I think it’s an interesting fact that in 1 Chronicles, this is the first time we see the word “Satan” translated as a proper noun. In the book of Job, Satan has to go before God and ask permission before he goes after Job. In many instances, David’s men do something, but it says that David did it. I think we have to understand that mindset, and in doing so, I don’t think this is a contradiction. There’s also the fact that Satan may not have been so personified at this point, and it was literally meaning “one who accuses” or simply “an adversary” and not necessarily what we think of as the “fallen angel.”

 

[firstmode]

Hey, fm, why did you remove that nice Mormon pic from your sig? I am disappointed!

zerinus

A moderator warned me about pic size, I can only have 1 that is 100 x 100 pixels, which apparently no one else follows that rule.

The picture i have in my Sig is 100 x100 exactly. If anyone has a pic bigger than that it is against the rules apparently.

 

[SSTeacher]

SSTeacher…what is a “evangelical Protestant”? I saw that in your profile and was wondering what that meant to you.

I chose to describe myself as an Evangelical Protestant in order to give both Catholics and non–Catholics something of an idea of my worldview whenever they read my profile. I intended that my use of the word “Protestant,” would lead Catholics correctly to infer that my sympathies lay with the Reformers; and that the prefix “Evangelical” would convey to other non–Catholics that I regarded the Bible of 66 books as my authority but reserved the right to interpret anything and everything I discovered in Scripture as I saw fit.

Cordially,
Mick

 

[SSTeacher]

Janet1983;4932735:

If the flood had been local why didn’t God tell Noah to simply move?

My personal opinion is that it didn’t happen, or, if it did happen, it did not happen chronologically where it appears in the Bible, or that it was simply an embellished story to teach a moral lesson. If the flood was global, why do we have records from existing civilizations before, during, and after this period? The history of human migrations is well documented, even if it is still being refined. It is impossible that the flood was universal (i.e. covered the whole earth, killed humans and animals except those on the ark, etc.).

It’s perhaps relevant to note that Jesus seemed to hold to the idea of a literal flood. He said:

As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.

Grace and peace,
Mick

 

[ckempston]

It’s perhaps relevant to note that Jesus seemed to hold to the idea of a literal flood. He said:

As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.

Grace and peace,
Mick

If Jesus thought the flood covered the entire world, then Jesus was wrong, and we might as well eat and drink, for tomorrow we die. If however, Jesus was using the flood narrative much like he used fictional parables, then this creates no problem for Jesus’ claims.

 

[DeRonde]

I chose to describe myself as an Evangelical Protestant in order to give both Catholics and non–Catholics something of an idea of my worldview whenever they read my profile. I intended that my use of the word “Protestant,” would lead Catholics correctly to infer that my sympathies lay with the Reformers; and that the prefix “Evangelical” would convey to other non–Catholics that I regarded the Bible of 66 books as my authority but reserved the right to interpret anything and everything I discovered in Scripture as I saw fit.

Cordially,
Mick

**
Do you consider yourself a Christian? If you believe and understand the Bible were you serious about leaning toward Catholicism? I appreciate the explanation and and did not know what to make of it, but the explanation has some logic to it…thank you.**

 

[SSTeacher]

If Jesus thought the flood covered the entire world, then Jesus was wrong, and we might as well eat and drink, for tomorrow we die. If however, Jesus was using the flood narrative much like he used fictional parables, then this creates no problem for Jesus’ claims.

How do you understand the words of Jesus regarding this issue?

Curiously,
Mick