Biblical Mistakes (O. T.)

[anontheist]

Christian,

We have different beliefs.

Not all our beliefs are correct, there are times we are mistaken. So, how do we determine which beliefs are true or false?

We all think that all of our beliefs are in fact true or they would not be our beliefs.

Now the Mormons believe the Book of Mormon is true; Islam believes the Qur'an is true; Christians believe the Bible is true. But how do we determine if something is in fact the case?

If these books are in fact true, or from God, would we find any mistakes in them? If there are mistakes in any of them what would that mean about them?

If there were no mistakes in the Book of Mormon should we accept it? If there are no mistakes in the Qur'an, should we believe it? If there are mistakes in the Bible, should we reject it?

There are mistakes in the Bible. There are also answers to some of these mistakes. But the question is, are the answers given good answers or bad. Or are they simply weak justifications or rationalizations so one can continue to believe the Bible is the "Word of God"?

1. It has been suggested the original manuscripts, the autographs, were, Inerrant. But we do not have the original manuscripts. All we have are copies of copies of copies, (etc.) and all of the manuscripts we do posses contain mistakes. So, it is an assumption without any justification to suggest that the autographs were without mistakes. (Just a note: no two manuscripts that exist today are identical.)

2. One of the most common answers to the problems I will raise is it must have been copyists' error. Meaning that in the copying process of the manuscripts; human error tended to creep in. Now there are a couple of points to make about this response. 1. There is an unjustified assumption that the original did not have any mistakes; which there is no evidence for this. It is simply an assumption with no justification. 2. There is still an error. Even if it is a "copyists'" error it is still an error. (Note: "Error" and "mistake" are synonymous.)

3. Sometimes it is suggested that one cannot always interpret the BIble literally and that there are times when the Bible is being figurative. Of course the problem is, how do we determine when the Bible is being figurative and when it is not. This can be seen as a convenient means of rationalizing an obvious problem with the Bible. If reading the section of the Bible literally is problematic, then it must be read figuratively. But this would seem to be a rationalization.

4. It has also been suggested that perhaps the problem is that the verses are being taken out of context. But I would suggest that before this tactic is accepted, one take a look at the context for yourself and determine if such a problem really exists or if it is just a means of deflecting and rationalizing the issue.

5. Sometimes it seems that no matter what kind of answer is provided for a Biblical mistake the answer will simply be accepted by many because they wish to hold to the assumption that the Bible cannot be mistaken. But just because an answer is provided does not mean it is a good one. One must look at the mistake itself and determine for themselves whether this is a mistake or not. And whether the answer given really does solve the problem. And the most obvious question is, if there are mistakes, aside from the ones we find, how many mistakes are there that we are simply not aware of?

Apologists' tend to suggest that there are really no mistakes, but if there are mistakes they can easily be reconciled. It is easy to accept either of these points if you want to maintain your belief that the Bible is the "Word of God." (Note: you cannot accept both of these claims at the same time, that would be a contradiction.) But it is false to say there are no mistakes in the Bible or that the mistakes can easily be dealt with.

Here are just a few of the more interesting examples:

2 Chron. 36:9
Chapter 36 is about the reign of some of the last kings of Israel. This includes Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim, and Jehoiachin. What is interesting is Jehoiachin is said to be eight (8) years old when he began his reign; (verse 9) he reigned three (3) months and ten (10) days in Jerusalem. He did what was evil in the sight of the LORD. So he lost his kingship.

How does an eight year old do evil in the sight of the Lord?

He was 8! Does it make sense for God to hold someone so young responsible for their actions?

Perhaps he was not really 8 years old. Perhaps he was actually 10 or 12 years old, but would that be old enough to be held responsible for their actions? 1. Would you give your 8 year old a kingdom to run? And then punish him if he fails to run it properly?

But again, perhaps he was older.

How do we know he was in fact 8 years old? The Bible, and specifically Chronicles says he was 8. But perhaps the Bible is mistaken.

2 Kings 24:8
Now we have the same story. Near the end of Chapter 23 deals with Jehoahaz, Jehoiakim and Chapter 24, verse 8 talks about Jehoiachin. Verse 8 starts with, "Jehoiachin was eighteen (18) years old when he began to reign; he reigned three months in Jerusalem..." verse 9, "He did what was evil in the sight of the Lord;..."

Ah! So, 2 Chron. 36:9 was mistaken. Or perhaps you prefer this particular version and think 2 Kings is the one that was mistaken.

Either way, both of them cannot be true. One cannot be 8 and 18 at the same time in the same place. So, you have a choice. Either Chron. is mistaken or Kings is mistaken or perhaps they are both wrong, but logically they cannot both be true. So, either way the Bible has mistakes.

Perhaps it is a copyist error. But if one looks up "error" in a dictionary one finds that one of the definitions will include the synonymous term "mistake." So, it is a copyist mistake. A copyist of the Bible. Therefore, the Bible has mistakes.

2 Samuel 24:18-25
Chapter 24 is about King David's Census of Israel and Judah. Starting in verse 10 we have the judgment on King David for this sin. So, starting in verse 18 we David building an altar on a threshing floor for this sin. David is going to buy this threshing floor from Araunah the Jebusite. In verse 24, David buys the oxen and threshing floor for fifty (50) shekels of silver. So, this seems clear enough. 50 shekels of silver for a threshing floor.

1 Chronicles 21:18-26
We have the same story here. Chapter 21 is about the census and the Plague. Now Ornan (?) the Jebusite is going to sell the threshing floor to David. In verse 25, David pays Ornan six hundred (600) shekels of gold, for the threshing floor. It is not so clear anymore.

One would be hard pressed to suggest that (50) looks like (600) or the silver and gold appear to be the same. So, we can see that either the author of Samuel is mistaken or the Chronicler is mistaken. Or perhaps they are both wrong. Perhaps this story never happened.

1 Kings7:15-21
Here we have two bronze pillars about 18 cubits (about 27 feet) high. One named Jachin on the south side. The other named Boaz on the north side. So, it is at least clear how tall these pillars were. (?)

2 Chronicles 3:15-17
And here we have the same story. Here we have two bronze pillars about 35 cubits (about 53 feet) high. The one on the right named Jachin, the one on the left named Boaz. Hmmm! Someone made a mistake. They cannot both be 18 cubits and 35 cubits at the same time. So here we hae a mistake.

1 Kings 5:16
Let us pick up the story at verse 13. King Solomon has made slaves of his people to build some of his projects. They are called "forced labor" in the NASB. In verse 15, 70,000 transporters, 80,000 hewers of stone are counted. in verse 16; 3,300 chief deputies who were over the project and who ruled over the people who were doing the work.

So, there are 3,300 overseers. Historically we know there were 3, 300 of these men. Or do we? The Bible is clear, there is no doubt, right?

2 Chron. 2:18
In 2 Chron. 2:18 we have the same story retold. There are 70,000 to carry loads and 80,000 to quarry stones. But the supervision was done by 3,600 men.

It is only a difference of 300 men. But I think one can still ask, how many men were there? A mistake of 300 men. Which account is correct? Or perhaps someone was rounding off in some strange way. So, we cannot always know if the Bible is simply being sloppy or if it is mistaken.

2 Chron. 9:25
In 2 Chron. 9:25, the King Solomon has 4,000 stalls. This is a big number. But the question is is this true? or is it made up? or is there some other number?

1 Kings 4:26
Here King Solomon has an amazing 40,000 horse stalls in 1 Kings 4:26. Can we bet on this being the correct number? Which of these accounts is correct?

Some apologists have suggested that the number in Chron. is at the beginning of King Solomon's reign and the number in Kings is at the end of his reign. But of course, there is nothing in the Bible that suggests such a thing. This is a kind of reading into the Bible in the hopes of correcting any possible errors.

Some have suggested that 4 and 40 look very similar in Hebrew. This may well be the case, but the fact remains, we have a mistake. We can still ask, which account is correct?

1 Kings 7:26 vs. 2 Chron. 4:5
So, were there 2,000 baths or are there 3,000?

2 Sam. 8:4 vs. 1 Chron. 18:4
How many horsemen were there?

2 Kings 8:26 vs. 2 Chron. 22:2
So, how old was Ahaziah when he began to reign? 22 or 42?

2 Sam. 6:23 vs. 2 Sam. 21:8
Now, there is the question of Michal. Does she have any children or not?

2 Sam. 24:9 vs. 1 Chron. 21:5
How many men drew a sword? Exactly how many, and if you are rounding out the number, in which direction are you going? Or perhaps we cannot even know the answer to these questions.

1 Sam. 31:4; 2 Sam. 21:12; 2 Sam. 1:10
By the way, how did King Saul die?

2 Sam. 24:9 vs. 1 Chron. 21:5
Again, how many men drew their swords?

One of the things I have noticed, is that when people are shown these mistakes, they tend to want to put words into the Bible that are simply not there. In other words, they do not want to read it literally at this point.

Another thing I have noticed; some translations change some of the verses so there are no longer mistakes. But as far as I understand these changes are without merit. They cannot say that these changes are justified by any of the existing manuscripts.

This is a short list, there are so many more that have not been mentioned. Now again, there are "answers" to these problems. But simply coming up with an answer does not always resolve the issue. One can ask, "Does the answer make any sense?" Or is it simply a means to rationalize a mistake? In other words are we trying to find a answer to an obvious mistake no matter how irrational?

These are the mistakes we have found. But a better question is, what about all of those we have not found or are unaware of? How many are there? And how do we know?

If you are interested in doing a little home work, look up Ezra Chapter 2 and compare the names and numbers with Nehemiah Chapter 7. You may find this quit interesting.

There are a few books that give a more exhaustive list of problems and mistakes in the Bible. Biblical Errancy: A Reference Guide, and The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy by C. Dennis McKinsey, http://www.prometheusbooks.com/. The Perfect Mirror?: The Question of Bible Perfection by Darrel G. Henschell, The Oak Hill Free Press, http://edwardtbabinski.us/catalog.html. And finally there is Dan Barker's book, Losing Faith in Faith: From Preacher to Atheist, http://ffrf.org/index.php.

So, is the Bible the "Word of God" or are we mistaken in believing this?

anon

[JehovahsWitness]

Here are just a few of the more interesting examples:

2 Chron. 36:9 [...] What is interesting is Jehoiachin is said to be eight (8) years old when he began his reign

2 CHRONICLES 36:9
Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months and ten days. Jehoiachin did what was evil in the LORD's sight.

http://biblehub.com/2_chronicles/36-9.htm

[JehovahsWitness]

2 Kings 8:26 vs. 2 Chron. 22:2
So, how old was Ahaziah when he began to reign? 22 or 42?

2 KINGS 8:26 Ahaziah was 22 years old when he became king, and he reigned for one year in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Athaliah the granddaughter* of King Omri of Israel. 27

2 CHRON 22:2: Ahaziah was 22 years old when he became king, and he reigned for one year in Jerusalem. His mother's name was Athaliah the granddaughter of Omri.


COMMENT: Judging the fact that both scriptures you refered to say 22 I would hazard a guess that Ahaziah was... 22

JW

[1213]

If there were no mistakes in the Book of Mormon should we accept it? If there are no mistakes in the Qur'an, should we believe it? If there are mistakes in the Bible, should we reject it?

I think this depends on wery much on what kind of mistake there would be.

Would you accept the Bible, if you would surely know there are no mistakes?

Bible says for example that we should love our neighbor as ourselves. Is that a mistake? Should we reject it if we manage to find a mistake in some copy of the Bible?

I think it would not be reasonable to reject good teaching, even if there would be some mistake in some irrelevant number in ancient history.

2 Chron. 9:25
In 2 Chron. 9:25, the King Solomon has 4,000 stalls. This is a big number. But the question is is this true? or is it made up? or is there some other number?

1 Kings 4:26
Here King Solomon has an amazing 40,000 horse stalls in 1 Kings 4:26. Can we bet on this being the correct number? Which of these accounts is correct?
...
One of the things I have noticed, is that when people are shown these mistakes, they tend to want to put words into the Bible that are simply not there. In other words, they do not want to read it literally at this point.

I have noticed that people who are against God are literal only when it fits to them, for example in this case about stalls.

And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen; and he placed them in the chariot-cities, and with the king at Jerusalem.
2 Chron. 9:25

And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen.
1 Kings 4:26

If we are accurate 2 Chron. 9:25 says there was 4000 stalls for horses and chariots. In 1 Kings 4:26 there is 40 000 stalls for horses. They are not same thing because other is about horses and other is about horses and chariots. Still people who want to see mistakes in the Bible ignore that they are literally about different things, when they try to claim mistake in that, while having mistake in their own mind.

If you are not accurate even with this small matter, how could anyone expect you to even want and try to understand the more difficult matters? And if you don’t want to understand, what is the point of this? It is all useless, if you have already decided that you want to see mistakes even if there are none.

Another thing I have noticed; some translations change some of the verses so there are no longer mistakes. But as far as I understand these changes are without merit. They cannot say that these changes are justified by any of the existing manuscripts.

But what is the Bible? Is Bible the copy of the Bible, or the original text that some may have copied wrongly?

So, is the Bible the "Word of God" or are we mistaken in believing this?

What do you mean by “word of God�?

By what the Bible tells, at least some parts of the Bible are written by people. So I don’t believe it is written by God. However I believe God has influenced to this world as written in the Bible.

[Zzyzx]

.

If there were no mistakes in the Book of Mormon should we accept it? If there are no mistakes in the Qur'an, should we believe it? If there are mistakes in the Bible, should we reject it?

I think this depends on wery much on what kind of mistake there would be.

Would you accept the Bible, if you would surely know there are no mistakes?

I would accept the Bible (even with minor errors) if it could be shown that its stories are true.

That includes creation tales, worldwide flood “to the tops of mountains�, virgin birth, miracles, divinity, talking donkeys and snakes, Earth stopping rotation, star stopping over a specific location, etc.

Bible says for example that we should love our neighbor as ourselves. Is that a mistake? Should we reject it if we manage to find a mistake in some copy of the Bible?

“Even a blind hog finds an acorn occasionally� – any work of nearly a million words is likely to contain at least a few worthwhile sentences.

I think it would not be reasonable to reject good teaching, even if there would be some mistake in some irrelevant number in ancient history.

Some errors would be tolerable (to me) if the fundamentals were shown to be literally true as applied to the real world AND if proponents were willing to modify the teaching to reflect new and more accurate information.

I have noticed that people who are against God are literal only when it fits to them, for example in this case about stalls.

Have you noticed that when Apologists are shown that a passage doesn't make sense they resort to saying “Don't take it literally� – EXCEPT as regards the “resurrection� (which most claim is literal truth even though most people no longer believe that long-dead bodies come back to life – as many or most people evidently did believe thousands of years ago).

If you are not accurate even with this small matter, how could anyone expect you to even want and try to understand the more difficult matters?

Apply exactly that to Bible stories.

And if you don’t want to understand, what is the point of this? It is all useless, if you have already decided that you want to see mistakes even if there are none.

The primary reason we debate here is that some believe Bible tales and others do not. Most who engage in debates have decided one way or the other.

When I pose a topic or post in a thread I have a pretty good idea what range of responses to expect from Apologists. I have NO interest in changing their mind. However, I am aware that these threads received hundreds, thousands or tens of thousands of views (several are near or over 150,000 according to site statistics).

I trust that those readers include many who have NOT established a firm position regarding theistic beliefs – and address my comments to them.

But what is the Bible?

The Bible is the fundamental document upon which Christianity is based.

Is Bible the copy of the Bible, or the original text that some may have copied wrongly?

Exactly. The earliest surviving copy of the Bible is from the Fourth Century – hand copies of copies of copies for centuries – translated into various languages (with varying degrees of accuracy evidently) – changed by editors producing new versions (50 versions available in English), some of which differ substantially from others.

So, is the Bible the "Word of God" or are we mistaken in believing this?

What do you mean by “word of God�?

Christians often use that term in reference to their favorite version of the Bible (or perhaps to Bibles in general). However, they seem to disagree about its meaning. Perhaps Christendom should ask Non-Christians to define the term since Christians can't agree.

By what the Bible tells, at least some parts of the Bible are written by people.

If only some parts are written by people, who wrote the other parts?

Which parts are NOT written by people?

So I don’t believe it is written by God. However I believe God has influenced to this world as written in the Bible.

That you and many people believe that God influenced writing (or writers) of the Bible is NO assurance that is true – or anything other than an opinion.

I accept that Bible writers (whoever they may have been) were motivated (not supernaturally “inspired�) to write their OPINIONS and testimonials about God – just as promoters of other religions were motivated to write their opinions and testimonials about their favorite gods.

[JLB32168]

So, it is an assumption without any justification to suggest that the autographs were without mistakes.

Yes, it is an assumption that the autographs were w/o mistakes. Is there any reason that the Christian should assume something else? “Because it’s possible that they contained errors but we’ll never know� doesn’t seem like a compelling point for the Christian, to be quite honest.

Of course the problem is, how do we determine when the Bible is being figurative and when it is not.

The Christian determines this by A)reasoning that God exists, B)That God established the Church and remains her Head and C)He tells us what is figurative and what is literal via her. Again, all of these things are presuppositions but “What if you’re wrong� doesn’t seem like a compelling reason for most Christians.

It has also been suggested that perhaps the problem is that the verses are being taken out of context.

Yes and it is done regularly by skeptics. I had a discussion where a skeptic pulled one phrase out of a section whose genre was clearly poetry and attempted to explain that this one phrase was supposed to be interpreted literally while s/he said that everything around it was figurative. His/her argumentation simply made no sense and s/he couldn’t produce any criteria that s/he used to determine how four words were supposed to be literal while everything around it wasn’t. That indicates an argument based in axe-grinding and not objective consideration of the evidence.

Sometimes it seems that no matter what kind of answer is provided for a Biblical mistake the answer will simply be accepted by many because they wish to hold to the assumption that the Bible cannot be mistaken.

Why should the Christian determine otherwise – because you say it’s possible?? Theists are well aware of the fact that it’s hard to prove God’s existence and that means it’s just as hard to prove the Bible cannot be mistaken.
As for a provided answer being a good one, the burden of proof for “good answers� has been met for the Christian. “Good� is a subjective, feelings based, judgment that can’t be proved either way – anymore than “vanilla is better than chocolate.�

One must look at the mistake itself and determine for themselves whether this is a mistake or not.

That’s what Captain Obvious said.

Your examples of errors are reconciled for the Christian what I’ve just said.

[PghPanther]

My high school algebra book had an error in it, does that mean that Algebra is all wrong? A simplistic approach, perhaps, but some use that approach to claim that the ENTIRE bible is fiction, and others will blind themselves to obvious contradictions and stubbornly cling to a meaningless point.
Most of the so-called mistakes in the Bible are of no relevance to the overall message, or the plan of salvation. Surely we believers can accept the obvious good parts and let others beat themselves silly worrying about proper translation, meanings of words, etc. We make ourselves look stupid fighting over minor points, while we should be spending our time doing what we are told to do by Christ himself.
MOST Christian churches have gone astray. Very few are following in the footsteps of Jesus when it comes to "feeding his sheep".
The deeds of Christianity are more important than the words. If we can't do the simple things that are asked of us, all the rest is of no value.

Comparing HS algebra to a book that is suppose to contain a revelation to what will happen to the eternal fate of your soul?...............silly comparison.

Why didn't this God decide to hand us the revelation in his very own writing like he supposedly did with the 10 commandments?

Or give us a revelation when digital technology existed so there wouldn't be any mistakes?

Maybe this God is nothing more than the image of those primitive tribal peoples who claim it is so wise never figured out others would be challenging their stories centuries from when they were written and with a process that never occurred to them as a way to figure out reality...aka the scientific method.......