A response to @MaghrebGator 's supposed numerical Biblical contradictions. Muzzie arguments destroyed to oblivion!

[Deleted member 45780]

Ok

Research them one by one and you'll see

 

[i_love_roosters]

I will become bible scholar find turth for myself, not listen to jews or jews larping as christ cucks

shiiii, you got me

 

[PsychoH]

So, where do I even begin. I didn't come to this place to debate religion. To the people who are against this type of threads (@Psychophilly, sorry bestie), I just wanna say that I didn't come for this. I came here to looksmaxx and it's still the reason why I'm here. I'm a real looksmaxxer who actually does things to improve, not just rot and troll. I also post looksmaxxing and blackpill threads from time to time. The reason why I started debating religion is because this low IQ user @MaghrebGator was spamming his (wrong) faith like there is no tomorrow.

This thread is gonna be really long and it's probably gonna be a waste of time to make it because the muzzies aren't gonna read it. I already made a really long thread on one of the many gigantic fallacies of Islam. Link: https://looksmax.org/threads/a-huge...oves-the-whole-religion.964666/#post-14763207. So far nobody tried to disprove it (impossible). It's not just them, pretty much nobody will be interested in all this, but it's my duty as a Christian to defend my faith. As I like to say, Jesus died for my sins and so I can live, the least I could do for him is to live for him and defend him. As @ylrven once commented under on one of my other threads on religion: "rotting for a good cause"

The reason why I'm writing this is because @MaghrebGator thought he did something by copying and pasting some supposed numerical "contradictions" in the bible (this is where he stole it from: https://islamiat101.blogspot.com/2012/11/numerical-contradictions-in-bible.html?m=1 ). He wrote it as a reply to this thread of mine where I talk about how Allah was bad at maths. Link: https://looksmax.org/threads/mathematical-error-in-islam-its-so-over-for-muzzies.974830/ To refute him, it would require a lot of writing and I thought it would be a shame for all this work to be posted as a reply, so I'm making a whole thread about it.

Here's what he commented:

Now answer these Biblical numerical and mathematical errors one by one

1- On how many shekels of gold David brought threshing floor?
600 [1 Chronicles 21:25]
50 [2 Samuel 24:24]

2- How many years of famine?
Seven [2 Samuel 24:13]
Three [1 Chronicles 21:12]

3- The number of fighting men of Israel and Judah were?
Israel was 1,100,000 and Judah numbered 470,000 [1 Chronicles 21:5]
Israel was 800,000 and Judah numbered 500,000 [ 2 Samuel 24:9]

4- In which year did Ahaziah began to reign?
12 [2 Kings 8:25]
11 [2 Kings 9:29]

5- How old was Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem?
Twenty-two [2 Kings 8:26]
Forty-two [2 Chronicles 22:2]

6- How old was Jehoiachin when he became king of Jerusalem?
Eighteen [2 Kings 24:8]
Eight [2 Chronicles 36:9]

7- How long did he rule over Jerusalem?
Three months [2 Kings 24:8]
Three months and ten days [2 Chronicles 36:9]

8- The chief of the mighty men of David lifted up his spear and killed how many men at one time?
Eight hundred [2 Samuel 23:8]
Three hundred [I Chronicles 11: 11]

9- How many pairs of clean animals did God tell Noah to take into the Ark?
Two [Genesis 6:19, 20]
Seven [Genesis 7:2]. But despite this last instruction only two pairs went into the ark [Genesis 7:8-9]

10- When David defeated the King of Zobah, how many horsemen did he capture?
One thousand and seven hundred [2 Samuel 8:4]
Seven thousand [I Chronicles 18:4]

11- How many stalls for horses did Solomon have?
Forty thousand [I Kings 4:26]
Four thousand [2 chronicles 9:25]

12- In what year of King Asa's reign did Baasha, King of Israel die?
Twenty-sixth year [I Kings 15:33 - 16:8]
Still alive in the thirty-sixth year [2 Chronicles 16:1]

13- How many overseers did Solomon appoint for the work of building the temple?
Three thousand six hundred [2 Chronicles 2:2]
Three thousand three hundred [I Kings 5:16]

14- Solomon built a facility containing how many baths?
Two thousand [1 Kings 7:26]
Over three thousand [2 Chronicles 4:5]

15- Of the Israelites who were freed from the Babylonian captivity, how many were the children of Pahrath-Moab?
Two thousand eight hundred and twelve [Ezra 2:6]
Two thousand eight hundred and eighteen [Nehemiah 7:11]

16- How many were the children of Zattu?
Nine hundred and forty-five [Ezra 2:8]
Eight hundred and forty-five [Nehemiah 7:13]

17- How many were the children of Azgad?
One thousand two hundred and twenty-two [Ezra 2:12]
Two thousand three hundred and twenty-two [Nehemiah 7:17]

18- How many were the children of Adin?
Four hundred and fifty-four [Ezra 2:15]
Six hundred and fifty-five [Nehemiah 7:20]

19- How many were the children of Hashum?
Two hundred and twenty-three [Ezra 2:19]
Three hundred and twenty-eight [Nehemiah 7:22]

20- How many were the children of Bethel and Ai?
Two hundred and twenty-three [Ezra 2:28]
One hundred and twenty-three [Nehemiah 7:32]

21- How many singers accompanied the assembly?
Two hundred [Ezra 2:65]
Two hundred and forty-five [Nehemiah 7:67]

22-When the Israelites dwelt in Shittin they committed adultery with the daughters of Moab. God struck them with a plague. How many people died in that plague?
Twenty-four thousand [Numbers 25:1 and 9]
Twenty-three thousand [I Corinthians 10:8]

23- How many members of the house of Jacob came to Egypt?
Seventy souls [Genesis 4 & 27]
Seventy-five souls [Acts 7:14]

24- On life span?
God decided that the life-span of humans will be limited to 120 years [Genesis 6:3]
Many people born after that lived longer than 120. Arpachshad lived 438 years. His son Shelah lived 433 years. His son Eber lived 464 years, etc [Genesis 11:12-16]

25- Can King multiply his horses?
Solomon had thousands of horses. [1 Kings 4:26]
A King must not multiply horses to himself. [Deuteronomy 17:15-16]

26- Can King multiply his wives?
King Solomon had hundreds of wives. [1 Kings 11:1-3]
A King must not multiply wives to himself. [Deuteronomy 17:17]

27- On sons of Eliphaz
Eliphaz had six sons. [Genesis 36:11-12]
Eliphaz had seven sons. [Genesis 36:15-16]
Eliphaz had seven different sons. [1 Chronicles 1:36]

28- On sons of Dan
Dan had one son. [Genesis 46:23]
Amazingly, this one son produced over 62,000 military-age males by the first census. [Numbers1:38-39]

29- How many beasts died in Plague?
All the beasts died in plague number six. [Exodus 9:6]
All the beasts received boils in plague number seven. [Exodus 9:10]
All the beasts were hit with hail and fire in plague number eight. [Exodus 9:25]
All the beasts lost their firstborn in plague number ten. [Exodus 12:29]

30- On the journey
The number of Israelites, excluding children, was 600,000 [Exodus 12:37]
The number of Israelites, including children, was only 7000. [1 Kings 20:15]

31- How many sons Jesse had?
Jesse had eight sons. [1 Samuel 16:10-11; 1 Samuel 17:12]
Jesse had seven sons. [Chronicles 2:13-15]

32- Did Michal have child or not?
Michal had five children [2 Samuel 21:8]
Michal had no children till her death [2 Samuel 6:23]

33- How many chariots David destroys?
David destroys 700 chariots [2 Samuel 10:18]
David destroys 7000 chariots [1 Chronicles 19:18]

34- How many cubits were temple pillar built?
The Temple pillars were 18 cubits [1 Kings 7:15]
The Temple pillars were 35 cubits [2 Chronicles 3:15]

35- How many men captain took?
The captain takes 5 men of the king's council [2 Kings 25:19]
The captain takes 7 men of the king's council [Jeremiah 52:25]

36- On death of Baasha?
Baasha died in the 26tth year of King Asa's reign. [1 Kings16:6-8]
Baasha built a city in the 36th year of King Asa's reign. [2 Chronicles16:1]

37- How much years Omri reign?
Omri reigned 12 years beginning in the 31st year of Asa's reign. [1 Kings 16:23]O
mri died and his son began his reign in the 38th year of Asa's reign, making Omri's reign only 7-years. [1 Kings16:28-29]
@Fiqh
@Hamdan

Before I begin annihilating every single one of his (stolen) points one by one, I would like to say that he shouldn't be commenting the accuracy of the Bible as a Muslim because Allah and Muhammad, aka Qutham, affirm the preservation, inspiration, and the authority of the Bible. I briefly touch upon this issue of Islam in the first thread that I linked (the long one). This thread is not about that, so I wouldn't be writing a long explanation (already did). Instead, I'll just leave this video here


(Try to disprove it)

One more thing before I get to the meaty part. I wanna shoutout some .org defenders of Christ, our Lord: @Eternal_ @BigBiceps . Y'all are moggers for doing what you're doing. There could be more people doing the same but you're the ones I've seen do it the most. God bless you and your close ones.

Now let's get to the actual reason why I'm making this...

1.

Response: Read it in context, the account found in 2 Samuel 24 records only David’s purchase of the threshing floor and oxen. On the other hand, the account in 1 Chronicles 21 records a higher price for the full purchase, including the surrounding land.

2.

Response: So, according to the text, numbering the people was nearly a year-long process, and there is no clear indication that God had suspended the initial three-year famine prior to the events in chapter 24. Now, if God had combined three additional years of famine (1 Chronicles 21:12) with the three years of initial famine, and a possible intervening year while the census was conducted, the resulting overall famine would have totaled about seven years (2 Samuel 24:13).

I've heard some Christians propose another solution. They claim that these two passages describe the prophet Gad confronting me on two different occasions. According to this view, the “seven year” proposal was initially given four years prior to the “three year” proposal. Thus, the prophet would have confronted me and given me a few years to mull over my decision. During that time, I had repented of my actions, so God reduced the time of punishment—something God definitely has the authority to do. A problem with this view is that if God reduced the seven years to three years because of my repentance, then why didn’t He reduce the length of the other options as well? So, while this solution may seem less likely, it still provides another reasonable explanation.

It's crucial to understand that no matter which solution we opt for, the outcome remains consistent. The allegation of contradiction dissipates, all without asserting any error within the text. To sum up, these Scriptures not only align harmoniously but also complement each other by offering further insights into this specific event.

3.

Response:

(3.1) The solution lies in the translation. The first passage indicates that Joab presented the census to David, listing 800,000 individuals, while the second passage mentions 1,100,000 men who were ready for battle. The key lies in the term "valiant." Among the total 1,100,000 men, only 800,000 were considered valiant warriors. The remaining 300,000 served as reserves. This distinction underscores the difference between simply being a soldier and being a courageous and skilled warrior, akin to the contrast between military ranks such as a sergeant and a general. Both serve in their respective capacities, but their levels of skill and authority differ significantly.

(3.2) It is clear that, with regard to Judah, the figure of 470,000 - quoted in Chronicles - is just those who drew sword, whereas the Samuel number is all of Judah, 500,000.

The census report in 1 Chronicles reports that there were 470,000 soldiers of Judah who drew the sword, yet does not include the standing army of the 30,000 soldiers that are cited in 2 Samuel 6:1. It so happens that these numbers (400,000 + 30,000 = 500,000) add up to the number of soldiers reported in 2 Samuel.

Another historical fact to consider is that Joab was not able to finish counting all the men (1 Chronicles 21:6), which makes the census incomplete (explaining why there is a difference in the report of the numbers).

4.

Response: The initial passage indicates the moment Ahaziah ascended to the throne following his father's death. However, the second passage specifies when Ahaziah commenced his reign. While typically these events coincide, it's not always the case. In this instance, Joram, Ahaziah's father, succumbs to a prolonged illness before his demise. The logical conclusion is that Ahaziah assumed rulership when his father became incapacitated, during the eleventh year of Joram's reign, and formally ascended to the throne upon his father's passing in the twelfth year of Joram's reign. Such instances underscore the complexity of dating ancient events, often challenging assumptions of sequential reigns among kings.

5.

Response: Ahaziah reigned twice. The first time at 22 he reigned over Judah in Jerusalem. The second
time he reigned at 42 was after Israel and Judah were reunited into 1 nation and he was
chosen to reign over Israel. However both times he was removed from king because he was
wicked.

6.

Response: The Hebrew word "בְּמָלְכ֔וֹ" translates "when he became king", not "when he began to reign." In this way, it would support the co-regent argument because "בְּמָלְכ֔וֹ"and "מָלַ֖ךְ" ("he reigned") are not the same word.

If it is not an error, there were two separate crowning events—one at age 8 when his father ceremonially named him co-regent (much like David named Solomon king while he still lived and reigned, 1 Kings 1) and once at age 18 when Jehoiachin officially became king at his father’s death and then reigned for a mere three months.

7.

Response: 2 Kings 24:8 is just rounding to the nearest month, jfl

8.

Response: The discrepancy between the numbers 800 and 300, as recorded in 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles respectively, may initially seem contradictory. However, upon closer examination, it becomes evident that the apparent contradiction arises from mistranslations and actually pertains to two distinct individuals within David's mighty men. In 2 Samuel 23:8, Josheb-basshebeth, also known as Adino the Eznite, is described as having slain 800 enemies in a single encounter, earning him the title of chief among the three great heroes appointed by David. This distinction as one of the "third men" signifies his role as a leader among captains or commanders in David's army.

On the other hand, 1 Chronicles 11:11 recounts the valor of Jashobeam the Hachmonite, who is designated as the chief among David's thirty mighty men. Despite the discrepancy in translation, accurately rendering him as the leader of the thirty heroes, Jashobeam's feat involves the slaying of 300 adversaries in battle. It's important to note that these are two separate individuals with different names, origins, positions, and achievements.

While the mistranslations may lead to confusion, a careful reading of the passages clarifies that there is no contradiction. Rather, they highlight the valor and prowess of two distinct warriors within David's army, each contributing to the military success of the kingdom in their own right.

9.

Response: The narrative of Noah's ark in the Bible appears to present a discrepancy regarding the number of clean animals to be brought onto the ark. Critics point out that while Genesis 6:19 instructs Noah to bring two of every kind of animal, Genesis 7:2-3 adds that he should bring seven of each clean animal and two of each unclean animal. However, this contradiction is resolved when we understand the supplementation of instructions. Initially, Noah was instructed to bring two of every kind of animal, which included both clean and unclean. Later, God further instructed him to bring additional clean animals, not as a contradiction but as a necessary provision for future sacrifices after the Flood.

The analogy of a farmer instructing his son to take animals to the state fair and then providing additional instructions for a barbecue helps illustrate this point. Just as the farmer's additional instructions are not contradictory but supplemental, so too are God's instructions to Noah regarding the animals for the ark.

Additionally, the debate over whether Noah took seven or fourteen of each clean animal arises from translational differences in the Hebrew phrase "shibb’ah shibb’ah." Some translations interpret this phrase to mean seven pairs, while others interpret it as seven individual animals. Despite this uncertainty, the main point remains clear: Noah took different numbers of clean and unclean animals onto the ark, as specified in the biblical text.

Ultimately, while the exact number of clean animals brought onto the ark may remain unclear, there is no inherent contradiction in the biblical account. The narrative maintains its coherence, depicting Noah's faithful obedience to God's instructions amidst the cataclysmic event of the Flood.

10.

Response: The discrepancy between the accounts of David's capture of horsemen in 2 Samuel 8:4 and 1 Chronicles 18:4 is rooted in the understanding that horsemen were not necessarily exclusive from footmen but a subset within footmen. This aligns with historical military practices where soldiers trained as ground infantry could also serve as horsemen. This interpretation is supported by other biblical passages like 2 Samuel 10:18 and 1 Chronicles 19:18, where similar events are described using different terminology, suggesting that horsemen and footmen were essentially the same individuals described differently. In the case of the battle with Hadarezer, when 2 Samuel mentions "seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen," it's likely that the 700 horsemen were part of the larger group of footmen. Similarly, when 1 Chronicles lists "seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen," these were also likely part of the overall footmen count.

Furthermore, the discrepancy in the number of horsemen captured (700 vs. 7000) can be attributed to the flexible nature of the label "horsemen," which attaches to individuals when they are on horses but can detach when they are not. Therefore, depending on when the headcount was taken, one historian might report a higher number of horsemen if they counted before the battle, while another might report a lower number if they counted after the battle, considering only those still mounted on horses. This discrepancy underscores the different perspectives and methodologies of the historians compiling these accounts.

Additionally, both passages mention 1700 soldiers, which likely includes both horsemen and footmen. These soldiers would be part of the total count but not explicitly delineated as either horsemen or footmen.

Moreover, the existence of multiple historical sources used in compiling the biblical texts supports the idea that these accounts reflect different viewpoints. The superficial differences between 2 Samuel 10:18 and 1 Chronicles 19:18, where one mentions "forty thousand horsemen" and the other "forty thousand footmen" in the same battle, suggest that these are not mere duplicates but rather reflections of varying historical perspectives.

In conclusion, understanding horsemen as a subset of footmen and recognizing the flexible nature of the label "horsemen" helps reconcile the discrepancies between 2 Samuel 8:4 and 1 Chronicles 18:4. These differences highlight the complexities of historical interpretation and the multiplicity of sources underlying biblical narratives, allowing for a richer understanding of the events described in scripture.

11.

Response: One way to explain this is to acknowledge that the difference is due to time; that is, one account is at the beginning of Solomon’s reign (1 Kings 4:26), and the other at the end (2 Chron. 9:25)

Another way to explain this is that the contradiction between 1 Kings 4:26 and 2 Chronicles 9:25 can be reconciled by understanding the different types of stalls mentioned. In 1 Kings 4:26, the stalls were for horses used primarily by chariots and horsemen. On the other hand, 2 Chronicles 9:25 mentions stalls specifically for horses and chariots, which would logically be fewer in number compared
to stalls for horses alone. Considering the known number of chariots (1,400) from 2 Chronicles 1:14, it's reasonable to assume fewer stalls were needed for both horses and chariots.

Furthermore, while 2 Chronicles 9:25 describes the purpose of the stalls, 1 Kings 4:26 details the purpose of the horses, indicating they were for chariots and horsemen. Even with conservative estimates of horse usage, the number of stalls aligns with the needs for housing horses and accommodating chariots. Therefore, there were likely 40,000 stalls for housing horses and 4,000 stalls capable of storing horses and chariots, with each of the latter potentially subdivided to accommodate individual horses.

In conclusion, there were 40,000 stalls that were for housing horses, and 4,000 stalls that were for storing horses and chariots. The two numbers could be harmonized if each of the 4,000 stalls with the space to house a chariot had 10 subdividing stalls for individual horses.

12.

Response: Baasha came to power in the third year of the reign of King Asa and died in the twenty-sixth year of Asa’s reign, just as 1 Kings states. His son, Elah, reigned after him, as verse 6 in 1 Kings 16 states:

1 Kings 16:6 So Baasha slept with his fathers, and was buried in Tirzah: and Elah his son reigned in his stead.

This, as we already know from verse 8, was in the 26th year of Asa.

Yet, obviously, this does not coincide with the thirty-sixth year as stated in 2 Chronicles.

2 Chronicles, however, unlike 1 Kings, is not referring to the literal year of Asa’s reign. The thirty-sixth year is actually the 36th year since the division of the kingdom from the unified Israel into the Northern tribes of the house of Israel and the southern tribes, the house of Judah. While the author of 1 Kings records the year according to the literal reign of Asa, the author of 2 Chronicles records the year according to the division of the kingdom of Israel into two kingdoms.

When we look at the Hebrew in 1 Kings 15:33, there are two important things to note. Firstly, we will see that the word translated as reign is מָלַךְ (Malak), which means to reign as king or to become king (or queen). This is a literal reference as to when Baasha became king. He became the literal king in the third year of Asa. Here is the second point: it states clearly, “the third year of Asa”. This is a reference to the literal third year of Asa’s reign as king.

Now let’s look at 2 Chronicles 16:1. The Hebrew word translated as reign here is מַלְכוּת (malkuth), which means reign or kingdom. This is not referring to the literal reign of Asa as king but the reign of the kingdom of which Asa was a member. The kingdom that had started thirty-six years earlier with his grandfather Rehoboam.

Rehoboam had become King of Israel after the death of his father Solomon.

2 Chronicles 9:31 And Solomon slept with his fathers, and he was buried in the city of David his father: and Rehoboam his son reigned in his stead.

1 Kings 11:43 And Solomon slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David his father: and Rehoboam his son reigned in his stead.

However, Jeroboam and the Northern tribes rebelled against Rehoboam, and this is when the Kingdom was divided.

1 Kings 12:20 And it came to pass, when all Israel heard that Jeroboam was come again, that they sent and called him unto the congregation, and made him king over all Israel: there was none that followed the house of David, but the tribe of Judah only.

We are told in 2 Chronicles that Rehoboam had established a kingdom.

2 Chronicles 12:1 And it came to pass, when Rehoboam had established the kingdom, and had strengthened himself, he forsook the law of the LORD, and all Israel with him.

The Hebrew word translated as kingdom is unsurprisingly מַלְכוּת (mulkuth), the same word translated as reign in 2 Chronicles 16:1.

The author of 2 Chronicles is giving us the year as per the founding of the Kingdom.

Rehoboam reigned for seventeen years.

1 Kings 14:21 And Rehoboam the son of Solomon reigned in Judah. Rehoboam was forty and one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city which the LORD did choose out of all the tribes of Israel, to put his name there. And his mother’s name was Naamah an Ammonitess.

Rehoboam's son Abijam reigned after him.

1 Kings 14:31 And Rehoboam slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in the city of David. And his mother’s name was Naamah an Ammonitess. And Abijam his son reigned in his stead.

Abijam reigned for three years.

2 Chronicles 13:2 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.

After the death of Abijam, Asa reigned in his stead. This was now the 20th year of the kingdom of Judah.

2 Chronicles 14:1 So Abijah slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the city of David: and Asa his son reigned in his stead. In his days the land was quiet ten years.

Reigned in both of these verses is מָלַךְ (Malak), so we are referring to the personal reign of each king.

So we see that there had, in fact, been 20 years since the founding of the 2 Kingdoms when Asa became the literal physical king of the house of Judah.

Baasha became king of the Northern tribes in the 3rd year of Asa, which was the 23rd year of the kingdom of Asa or rather the kingdom of the house of Judah. This means that Baasha's death, which we know occurred in the 26th year of Asa as king, was in the 46th year of the kingdom. 20 years + 26 years = 46 years.

Therefore, Baasha's death actually occurred a full 10 years after he had come against Asa in the 36th year of the kingdom, which was the 16th year of Asa’s own personal reign as king.

When we analyze the texts correctly, there simply is no contradiction between these two numbers.

13.

Response: The contradiction between 1 Kings and 2 Chronicles regarding the number of supervisors can be resolved by considering various factors. One plausible explanation is that the author of 2 Chronicles may have included reserves among the overseers, ready to step in for any supervisors who were unable to fulfill their duties due to illness or death. In their analysis of alleged Bible contradictions, Jay Smith, Alex Chowdhry, and others suggest this interpretation, highlighting the inclusion of reserves as a solution to the perceived inconsistency.

Another perspective offered by esteemed Old Testament commentators, Keil and Delitzsch, suggests that the difference in numbers arises from how the supervisors were categorized. They point out that while 1 Kings mentions a total of 3,850 supervisors, combining figures from different passages, 2 Chronicles also arrives at the same total. Keil and Delitzsch propose that the discrepancy lies not in the actual count but in the classification method used by each author. While one may have categorized supervisors based on nationality, the other may have organized them by authority.

In essence, these explanations demonstrate that what initially appears as a contradiction can be reconciled through careful consideration of context and interpretation. This underscores the importance of understanding nuances within biblical texts and highlights that apparent differences do not necessarily indicate contradictions.

14.

Response: One plausible explanation for the differing numbers in 1 Kings 7:26 and 2 Chronicles 4:5 lies in the method of counting. According to Matthew Henry and Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown, 1 Kings 7:26 may denote the practical capacity of the laver, indicating the amount it could comfortably hold for regular use. In contrast, 2 Chronicles 4:5 might refer to the total capacity of the laver if it were filled to the brim.

The "molten sea," a large brass basin designated for priestly ablutions, was positioned at the entrance of the priests' court, akin to a font at a church entrance. While its full capacity was noted as 3000 baths (as in 2 Chronicles 4:5), it typically contained only 2000 baths for regular use, as mentioned in 1 Kings 7:26.

Matthew Henry underscores this interpretation by highlighting the practical aspect, suggesting that the laver ordinarily held 2000 baths, while Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown emphasize the distinction between "receiving" and "holding," implying that the laver could receive up to 3000 baths but typically held less.

In essence, these perspectives suggest that the discrepancy in numbers stems from the different approaches to counting—whether to denote practical usage or total capacity—rather than a contradiction in the texts.

Another plausible explanation is that it's important to understand that "baths" in this context represents a unit of volume, with one bath roughly equivalent to 5.8 gallons. Thus, the discrepancy lies in whether the "Sea" held 11,600 gallons or 17,400 gallons.

One explanation is that 2 Chronicles could be referring to the Sea's total capacity, while 1 Kings could be describing the typical amount of water it held.

There's evidence suggesting that the dry volume bath was smaller than the liquid volume bath used in ancient Israel. The Targum indicates, "It received three thousand baths of dry measure, and held two thousand of liquid measure." Some scholars speculate that during the Babylonian captivity, the smaller volume bath became prevalent, and since 2 Chronicles was likely written towards the end of this period, it could account for the discrepancy, whereas 1 Kings was penned before the captivity.

15 - 23

Response: In the Hebrew Bible, Ezra-Nehemiah forms a cohesive unit, portraying the return of Israelites from Babylon to Jerusalem and Judea following the exile. Two distinct lists, Ezra 2:1-67 and Nehemiah 7:6-68, detail this return. Despite striking similarities in language, style, and the order of paragraphs, differences in spelling variations, the number of registered families, and leadership figures emerge.

Nehemiah's designation of his list as 'the book of the genealogy of those who came up first' suggests it captures the earliest wave of immigrants led by Zerubbabel, likely compiled in Jerusalem where the chronological order of arrivals could be accurately determined. Conversely, Ezra's list, likely compiled in Babylon, registers those who chose to journey with Zerubbabel and were recorded there before departure.

These discrepancies, such as spelling variations and the inclusion of additional families in Nehemiah's list, likely stem from the dynamic nature of the journey. For instance, the early days of travel likely saw the inclusion of more individuals, while certain groups might have lagged behind for various reasons, explaining the discrepancies in numbers and the addition of Nahamani to Nehemiah's list.

Furthermore, the figure of 42,360 recorded in both lists doesn't purport to represent every individual but rather focuses on the foundational families forming the nascent nation in Judea.

Ezra and Nehemiah, writing with prophetic insight, didn't perceive contradictions within these texts, viewing them as complementary perspectives of the same historical event. Thus, we too should view these differences as enriching the narrative rather than detracting from its authenticity.

24.

Response: In this passage, God's statement was not about the average human lifespan, but rather a declaration of judgment against wickedness, indicating when He would cleanse the earth with the Flood.

According to the biblical timeline, the Flood began around 2370 B.C., suggesting that God made this pronouncement around 2490 B.C.E., when Noah was 480 years old.

Approximately 20 years later, around 2470 B.C.E., Noah's sons were born, leaving about a century before the Flood. However, God did not reveal to Noah the specifics of his role or the timing of the event.

During those 120 years, Noah was able to build the ark, raise a family, and warn his contemporaries of the impending catastrophe, demonstrating God's patience and mercy.

Despite the impending judgment, human lifespans remained long, allowing Noah and his sons to live for many years after the Flood.

25-26

Response: Solomon is one of the biggest sinners in The Bible, he disobeyed God multiple times.

27.

I don't see a contradiction anywhere. Elaborate???

28.

Response: The discrepancy you're pointing out arises from differences in how the term "sons of Dan" is used in Genesis and Numbers. In Genesis 46:23, "sons of Dan" refers to Dan's direct descendants, whereas in Numbers 1:38-39, it refers to the entire tribe of Dan, including all its descendants and associated clans. This broader usage accounts for the larger number in the census.

29.

Response: There is a misunderstanding in the interpretation of the plagues in Exodus. While the plagues affected the livestock in various ways, not all the beasts died in each plague. For example:

- In plague number six, only the livestock of the Egyptians died (Exodus 9:6).
- In plague number seven, the livestock of the Egyptians are not specifically mentioned, but it's about boils afflicting people and animals (Exodus 9:10).
- In plague number eight, hail destroyed the Egyptian's livestock that were in the fields (Exodus 9:25).
- In plague number ten, the death of the firstborn affected humans, not livestock (Exodus 12:29).

So, not all the beasts died in every plague; the impact varied from one plague to another.

30.

Response: The discrepancy in the numbers arises from different contexts and methods of counting.

In Exodus 12:37, the figure of 600,000 refers to the number of Israelite men of military age who left Egypt during the Exodus. This count excludes women, children, and elderly individuals.

In 1 Kings 20:15, the figure of 7,000 likely refers to a different context or a specific group of people within Israel, rather than the entire population. Consider the context and the specific group being referenced when comparing numbers from different parts of the Bible.

31:

Response: The discrepancy in the number of Jesse's sons arises from differences in the way the sons are counted or named in different passages of the Bible.

In 1 Samuel 16:10-11 and 1 Samuel 17:12, Jesse's eight sons are mentioned, including David. However, in 1 Chronicles 2:13-15, only seven sons are listed. It's possible that one of Jesse's sons died or was not included in the genealogy mentioned in Chronicles. Alternatively, there could be variations in the naming or counting of the sons between the two passages.

32.

Response: The contradiction regarding Michal's children in the biblical passages of 2 Samuel 6:23 and 21:8 is reconciled through a detailed narrative analysis. Initially, Michal was promised to David, but due to Saul's manipulation, she was given to Adriel instead, with whom she had five sons. However, after Adriel's death, Michal was given to Paltiel. Later, David claimed Michal as his rightful wife, leading to her divorce from Paltiel and reunion with David. Despite having children with Adriel, Michal didn't bear any more children after reuniting with David. This explanation provides a coherent timeline of Michal's marriages and children, removing the contradiction between the two passages. Additionally, it suggests the involvement of Michal's sons in Saul's persecution against the Gibeonites, highlighting the complexities of familial dynamics and political intrigue within biblical narratives.

The contradiction regarding Michal having children can be explained by another way and that's by considering the possibility that the children mentioned in 2 Samuel 21:8 were not biologically hers but were perhaps adopted or raised by her. Meanwhile, 2 Samuel 6:23 may be emphasizing that she remained childless in terms of giving birth during her lifetime.

33.

Response: There's a difference between II Samuel 8:3 and I Chronicles 18:3 concerning David's conflict with Hadadezer, the king of Zobah. Some argue that these verses describe distinct battles. Another perspective, advocated by scholars like Matthew Henry and John Wesley, suggests that the variance lies in the method of enumeration: one verse tallies men while the other counts chariot companies, presuming ten men per unit.

However, a more nuanced explanation, championed by Peter Ruckman, gains traction when examining II Samuel 10:18 and I Chronicles 19:18, which recount a separate engagement between David and Hadadezer's forces. These passages describe how Syrian chariots likely operated with multiple crew members, including a commander, drivers, shieldmen, and bowmen. This setup implies that each chariot could accommodate several combatants, explaining the discrepancy in casualty counts between the two biblical accounts. Consequently, II Samuel 8:4's mention of 1000 chariots but only 700 horsemen could indicate that the 700 horsemen represent chariot units rather than individual riders, with the additional chariots serving as spares for battle damage or replacements.

34.

Response: In comparing the descriptions of the pillars in 1 Kings 7:15 and 2 Chronicles 3:15, we encounter a discrepancy in the measurement terminologies used. In 1 Kings, the height of the first pillar is specified as eighteen cubits, indicating a vertical measurement. Additionally, it mentions that a cord of twelve cubits would encircle the second pillar, implying its circumference. On the other hand, 2 Chronicles describes the pillars as thirty-five cubits high, employing the term "orekh" (אֹרֶךְ) which typically denotes length or extension rather than height. This discrepancy has led to debates over the interpretation of the measurements.

One interpretation suggests that the thirty-five cubits mentioned in 2 Chronicles is a summary measurement, combining the total height (including the capital) and the circumference of the pillar. This is derived from the assumption that the Chronicler used a convention where the total length of a three-dimensional object was represented by the sum of its dimensions. However, this interpretation is speculative and may not accurately reflect the conventions or intentions of the Chronicler.

The key distinction between the two accounts lies in the level of detail provided. While 1 Kings offers specific measurements for the height ("qomath" - קוֹמַת) and circumference of the pillars separately, 2 Chronicles presents a summary measurement that encompasses all dimensions of the pillars. Thus, while 1 Kings provides a more detailed breakdown of the measurements, 2 Chronicles offers a consolidated view of the total length of the pillars.

Ultimately, the differing measurement terminologies and levels of detail between the two accounts highlight the complexities of interpreting ancient texts and the importance of considering historical and cultural contexts when analyzing such passages.

A different point of view is that just as many "non-modern" units of measurement varied between different regions, the cubit also had differing meanings depending on the country. For example, a cubit measured 939 millimeters in Turkey and 457 millimeters in India. Therefore, 18 Turkish cubits would be equivalent to 37 Indian cubits. This illustrates how historical measurements could vary significantly across geographical and cultural boundaries, akin to the differences between the mile, and the nautical mile still observed today.

35.

Response: This number excluded Pashur the son of Melchiah (Jeremiah 21:1), and his apparent son Gedaliah (Jer 38:1), according to an apparent possible lack of genealogical record (Jeremiah 21:1, Ezr 2:59). Or, maybe they were eunuchs

36.

Response: In the books of Kings and Chronicles rulership complications many times give rise to numerical differences in the records between the four books but the differences aren’t mistakes, the different authors are just reckoning the same numerical information differently.

The "26th year of Asa’s reign" spoken of 1 Kings 16:8 only speaks about the amount of time that Asa had reigned alone, and these "26 years" do not include the period he co-reigned with his mother queen Maachah before she made an idol and was dethroned (see 1 Kings 15:10-13) which could have lasted ten years or more. This is very plausible as it wouldn’t be the first time that the author differentiates between a co-reign and an individual reign. This explains the seeming inconsistency with Baasha still being alive in the "36th year of Asa’s reign" in 2 Chronicles 16:1 (the "36 years" of 2 Chronicles 16:1 including both Asa’s co-reign and individual reign).

37.

Response: You're making me repeat myself for the 100th time. The discrepancy you mentioned arises from a difference in how the years of reign are counted. In ancient times, it was common to count the first partial year of a reign as the first year. Therefore, Omri's reign is counted as 12 years because his reign began in the 31st year of Asa's reign, and the year he died in was considered as his 12th year.



Notice how I didn't use the scribal errors argument when I could've used it many times. It was always over for Islam

mirin' effort

 

[Deleted member 45780]

View attachment 2790381shiiii, you got me

Original romans who amde europeans who made spics and niggers christian are phenotypically similar to jews

 

[Deleted member 45780]

Original romans who amde europeans who made spics and niggers christian are phenotypically similar to jews

In the future majority of christians will be niggers

 

[i_love_roosters]

Original romans who amde europeans who made spics and niggers christian are phenotypically similar to jews

Nothing wrong with having Jewish heritage

 

[i_love_roosters]

In the future majority of christians will be niggers

Schizo ramblings

 

[Deleted member 45780]

Schizo ramblings

more number of Christians live in Africa than on any other single continent:[60] "The results show Africa on top with 631 million Christian residents, Latin America in 2nd place with 601 million Christians, and Europe in 3rd place with 571 million Christians"

Tbh i really dislike christian culture in america seems like it ahstn had enough time to mature like the churches in europe did catholicism does have a really nice aesthetic tbh

 

[Deleted member 48689]

So, where do I even begin. I didn't come to this place to debate religion. To the people who are against this type of threads (@Psychophilly, sorry bestie), I just wanna say that I didn't come for this. I came here to looksmaxx and it's still the reason why I'm here. I'm a real looksmaxxer who actually does things to improve, not just rot and troll. I also post looksmaxxing and blackpill threads from time to time. The reason why I started debating religion is because this low IQ user @MaghrebGator was spamming his (wrong) faith like there is no tomorrow.

This thread is gonna be really long and it's probably gonna be a waste of time to make it because the muzzies aren't gonna read it. I already made a really long thread on one of the many gigantic fallacies of Islam. Link: https://looksmax.org/threads/a-huge...oves-the-whole-religion.964666/#post-14763207. So far nobody tried to disprove it (impossible). It's not just them, pretty much nobody will be interested in all this, but it's my duty as a Christian to defend my faith. As I like to say, Jesus died for my sins and so I can live, the least I could do for him is to live for him and defend him. As @ylrven once commented under on one of my other threads on religion: "rotting for a good cause"

The reason why I'm writing this is because @MaghrebGator thought he did something by copying and pasting some supposed numerical "contradictions" in the bible (this is where he stole it from: https://islamiat101.blogspot.com/2012/11/numerical-contradictions-in-bible.html?m=1 ). He wrote it as a reply to this thread of mine where I talk about how Allah was bad at maths. Link: https://looksmax.org/threads/mathematical-error-in-islam-its-so-over-for-muzzies.974830/ To refute him, it would require a lot of writing and I thought it would be a shame for all this work to be posted as a reply, so I'm making a whole thread about it.

Here's what he commented:

Now answer these Biblical numerical and mathematical errors one by one

1- On how many shekels of gold David brought threshing floor?
600 [1 Chronicles 21:25]
50 [2 Samuel 24:24]

2- How many years of famine?
Seven [2 Samuel 24:13]
Three [1 Chronicles 21:12]

3- The number of fighting men of Israel and Judah were?
Israel was 1,100,000 and Judah numbered 470,000 [1 Chronicles 21:5]
Israel was 800,000 and Judah numbered 500,000 [ 2 Samuel 24:9]

4- In which year did Ahaziah began to reign?
12 [2 Kings 8:25]
11 [2 Kings 9:29]

5- How old was Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem?
Twenty-two [2 Kings 8:26]
Forty-two [2 Chronicles 22:2]

6- How old was Jehoiachin when he became king of Jerusalem?
Eighteen [2 Kings 24:8]
Eight [2 Chronicles 36:9]

7- How long did he rule over Jerusalem?
Three months [2 Kings 24:8]
Three months and ten days [2 Chronicles 36:9]

8- The chief of the mighty men of David lifted up his spear and killed how many men at one time?
Eight hundred [2 Samuel 23:8]
Three hundred [I Chronicles 11: 11]

9- How many pairs of clean animals did God tell Noah to take into the Ark?
Two [Genesis 6:19, 20]
Seven [Genesis 7:2]. But despite this last instruction only two pairs went into the ark [Genesis 7:8-9]

10- When David defeated the King of Zobah, how many horsemen did he capture?
One thousand and seven hundred [2 Samuel 8:4]
Seven thousand [I Chronicles 18:4]

11- How many stalls for horses did Solomon have?
Forty thousand [I Kings 4:26]
Four thousand [2 chronicles 9:25]

12- In what year of King Asa's reign did Baasha, King of Israel die?
Twenty-sixth year [I Kings 15:33 - 16:8]
Still alive in the thirty-sixth year [2 Chronicles 16:1]

13- How many overseers did Solomon appoint for the work of building the temple?
Three thousand six hundred [2 Chronicles 2:2]
Three thousand three hundred [I Kings 5:16]

14- Solomon built a facility containing how many baths?
Two thousand [1 Kings 7:26]
Over three thousand [2 Chronicles 4:5]

15- Of the Israelites who were freed from the Babylonian captivity, how many were the children of Pahrath-Moab?
Two thousand eight hundred and twelve [Ezra 2:6]
Two thousand eight hundred and eighteen [Nehemiah 7:11]

16- How many were the children of Zattu?
Nine hundred and forty-five [Ezra 2:8]
Eight hundred and forty-five [Nehemiah 7:13]

17- How many were the children of Azgad?
One thousand two hundred and twenty-two [Ezra 2:12]
Two thousand three hundred and twenty-two [Nehemiah 7:17]

18- How many were the children of Adin?
Four hundred and fifty-four [Ezra 2:15]
Six hundred and fifty-five [Nehemiah 7:20]

19- How many were the children of Hashum?
Two hundred and twenty-three [Ezra 2:19]
Three hundred and twenty-eight [Nehemiah 7:22]

20- How many were the children of Bethel and Ai?
Two hundred and twenty-three [Ezra 2:28]
One hundred and twenty-three [Nehemiah 7:32]

21- How many singers accompanied the assembly?
Two hundred [Ezra 2:65]
Two hundred and forty-five [Nehemiah 7:67]

22-When the Israelites dwelt in Shittin they committed adultery with the daughters of Moab. God struck them with a plague. How many people died in that plague?
Twenty-four thousand [Numbers 25:1 and 9]
Twenty-three thousand [I Corinthians 10:8]

23- How many members of the house of Jacob came to Egypt?
Seventy souls [Genesis 4 & 27]
Seventy-five souls [Acts 7:14]

24- On life span?
God decided that the life-span of humans will be limited to 120 years [Genesis 6:3]
Many people born after that lived longer than 120. Arpachshad lived 438 years. His son Shelah lived 433 years. His son Eber lived 464 years, etc [Genesis 11:12-16]

25- Can King multiply his horses?
Solomon had thousands of horses. [1 Kings 4:26]
A King must not multiply horses to himself. [Deuteronomy 17:15-16]

26- Can King multiply his wives?
King Solomon had hundreds of wives. [1 Kings 11:1-3]
A King must not multiply wives to himself. [Deuteronomy 17:17]

27- On sons of Eliphaz
Eliphaz had six sons. [Genesis 36:11-12]
Eliphaz had seven sons. [Genesis 36:15-16]
Eliphaz had seven different sons. [1 Chronicles 1:36]

28- On sons of Dan
Dan had one son. [Genesis 46:23]
Amazingly, this one son produced over 62,000 military-age males by the first census. [Numbers1:38-39]

29- How many beasts died in Plague?
All the beasts died in plague number six. [Exodus 9:6]
All the beasts received boils in plague number seven. [Exodus 9:10]
All the beasts were hit with hail and fire in plague number eight. [Exodus 9:25]
All the beasts lost their firstborn in plague number ten. [Exodus 12:29]

30- On the journey
The number of Israelites, excluding children, was 600,000 [Exodus 12:37]
The number of Israelites, including children, was only 7000. [1 Kings 20:15]

31- How many sons Jesse had?
Jesse had eight sons. [1 Samuel 16:10-11; 1 Samuel 17:12]
Jesse had seven sons. [Chronicles 2:13-15]

32- Did Michal have child or not?
Michal had five children [2 Samuel 21:8]
Michal had no children till her death [2 Samuel 6:23]

33- How many chariots David destroys?
David destroys 700 chariots [2 Samuel 10:18]
David destroys 7000 chariots [1 Chronicles 19:18]

34- How many cubits were temple pillar built?
The Temple pillars were 18 cubits [1 Kings 7:15]
The Temple pillars were 35 cubits [2 Chronicles 3:15]

35- How many men captain took?
The captain takes 5 men of the king's council [2 Kings 25:19]
The captain takes 7 men of the king's council [Jeremiah 52:25]

36- On death of Baasha?
Baasha died in the 26tth year of King Asa's reign. [1 Kings16:6-8]
Baasha built a city in the 36th year of King Asa's reign. [2 Chronicles16:1]

37- How much years Omri reign?
Omri reigned 12 years beginning in the 31st year of Asa's reign. [1 Kings 16:23]O
mri died and his son began his reign in the 38th year of Asa's reign, making Omri's reign only 7-years. [1 Kings16:28-29]
@Fiqh
@Hamdan

Before I begin annihilating every single one of his (stolen) points one by one, I would like to say that he shouldn't be commenting the accuracy of the Bible as a Muslim because Allah and Muhammad, aka Qutham, affirm the preservation, inspiration, and the authority of the Bible. I briefly touch upon this issue of Islam in the first thread that I linked (the long one). This thread is not about that, so I wouldn't be writing a long explanation (already did). Instead, I'll just leave this video here


(Try to disprove it)

One more thing before I get to the meaty part. I wanna shoutout some .org defenders of Christ, our Lord: @Eternal_ @BigBiceps . Y'all are moggers for doing what you're doing. There could be more people doing the same but you're the ones I've seen do it the most. God bless you and your close ones.

Now let's get to the actual reason why I'm making this...

1.

Response: Read it in context, the account found in 2 Samuel 24 records only David’s purchase of the threshing floor and oxen. On the other hand, the account in 1 Chronicles 21 records a higher price for the full purchase, including the surrounding land.

2.

Response: So, according to the text, numbering the people was nearly a year-long process, and there is no clear indication that God had suspended the initial three-year famine prior to the events in chapter 24. Now, if God had combined three additional years of famine (1 Chronicles 21:12) with the three years of initial famine, and a possible intervening year while the census was conducted, the resulting overall famine would have totaled about seven years (2 Samuel 24:13).

I've heard some Christians propose another solution. They claim that these two passages describe the prophet Gad confronting me on two different occasions. According to this view, the “seven year” proposal was initially given four years prior to the “three year” proposal. Thus, the prophet would have confronted me and given me a few years to mull over my decision. During that time, I had repented of my actions, so God reduced the time of punishment—something God definitely has the authority to do. A problem with this view is that if God reduced the seven years to three years because of my repentance, then why didn’t He reduce the length of the other options as well? So, while this solution may seem less likely, it still provides another reasonable explanation.

It's crucial to understand that no matter which solution we opt for, the outcome remains consistent. The allegation of contradiction dissipates, all without asserting any error within the text. To sum up, these Scriptures not only align harmoniously but also complement each other by offering further insights into this specific event.

3.

Response:

(3.1) The solution lies in the translation. The first passage indicates that Joab presented the census to David, listing 800,000 individuals, while the second passage mentions 1,100,000 men who were ready for battle. The key lies in the term "valiant." Among the total 1,100,000 men, only 800,000 were considered valiant warriors. The remaining 300,000 served as reserves. This distinction underscores the difference between simply being a soldier and being a courageous and skilled warrior, akin to the contrast between military ranks such as a sergeant and a general. Both serve in their respective capacities, but their levels of skill and authority differ significantly.

(3.2) It is clear that, with regard to Judah, the figure of 470,000 - quoted in Chronicles - is just those who drew sword, whereas the Samuel number is all of Judah, 500,000.

The census report in 1 Chronicles reports that there were 470,000 soldiers of Judah who drew the sword, yet does not include the standing army of the 30,000 soldiers that are cited in 2 Samuel 6:1. It so happens that these numbers (400,000 + 30,000 = 500,000) add up to the number of soldiers reported in 2 Samuel.

Another historical fact to consider is that Joab was not able to finish counting all the men (1 Chronicles 21:6), which makes the census incomplete (explaining why there is a difference in the report of the numbers).

4.

Response: The initial passage indicates the moment Ahaziah ascended to the throne following his father's death. However, the second passage specifies when Ahaziah commenced his reign. While typically these events coincide, it's not always the case. In this instance, Joram, Ahaziah's father, succumbs to a prolonged illness before his demise. The logical conclusion is that Ahaziah assumed rulership when his father became incapacitated, during the eleventh year of Joram's reign, and formally ascended to the throne upon his father's passing in the twelfth year of Joram's reign. Such instances underscore the complexity of dating ancient events, often challenging assumptions of sequential reigns among kings.

5.

Response: Ahaziah reigned twice. The first time at 22 he reigned over Judah in Jerusalem. The second
time he reigned at 42 was after Israel and Judah were reunited into 1 nation and he was
chosen to reign over Israel. However both times he was removed from king because he was
wicked.

6.

Response: The Hebrew word "בְּמָלְכ֔וֹ" translates "when he became king", not "when he began to reign." In this way, it would support the co-regent argument because "בְּמָלְכ֔וֹ"and "מָלַ֖ךְ" ("he reigned") are not the same word.

If it is not an error, there were two separate crowning events—one at age 8 when his father ceremonially named him co-regent (much like David named Solomon king while he still lived and reigned, 1 Kings 1) and once at age 18 when Jehoiachin officially became king at his father’s death and then reigned for a mere three months.

7.

Response: 2 Kings 24:8 is just rounding to the nearest month, jfl

8.

Response: The discrepancy between the numbers 800 and 300, as recorded in 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles respectively, may initially seem contradictory. However, upon closer examination, it becomes evident that the apparent contradiction arises from mistranslations and actually pertains to two distinct individuals within David's mighty men. In 2 Samuel 23:8, Josheb-basshebeth, also known as Adino the Eznite, is described as having slain 800 enemies in a single encounter, earning him the title of chief among the three great heroes appointed by David. This distinction as one of the "third men" signifies his role as a leader among captains or commanders in David's army.

On the other hand, 1 Chronicles 11:11 recounts the valor of Jashobeam the Hachmonite, who is designated as the chief among David's thirty mighty men. Despite the discrepancy in translation, accurately rendering him as the leader of the thirty heroes, Jashobeam's feat involves the slaying of 300 adversaries in battle. It's important to note that these are two separate individuals with different names, origins, positions, and achievements.

While the mistranslations may lead to confusion, a careful reading of the passages clarifies that there is no contradiction. Rather, they highlight the valor and prowess of two distinct warriors within David's army, each contributing to the military success of the kingdom in their own right.

9.

Response: The narrative of Noah's ark in the Bible appears to present a discrepancy regarding the number of clean animals to be brought onto the ark. Critics point out that while Genesis 6:19 instructs Noah to bring two of every kind of animal, Genesis 7:2-3 adds that he should bring seven of each clean animal and two of each unclean animal. However, this contradiction is resolved when we understand the supplementation of instructions. Initially, Noah was instructed to bring two of every kind of animal, which included both clean and unclean. Later, God further instructed him to bring additional clean animals, not as a contradiction but as a necessary provision for future sacrifices after the Flood.

The analogy of a farmer instructing his son to take animals to the state fair and then providing additional instructions for a barbecue helps illustrate this point. Just as the farmer's additional instructions are not contradictory but supplemental, so too are God's instructions to Noah regarding the animals for the ark.

Additionally, the debate over whether Noah took seven or fourteen of each clean animal arises from translational differences in the Hebrew phrase "shibb’ah shibb’ah." Some translations interpret this phrase to mean seven pairs, while others interpret it as seven individual animals. Despite this uncertainty, the main point remains clear: Noah took different numbers of clean and unclean animals onto the ark, as specified in the biblical text.

Ultimately, while the exact number of clean animals brought onto the ark may remain unclear, there is no inherent contradiction in the biblical account. The narrative maintains its coherence, depicting Noah's faithful obedience to God's instructions amidst the cataclysmic event of the Flood.

10.

Response: The discrepancy between the accounts of David's capture of horsemen in 2 Samuel 8:4 and 1 Chronicles 18:4 is rooted in the understanding that horsemen were not necessarily exclusive from footmen but a subset within footmen. This aligns with historical military practices where soldiers trained as ground infantry could also serve as horsemen. This interpretation is supported by other biblical passages like 2 Samuel 10:18 and 1 Chronicles 19:18, where similar events are described using different terminology, suggesting that horsemen and footmen were essentially the same individuals described differently. In the case of the battle with Hadarezer, when 2 Samuel mentions "seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen," it's likely that the 700 horsemen were part of the larger group of footmen. Similarly, when 1 Chronicles lists "seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen," these were also likely part of the overall footmen count.

Furthermore, the discrepancy in the number of horsemen captured (700 vs. 7000) can be attributed to the flexible nature of the label "horsemen," which attaches to individuals when they are on horses but can detach when they are not. Therefore, depending on when the headcount was taken, one historian might report a higher number of horsemen if they counted before the battle, while another might report a lower number if they counted after the battle, considering only those still mounted on horses. This discrepancy underscores the different perspectives and methodologies of the historians compiling these accounts.

Additionally, both passages mention 1700 soldiers, which likely includes both horsemen and footmen. These soldiers would be part of the total count but not explicitly delineated as either horsemen or footmen.

Moreover, the existence of multiple historical sources used in compiling the biblical texts supports the idea that these accounts reflect different viewpoints. The superficial differences between 2 Samuel 10:18 and 1 Chronicles 19:18, where one mentions "forty thousand horsemen" and the other "forty thousand footmen" in the same battle, suggest that these are not mere duplicates but rather reflections of varying historical perspectives.

In conclusion, understanding horsemen as a subset of footmen and recognizing the flexible nature of the label "horsemen" helps reconcile the discrepancies between 2 Samuel 8:4 and 1 Chronicles 18:4. These differences highlight the complexities of historical interpretation and the multiplicity of sources underlying biblical narratives, allowing for a richer understanding of the events described in scripture.

11.

Response: One way to explain this is to acknowledge that the difference is due to time; that is, one account is at the beginning of Solomon’s reign (1 Kings 4:26), and the other at the end (2 Chron. 9:25)

Another way to explain this is that the contradiction between 1 Kings 4:26 and 2 Chronicles 9:25 can be reconciled by understanding the different types of stalls mentioned. In 1 Kings 4:26, the stalls were for horses used primarily by chariots and horsemen. On the other hand, 2 Chronicles 9:25 mentions stalls specifically for horses and chariots, which would logically be fewer in number compared
to stalls for horses alone. Considering the known number of chariots (1,400) from 2 Chronicles 1:14, it's reasonable to assume fewer stalls were needed for both horses and chariots.

Furthermore, while 2 Chronicles 9:25 describes the purpose of the stalls, 1 Kings 4:26 details the purpose of the horses, indicating they were for chariots and horsemen. Even with conservative estimates of horse usage, the number of stalls aligns with the needs for housing horses and accommodating chariots. Therefore, there were likely 40,000 stalls for housing horses and 4,000 stalls capable of storing horses and chariots, with each of the latter potentially subdivided to accommodate individual horses.

In conclusion, there were 40,000 stalls that were for housing horses, and 4,000 stalls that were for storing horses and chariots. The two numbers could be harmonized if each of the 4,000 stalls with the space to house a chariot had 10 subdividing stalls for individual horses.

12.

Response: Baasha came to power in the third year of the reign of King Asa and died in the twenty-sixth year of Asa’s reign, just as 1 Kings states. His son, Elah, reigned after him, as verse 6 in 1 Kings 16 states:

1 Kings 16:6 So Baasha slept with his fathers, and was buried in Tirzah: and Elah his son reigned in his stead.

This, as we already know from verse 8, was in the 26th year of Asa.

Yet, obviously, this does not coincide with the thirty-sixth year as stated in 2 Chronicles.

2 Chronicles, however, unlike 1 Kings, is not referring to the literal year of Asa’s reign. The thirty-sixth year is actually the 36th year since the division of the kingdom from the unified Israel into the Northern tribes of the house of Israel and the southern tribes, the house of Judah. While the author of 1 Kings records the year according to the literal reign of Asa, the author of 2 Chronicles records the year according to the division of the kingdom of Israel into two kingdoms.

When we look at the Hebrew in 1 Kings 15:33, there are two important things to note. Firstly, we will see that the word translated as reign is מָלַךְ (Malak), which means to reign as king or to become king (or queen). This is a literal reference as to when Baasha became king. He became the literal king in the third year of Asa. Here is the second point: it states clearly, “the third year of Asa”. This is a reference to the literal third year of Asa’s reign as king.

Now let’s look at 2 Chronicles 16:1. The Hebrew word translated as reign here is מַלְכוּת (malkuth), which means reign or kingdom. This is not referring to the literal reign of Asa as king but the reign of the kingdom of which Asa was a member. The kingdom that had started thirty-six years earlier with his grandfather Rehoboam.

Rehoboam had become King of Israel after the death of his father Solomon.

2 Chronicles 9:31 And Solomon slept with his fathers, and he was buried in the city of David his father: and Rehoboam his son reigned in his stead.

1 Kings 11:43 And Solomon slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David his father: and Rehoboam his son reigned in his stead.

However, Jeroboam and the Northern tribes rebelled against Rehoboam, and this is when the Kingdom was divided.

1 Kings 12:20 And it came to pass, when all Israel heard that Jeroboam was come again, that they sent and called him unto the congregation, and made him king over all Israel: there was none that followed the house of David, but the tribe of Judah only.

We are told in 2 Chronicles that Rehoboam had established a kingdom.

2 Chronicles 12:1 And it came to pass, when Rehoboam had established the kingdom, and had strengthened himself, he forsook the law of the LORD, and all Israel with him.

The Hebrew word translated as kingdom is unsurprisingly מַלְכוּת (mulkuth), the same word translated as reign in 2 Chronicles 16:1.

The author of 2 Chronicles is giving us the year as per the founding of the Kingdom.

Rehoboam reigned for seventeen years.

1 Kings 14:21 And Rehoboam the son of Solomon reigned in Judah. Rehoboam was forty and one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city which the LORD did choose out of all the tribes of Israel, to put his name there. And his mother’s name was Naamah an Ammonitess.

Rehoboam's son Abijam reigned after him.

1 Kings 14:31 And Rehoboam slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in the city of David. And his mother’s name was Naamah an Ammonitess. And Abijam his son reigned in his stead.

Abijam reigned for three years.

2 Chronicles 13:2 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.

After the death of Abijam, Asa reigned in his stead. This was now the 20th year of the kingdom of Judah.

2 Chronicles 14:1 So Abijah slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the city of David: and Asa his son reigned in his stead. In his days the land was quiet ten years.

Reigned in both of these verses is מָלַךְ (Malak), so we are referring to the personal reign of each king.

So we see that there had, in fact, been 20 years since the founding of the 2 Kingdoms when Asa became the literal physical king of the house of Judah.

Baasha became king of the Northern tribes in the 3rd year of Asa, which was the 23rd year of the kingdom of Asa or rather the kingdom of the house of Judah. This means that Baasha's death, which we know occurred in the 26th year of Asa as king, was in the 46th year of the kingdom. 20 years + 26 years = 46 years.

Therefore, Baasha's death actually occurred a full 10 years after he had come against Asa in the 36th year of the kingdom, which was the 16th year of Asa’s own personal reign as king.

When we analyze the texts correctly, there simply is no contradiction between these two numbers.

13.

Response: The contradiction between 1 Kings and 2 Chronicles regarding the number of supervisors can be resolved by considering various factors. One plausible explanation is that the author of 2 Chronicles may have included reserves among the overseers, ready to step in for any supervisors who were unable to fulfill their duties due to illness or death. In their analysis of alleged Bible contradictions, Jay Smith, Alex Chowdhry, and others suggest this interpretation, highlighting the inclusion of reserves as a solution to the perceived inconsistency.

Another perspective offered by esteemed Old Testament commentators, Keil and Delitzsch, suggests that the difference in numbers arises from how the supervisors were categorized. They point out that while 1 Kings mentions a total of 3,850 supervisors, combining figures from different passages, 2 Chronicles also arrives at the same total. Keil and Delitzsch propose that the discrepancy lies not in the actual count but in the classification method used by each author. While one may have categorized supervisors based on nationality, the other may have organized them by authority.

In essence, these explanations demonstrate that what initially appears as a contradiction can be reconciled through careful consideration of context and interpretation. This underscores the importance of understanding nuances within biblical texts and highlights that apparent differences do not necessarily indicate contradictions.

14.

Response: One plausible explanation for the differing numbers in 1 Kings 7:26 and 2 Chronicles 4:5 lies in the method of counting. According to Matthew Henry and Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown, 1 Kings 7:26 may denote the practical capacity of the laver, indicating the amount it could comfortably hold for regular use. In contrast, 2 Chronicles 4:5 might refer to the total capacity of the laver if it were filled to the brim.

The "molten sea," a large brass basin designated for priestly ablutions, was positioned at the entrance of the priests' court, akin to a font at a church entrance. While its full capacity was noted as 3000 baths (as in 2 Chronicles 4:5), it typically contained only 2000 baths for regular use, as mentioned in 1 Kings 7:26.

Matthew Henry underscores this interpretation by highlighting the practical aspect, suggesting that the laver ordinarily held 2000 baths, while Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown emphasize the distinction between "receiving" and "holding," implying that the laver could receive up to 3000 baths but typically held less.

In essence, these perspectives suggest that the discrepancy in numbers stems from the different approaches to counting—whether to denote practical usage or total capacity—rather than a contradiction in the texts.

Another plausible explanation is that it's important to understand that "baths" in this context represents a unit of volume, with one bath roughly equivalent to 5.8 gallons. Thus, the discrepancy lies in whether the "Sea" held 11,600 gallons or 17,400 gallons.

One explanation is that 2 Chronicles could be referring to the Sea's total capacity, while 1 Kings could be describing the typical amount of water it held.

There's evidence suggesting that the dry volume bath was smaller than the liquid volume bath used in ancient Israel. The Targum indicates, "It received three thousand baths of dry measure, and held two thousand of liquid measure." Some scholars speculate that during the Babylonian captivity, the smaller volume bath became prevalent, and since 2 Chronicles was likely written towards the end of this period, it could account for the discrepancy, whereas 1 Kings was penned before the captivity.

15 - 23

Response: In the Hebrew Bible, Ezra-Nehemiah forms a cohesive unit, portraying the return of Israelites from Babylon to Jerusalem and Judea following the exile. Two distinct lists, Ezra 2:1-67 and Nehemiah 7:6-68, detail this return. Despite striking similarities in language, style, and the order of paragraphs, differences in spelling variations, the number of registered families, and leadership figures emerge.

Nehemiah's designation of his list as 'the book of the genealogy of those who came up first' suggests it captures the earliest wave of immigrants led by Zerubbabel, likely compiled in Jerusalem where the chronological order of arrivals could be accurately determined. Conversely, Ezra's list, likely compiled in Babylon, registers those who chose to journey with Zerubbabel and were recorded there before departure.

These discrepancies, such as spelling variations and the inclusion of additional families in Nehemiah's list, likely stem from the dynamic nature of the journey. For instance, the early days of travel likely saw the inclusion of more individuals, while certain groups might have lagged behind for various reasons, explaining the discrepancies in numbers and the addition of Nahamani to Nehemiah's list.

Furthermore, the figure of 42,360 recorded in both lists doesn't purport to represent every individual but rather focuses on the foundational families forming the nascent nation in Judea.

Ezra and Nehemiah, writing with prophetic insight, didn't perceive contradictions within these texts, viewing them as complementary perspectives of the same historical event. Thus, we too should view these differences as enriching the narrative rather than detracting from its authenticity.

24.

Response: In this passage, God's statement was not about the average human lifespan, but rather a declaration of judgment against wickedness, indicating when He would cleanse the earth with the Flood.

According to the biblical timeline, the Flood began around 2370 B.C., suggesting that God made this pronouncement around 2490 B.C.E., when Noah was 480 years old.

Approximately 20 years later, around 2470 B.C.E., Noah's sons were born, leaving about a century before the Flood. However, God did not reveal to Noah the specifics of his role or the timing of the event.

During those 120 years, Noah was able to build the ark, raise a family, and warn his contemporaries of the impending catastrophe, demonstrating God's patience and mercy.

Despite the impending judgment, human lifespans remained long, allowing Noah and his sons to live for many years after the Flood.

25-26

Response: Solomon is one of the biggest sinners in The Bible, he disobeyed God multiple times.

27.

I don't see a contradiction anywhere. Elaborate???

28.

Response: The discrepancy you're pointing out arises from differences in how the term "sons of Dan" is used in Genesis and Numbers. In Genesis 46:23, "sons of Dan" refers to Dan's direct descendants, whereas in Numbers 1:38-39, it refers to the entire tribe of Dan, including all its descendants and associated clans. This broader usage accounts for the larger number in the census.

29.

Response: There is a misunderstanding in the interpretation of the plagues in Exodus. While the plagues affected the livestock in various ways, not all the beasts died in each plague. For example:

- In plague number six, only the livestock of the Egyptians died (Exodus 9:6).
- In plague number seven, the livestock of the Egyptians are not specifically mentioned, but it's about boils afflicting people and animals (Exodus 9:10).
- In plague number eight, hail destroyed the Egyptian's livestock that were in the fields (Exodus 9:25).
- In plague number ten, the death of the firstborn affected humans, not livestock (Exodus 12:29).

So, not all the beasts died in every plague; the impact varied from one plague to another.

30.

Response: The discrepancy in the numbers arises from different contexts and methods of counting.

In Exodus 12:37, the figure of 600,000 refers to the number of Israelite men of military age who left Egypt during the Exodus. This count excludes women, children, and elderly individuals.

In 1 Kings 20:15, the figure of 7,000 likely refers to a different context or a specific group of people within Israel, rather than the entire population. Consider the context and the specific group being referenced when comparing numbers from different parts of the Bible.

31:

Response: The discrepancy in the number of Jesse's sons arises from differences in the way the sons are counted or named in different passages of the Bible.

In 1 Samuel 16:10-11 and 1 Samuel 17:12, Jesse's eight sons are mentioned, including David. However, in 1 Chronicles 2:13-15, only seven sons are listed. It's possible that one of Jesse's sons died or was not included in the genealogy mentioned in Chronicles. Alternatively, there could be variations in the naming or counting of the sons between the two passages.

32.

Response: The contradiction regarding Michal's children in the biblical passages of 2 Samuel 6:23 and 21:8 is reconciled through a detailed narrative analysis. Initially, Michal was promised to David, but due to Saul's manipulation, she was given to Adriel instead, with whom she had five sons. However, after Adriel's death, Michal was given to Paltiel. Later, David claimed Michal as his rightful wife, leading to her divorce from Paltiel and reunion with David. Despite having children with Adriel, Michal didn't bear any more children after reuniting with David. This explanation provides a coherent timeline of Michal's marriages and children, removing the contradiction between the two passages. Additionally, it suggests the involvement of Michal's sons in Saul's persecution against the Gibeonites, highlighting the complexities of familial dynamics and political intrigue within biblical narratives.

The contradiction regarding Michal having children can be explained by another way and that's by considering the possibility that the children mentioned in 2 Samuel 21:8 were not biologically hers but were perhaps adopted or raised by her. Meanwhile, 2 Samuel 6:23 may be emphasizing that she remained childless in terms of giving birth during her lifetime.

33.

Response: There's a difference between II Samuel 8:3 and I Chronicles 18:3 concerning David's conflict with Hadadezer, the king of Zobah. Some argue that these verses describe distinct battles. Another perspective, advocated by scholars like Matthew Henry and John Wesley, suggests that the variance lies in the method of enumeration: one verse tallies men while the other counts chariot companies, presuming ten men per unit.

However, a more nuanced explanation, championed by Peter Ruckman, gains traction when examining II Samuel 10:18 and I Chronicles 19:18, which recount a separate engagement between David and Hadadezer's forces. These passages describe how Syrian chariots likely operated with multiple crew members, including a commander, drivers, shieldmen, and bowmen. This setup implies that each chariot could accommodate several combatants, explaining the discrepancy in casualty counts between the two biblical accounts. Consequently, II Samuel 8:4's mention of 1000 chariots but only 700 horsemen could indicate that the 700 horsemen represent chariot units rather than individual riders, with the additional chariots serving as spares for battle damage or replacements.

34.

Response: In comparing the descriptions of the pillars in 1 Kings 7:15 and 2 Chronicles 3:15, we encounter a discrepancy in the measurement terminologies used. In 1 Kings, the height of the first pillar is specified as eighteen cubits, indicating a vertical measurement. Additionally, it mentions that a cord of twelve cubits would encircle the second pillar, implying its circumference. On the other hand, 2 Chronicles describes the pillars as thirty-five cubits high, employing the term "orekh" (אֹרֶךְ) which typically denotes length or extension rather than height. This discrepancy has led to debates over the interpretation of the measurements.

One interpretation suggests that the thirty-five cubits mentioned in 2 Chronicles is a summary measurement, combining the total height (including the capital) and the circumference of the pillar. This is derived from the assumption that the Chronicler used a convention where the total length of a three-dimensional object was represented by the sum of its dimensions. However, this interpretation is speculative and may not accurately reflect the conventions or intentions of the Chronicler.

The key distinction between the two accounts lies in the level of detail provided. While 1 Kings offers specific measurements for the height ("qomath" - קוֹמַת) and circumference of the pillars separately, 2 Chronicles presents a summary measurement that encompasses all dimensions of the pillars. Thus, while 1 Kings provides a more detailed breakdown of the measurements, 2 Chronicles offers a consolidated view of the total length of the pillars.

Ultimately, the differing measurement terminologies and levels of detail between the two accounts highlight the complexities of interpreting ancient texts and the importance of considering historical and cultural contexts when analyzing such passages.

A different point of view is that just as many "non-modern" units of measurement varied between different regions, the cubit also had differing meanings depending on the country. For example, a cubit measured 939 millimeters in Turkey and 457 millimeters in India. Therefore, 18 Turkish cubits would be equivalent to 37 Indian cubits. This illustrates how historical measurements could vary significantly across geographical and cultural boundaries, akin to the differences between the mile, and the nautical mile still observed today.

35.

Response: This number excluded Pashur the son of Melchiah (Jeremiah 21:1), and his apparent son Gedaliah (Jer 38:1), according to an apparent possible lack of genealogical record (Jeremiah 21:1, Ezr 2:59). Or, maybe they were eunuchs

36.

Response: In the books of Kings and Chronicles rulership complications many times give rise to numerical differences in the records between the four books but the differences aren’t mistakes, the different authors are just reckoning the same numerical information differently.

The "26th year of Asa’s reign" spoken of 1 Kings 16:8 only speaks about the amount of time that Asa had reigned alone, and these "26 years" do not include the period he co-reigned with his mother queen Maachah before she made an idol and was dethroned (see 1 Kings 15:10-13) which could have lasted ten years or more. This is very plausible as it wouldn’t be the first time that the author differentiates between a co-reign and an individual reign. This explains the seeming inconsistency with Baasha still being alive in the "36th year of Asa’s reign" in 2 Chronicles 16:1 (the "36 years" of 2 Chronicles 16:1 including both Asa’s co-reign and individual reign).

37.

Response: You're making me repeat myself for the 100th time. The discrepancy you mentioned arises from a difference in how the years of reign are counted. In ancient times, it was common to count the first partial year of a reign as the first year. Therefore, Omri's reign is counted as 12 years because his reign began in the 31st year of Asa's reign, and the year he died in was considered as his 12th year.



Notice how I didn't use the scribal errors argument when I could've used it many times. It was always over for Islam

Dndrd

 

[i_love_roosters]

Dndrd

At least write it properly

 

[Deleted member 62070]

two grown men debating tales

 

[i_love_roosters]

two grown men debating tales

Smartest atheist

 

[mogstars]

So, where do I even begin. I didn't come to this place to debate religion. To the people who are against this type of threads (@Psychophilly, sorry bestie), I just wanna say that I didn't come for this. I came here to looksmaxx and it's still the reason why I'm here. I'm a real looksmaxxer who actually does things to improve, not just rot and troll. I also post looksmaxxing and blackpill threads from time to time. The reason why I started debating religion is because this low IQ user @MaghrebGator was spamming his (wrong) faith like there is no tomorrow.

This thread is gonna be really long and it's probably gonna be a waste of time to make it because the muzzies aren't gonna read it. I already made a really long thread on one of the many gigantic fallacies of Islam. Link: https://looksmax.org/threads/a-huge...oves-the-whole-religion.964666/#post-14763207. So far nobody tried to disprove it (impossible). It's not just them, pretty much nobody will be interested in all this, but it's my duty as a Christian to defend my faith. As I like to say, Jesus died for my sins and so I can live, the least I could do for him is to live for him and defend him. As @ylrven once commented under on one of my other threads on religion: "rotting for a good cause"

The reason why I'm writing this is because @MaghrebGator thought he did something by copying and pasting some supposed numerical "contradictions" in the bible (this is where he stole it from: https://islamiat101.blogspot.com/2012/11/numerical-contradictions-in-bible.html?m=1 ). He wrote it as a reply to this thread of mine where I talk about how Allah was bad at maths. Link: https://looksmax.org/threads/mathematical-error-in-islam-its-so-over-for-muzzies.974830/ To refute him, it would require a lot of writing and I thought it would be a shame for all this work to be posted as a reply, so I'm making a whole thread about it.

Here's what he commented:

Now answer these Biblical numerical and mathematical errors one by one

1- On how many shekels of gold David brought threshing floor?
600 [1 Chronicles 21:25]
50 [2 Samuel 24:24]

2- How many years of famine?
Seven [2 Samuel 24:13]
Three [1 Chronicles 21:12]

3- The number of fighting men of Israel and Judah were?
Israel was 1,100,000 and Judah numbered 470,000 [1 Chronicles 21:5]
Israel was 800,000 and Judah numbered 500,000 [ 2 Samuel 24:9]

4- In which year did Ahaziah began to reign?
12 [2 Kings 8:25]
11 [2 Kings 9:29]

5- How old was Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem?
Twenty-two [2 Kings 8:26]
Forty-two [2 Chronicles 22:2]

6- How old was Jehoiachin when he became king of Jerusalem?
Eighteen [2 Kings 24:8]
Eight [2 Chronicles 36:9]

7- How long did he rule over Jerusalem?
Three months [2 Kings 24:8]
Three months and ten days [2 Chronicles 36:9]

8- The chief of the mighty men of David lifted up his spear and killed how many men at one time?
Eight hundred [2 Samuel 23:8]
Three hundred [I Chronicles 11: 11]

9- How many pairs of clean animals did God tell Noah to take into the Ark?
Two [Genesis 6:19, 20]
Seven [Genesis 7:2]. But despite this last instruction only two pairs went into the ark [Genesis 7:8-9]

10- When David defeated the King of Zobah, how many horsemen did he capture?
One thousand and seven hundred [2 Samuel 8:4]
Seven thousand [I Chronicles 18:4]

11- How many stalls for horses did Solomon have?
Forty thousand [I Kings 4:26]
Four thousand [2 chronicles 9:25]

12- In what year of King Asa's reign did Baasha, King of Israel die?
Twenty-sixth year [I Kings 15:33 - 16:8]
Still alive in the thirty-sixth year [2 Chronicles 16:1]

13- How many overseers did Solomon appoint for the work of building the temple?
Three thousand six hundred [2 Chronicles 2:2]
Three thousand three hundred [I Kings 5:16]

14- Solomon built a facility containing how many baths?
Two thousand [1 Kings 7:26]
Over three thousand [2 Chronicles 4:5]

15- Of the Israelites who were freed from the Babylonian captivity, how many were the children of Pahrath-Moab?
Two thousand eight hundred and twelve [Ezra 2:6]
Two thousand eight hundred and eighteen [Nehemiah 7:11]

16- How many were the children of Zattu?
Nine hundred and forty-five [Ezra 2:8]
Eight hundred and forty-five [Nehemiah 7:13]

17- How many were the children of Azgad?
One thousand two hundred and twenty-two [Ezra 2:12]
Two thousand three hundred and twenty-two [Nehemiah 7:17]

18- How many were the children of Adin?
Four hundred and fifty-four [Ezra 2:15]
Six hundred and fifty-five [Nehemiah 7:20]

19- How many were the children of Hashum?
Two hundred and twenty-three [Ezra 2:19]
Three hundred and twenty-eight [Nehemiah 7:22]

20- How many were the children of Bethel and Ai?
Two hundred and twenty-three [Ezra 2:28]
One hundred and twenty-three [Nehemiah 7:32]

21- How many singers accompanied the assembly?
Two hundred [Ezra 2:65]
Two hundred and forty-five [Nehemiah 7:67]

22-When the Israelites dwelt in Shittin they committed adultery with the daughters of Moab. God struck them with a plague. How many people died in that plague?
Twenty-four thousand [Numbers 25:1 and 9]
Twenty-three thousand [I Corinthians 10:8]

23- How many members of the house of Jacob came to Egypt?
Seventy souls [Genesis 4 & 27]
Seventy-five souls [Acts 7:14]

24- On life span?
God decided that the life-span of humans will be limited to 120 years [Genesis 6:3]
Many people born after that lived longer than 120. Arpachshad lived 438 years. His son Shelah lived 433 years. His son Eber lived 464 years, etc [Genesis 11:12-16]

25- Can King multiply his horses?
Solomon had thousands of horses. [1 Kings 4:26]
A King must not multiply horses to himself. [Deuteronomy 17:15-16]

26- Can King multiply his wives?
King Solomon had hundreds of wives. [1 Kings 11:1-3]
A King must not multiply wives to himself. [Deuteronomy 17:17]

27- On sons of Eliphaz
Eliphaz had six sons. [Genesis 36:11-12]
Eliphaz had seven sons. [Genesis 36:15-16]
Eliphaz had seven different sons. [1 Chronicles 1:36]

28- On sons of Dan
Dan had one son. [Genesis 46:23]
Amazingly, this one son produced over 62,000 military-age males by the first census. [Numbers1:38-39]

29- How many beasts died in Plague?
All the beasts died in plague number six. [Exodus 9:6]
All the beasts received boils in plague number seven. [Exodus 9:10]
All the beasts were hit with hail and fire in plague number eight. [Exodus 9:25]
All the beasts lost their firstborn in plague number ten. [Exodus 12:29]

30- On the journey
The number of Israelites, excluding children, was 600,000 [Exodus 12:37]
The number of Israelites, including children, was only 7000. [1 Kings 20:15]

31- How many sons Jesse had?
Jesse had eight sons. [1 Samuel 16:10-11; 1 Samuel 17:12]
Jesse had seven sons. [Chronicles 2:13-15]

32- Did Michal have child or not?
Michal had five children [2 Samuel 21:8]
Michal had no children till her death [2 Samuel 6:23]

33- How many chariots David destroys?
David destroys 700 chariots [2 Samuel 10:18]
David destroys 7000 chariots [1 Chronicles 19:18]

34- How many cubits were temple pillar built?
The Temple pillars were 18 cubits [1 Kings 7:15]
The Temple pillars were 35 cubits [2 Chronicles 3:15]

35- How many men captain took?
The captain takes 5 men of the king's council [2 Kings 25:19]
The captain takes 7 men of the king's council [Jeremiah 52:25]

36- On death of Baasha?
Baasha died in the 26tth year of King Asa's reign. [1 Kings16:6-8]
Baasha built a city in the 36th year of King Asa's reign. [2 Chronicles16:1]

37- How much years Omri reign?
Omri reigned 12 years beginning in the 31st year of Asa's reign. [1 Kings 16:23]O
mri died and his son began his reign in the 38th year of Asa's reign, making Omri's reign only 7-years. [1 Kings16:28-29]
@Fiqh
@Hamdan

Before I begin annihilating every single one of his (stolen) points one by one, I would like to say that he shouldn't be commenting the accuracy of the Bible as a Muslim because Allah and Muhammad, aka Qutham, affirm the preservation, inspiration, and the authority of the Bible. I briefly touch upon this issue of Islam in the first thread that I linked (the long one). This thread is not about that, so I wouldn't be writing a long explanation (already did). Instead, I'll just leave this video here


(Try to disprove it)

One more thing before I get to the meaty part. I wanna shoutout some .org defenders of Christ, our Lord: @Eternal_ @BigBiceps . Y'all are moggers for doing what you're doing. There could be more people doing the same but you're the ones I've seen do it the most. God bless you and your close ones.

Now let's get to the actual reason why I'm making this...

1.

Response: Read it in context, the account found in 2 Samuel 24 records only David’s purchase of the threshing floor and oxen. On the other hand, the account in 1 Chronicles 21 records a higher price for the full purchase, including the surrounding land.

2.

Response: So, according to the text, numbering the people was nearly a year-long process, and there is no clear indication that God had suspended the initial three-year famine prior to the events in chapter 24. Now, if God had combined three additional years of famine (1 Chronicles 21:12) with the three years of initial famine, and a possible intervening year while the census was conducted, the resulting overall famine would have totaled about seven years (2 Samuel 24:13).

I've heard some Christians propose another solution. They claim that these two passages describe the prophet Gad confronting me on two different occasions. According to this view, the “seven year” proposal was initially given four years prior to the “three year” proposal. Thus, the prophet would have confronted me and given me a few years to mull over my decision. During that time, I had repented of my actions, so God reduced the time of punishment—something God definitely has the authority to do. A problem with this view is that if God reduced the seven years to three years because of my repentance, then why didn’t He reduce the length of the other options as well? So, while this solution may seem less likely, it still provides another reasonable explanation.

It's crucial to understand that no matter which solution we opt for, the outcome remains consistent. The allegation of contradiction dissipates, all without asserting any error within the text. To sum up, these Scriptures not only align harmoniously but also complement each other by offering further insights into this specific event.

3.

Response:

(3.1) The solution lies in the translation. The first passage indicates that Joab presented the census to David, listing 800,000 individuals, while the second passage mentions 1,100,000 men who were ready for battle. The key lies in the term "valiant." Among the total 1,100,000 men, only 800,000 were considered valiant warriors. The remaining 300,000 served as reserves. This distinction underscores the difference between simply being a soldier and being a courageous and skilled warrior, akin to the contrast between military ranks such as a sergeant and a general. Both serve in their respective capacities, but their levels of skill and authority differ significantly.

(3.2) It is clear that, with regard to Judah, the figure of 470,000 - quoted in Chronicles - is just those who drew sword, whereas the Samuel number is all of Judah, 500,000.

The census report in 1 Chronicles reports that there were 470,000 soldiers of Judah who drew the sword, yet does not include the standing army of the 30,000 soldiers that are cited in 2 Samuel 6:1. It so happens that these numbers (400,000 + 30,000 = 500,000) add up to the number of soldiers reported in 2 Samuel.

Another historical fact to consider is that Joab was not able to finish counting all the men (1 Chronicles 21:6), which makes the census incomplete (explaining why there is a difference in the report of the numbers).

4.

Response: The initial passage indicates the moment Ahaziah ascended to the throne following his father's death. However, the second passage specifies when Ahaziah commenced his reign. While typically these events coincide, it's not always the case. In this instance, Joram, Ahaziah's father, succumbs to a prolonged illness before his demise. The logical conclusion is that Ahaziah assumed rulership when his father became incapacitated, during the eleventh year of Joram's reign, and formally ascended to the throne upon his father's passing in the twelfth year of Joram's reign. Such instances underscore the complexity of dating ancient events, often challenging assumptions of sequential reigns among kings.

5.

Response: Ahaziah reigned twice. The first time at 22 he reigned over Judah in Jerusalem. The second
time he reigned at 42 was after Israel and Judah were reunited into 1 nation and he was
chosen to reign over Israel. However both times he was removed from king because he was
wicked.

6.

Response: The Hebrew word "בְּמָלְכ֔וֹ" translates "when he became king", not "when he began to reign." In this way, it would support the co-regent argument because "בְּמָלְכ֔וֹ"and "מָלַ֖ךְ" ("he reigned") are not the same word.

If it is not an error, there were two separate crowning events—one at age 8 when his father ceremonially named him co-regent (much like David named Solomon king while he still lived and reigned, 1 Kings 1) and once at age 18 when Jehoiachin officially became king at his father’s death and then reigned for a mere three months.

7.

Response: 2 Kings 24:8 is just rounding to the nearest month, jfl

8.

Response: The discrepancy between the numbers 800 and 300, as recorded in 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles respectively, may initially seem contradictory. However, upon closer examination, it becomes evident that the apparent contradiction arises from mistranslations and actually pertains to two distinct individuals within David's mighty men. In 2 Samuel 23:8, Josheb-basshebeth, also known as Adino the Eznite, is described as having slain 800 enemies in a single encounter, earning him the title of chief among the three great heroes appointed by David. This distinction as one of the "third men" signifies his role as a leader among captains or commanders in David's army.

On the other hand, 1 Chronicles 11:11 recounts the valor of Jashobeam the Hachmonite, who is designated as the chief among David's thirty mighty men. Despite the discrepancy in translation, accurately rendering him as the leader of the thirty heroes, Jashobeam's feat involves the slaying of 300 adversaries in battle. It's important to note that these are two separate individuals with different names, origins, positions, and achievements.

While the mistranslations may lead to confusion, a careful reading of the passages clarifies that there is no contradiction. Rather, they highlight the valor and prowess of two distinct warriors within David's army, each contributing to the military success of the kingdom in their own right.

9.

Response: The narrative of Noah's ark in the Bible appears to present a discrepancy regarding the number of clean animals to be brought onto the ark. Critics point out that while Genesis 6:19 instructs Noah to bring two of every kind of animal, Genesis 7:2-3 adds that he should bring seven of each clean animal and two of each unclean animal. However, this contradiction is resolved when we understand the supplementation of instructions. Initially, Noah was instructed to bring two of every kind of animal, which included both clean and unclean. Later, God further instructed him to bring additional clean animals, not as a contradiction but as a necessary provision for future sacrifices after the Flood.

The analogy of a farmer instructing his son to take animals to the state fair and then providing additional instructions for a barbecue helps illustrate this point. Just as the farmer's additional instructions are not contradictory but supplemental, so too are God's instructions to Noah regarding the animals for the ark.

Additionally, the debate over whether Noah took seven or fourteen of each clean animal arises from translational differences in the Hebrew phrase "shibb’ah shibb’ah." Some translations interpret this phrase to mean seven pairs, while others interpret it as seven individual animals. Despite this uncertainty, the main point remains clear: Noah took different numbers of clean and unclean animals onto the ark, as specified in the biblical text.

Ultimately, while the exact number of clean animals brought onto the ark may remain unclear, there is no inherent contradiction in the biblical account. The narrative maintains its coherence, depicting Noah's faithful obedience to God's instructions amidst the cataclysmic event of the Flood.

10.

Response: The discrepancy between the accounts of David's capture of horsemen in 2 Samuel 8:4 and 1 Chronicles 18:4 is rooted in the understanding that horsemen were not necessarily exclusive from footmen but a subset within footmen. This aligns with historical military practices where soldiers trained as ground infantry could also serve as horsemen. This interpretation is supported by other biblical passages like 2 Samuel 10:18 and 1 Chronicles 19:18, where similar events are described using different terminology, suggesting that horsemen and footmen were essentially the same individuals described differently. In the case of the battle with Hadarezer, when 2 Samuel mentions "seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen," it's likely that the 700 horsemen were part of the larger group of footmen. Similarly, when 1 Chronicles lists "seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen," these were also likely part of the overall footmen count.

Furthermore, the discrepancy in the number of horsemen captured (700 vs. 7000) can be attributed to the flexible nature of the label "horsemen," which attaches to individuals when they are on horses but can detach when they are not. Therefore, depending on when the headcount was taken, one historian might report a higher number of horsemen if they counted before the battle, while another might report a lower number if they counted after the battle, considering only those still mounted on horses. This discrepancy underscores the different perspectives and methodologies of the historians compiling these accounts.

Additionally, both passages mention 1700 soldiers, which likely includes both horsemen and footmen. These soldiers would be part of the total count but not explicitly delineated as either horsemen or footmen.

Moreover, the existence of multiple historical sources used in compiling the biblical texts supports the idea that these accounts reflect different viewpoints. The superficial differences between 2 Samuel 10:18 and 1 Chronicles 19:18, where one mentions "forty thousand horsemen" and the other "forty thousand footmen" in the same battle, suggest that these are not mere duplicates but rather reflections of varying historical perspectives.

In conclusion, understanding horsemen as a subset of footmen and recognizing the flexible nature of the label "horsemen" helps reconcile the discrepancies between 2 Samuel 8:4 and 1 Chronicles 18:4. These differences highlight the complexities of historical interpretation and the multiplicity of sources underlying biblical narratives, allowing for a richer understanding of the events described in scripture.

11.

Response: One way to explain this is to acknowledge that the difference is due to time; that is, one account is at the beginning of Solomon’s reign (1 Kings 4:26), and the other at the end (2 Chron. 9:25)

Another way to explain this is that the contradiction between 1 Kings 4:26 and 2 Chronicles 9:25 can be reconciled by understanding the different types of stalls mentioned. In 1 Kings 4:26, the stalls were for horses used primarily by chariots and horsemen. On the other hand, 2 Chronicles 9:25 mentions stalls specifically for horses and chariots, which would logically be fewer in number compared
to stalls for horses alone. Considering the known number of chariots (1,400) from 2 Chronicles 1:14, it's reasonable to assume fewer stalls were needed for both horses and chariots.

Furthermore, while 2 Chronicles 9:25 describes the purpose of the stalls, 1 Kings 4:26 details the purpose of the horses, indicating they were for chariots and horsemen. Even with conservative estimates of horse usage, the number of stalls aligns with the needs for housing horses and accommodating chariots. Therefore, there were likely 40,000 stalls for housing horses and 4,000 stalls capable of storing horses and chariots, with each of the latter potentially subdivided to accommodate individual horses.

In conclusion, there were 40,000 stalls that were for housing horses, and 4,000 stalls that were for storing horses and chariots. The two numbers could be harmonized if each of the 4,000 stalls with the space to house a chariot had 10 subdividing stalls for individual horses.

12.

Response: Baasha came to power in the third year of the reign of King Asa and died in the twenty-sixth year of Asa’s reign, just as 1 Kings states. His son, Elah, reigned after him, as verse 6 in 1 Kings 16 states:

1 Kings 16:6 So Baasha slept with his fathers, and was buried in Tirzah: and Elah his son reigned in his stead.

This, as we already know from verse 8, was in the 26th year of Asa.

Yet, obviously, this does not coincide with the thirty-sixth year as stated in 2 Chronicles.

2 Chronicles, however, unlike 1 Kings, is not referring to the literal year of Asa’s reign. The thirty-sixth year is actually the 36th year since the division of the kingdom from the unified Israel into the Northern tribes of the house of Israel and the southern tribes, the house of Judah. While the author of 1 Kings records the year according to the literal reign of Asa, the author of 2 Chronicles records the year according to the division of the kingdom of Israel into two kingdoms.

When we look at the Hebrew in 1 Kings 15:33, there are two important things to note. Firstly, we will see that the word translated as reign is מָלַךְ (Malak), which means to reign as king or to become king (or queen). This is a literal reference as to when Baasha became king. He became the literal king in the third year of Asa. Here is the second point: it states clearly, “the third year of Asa”. This is a reference to the literal third year of Asa’s reign as king.

Now let’s look at 2 Chronicles 16:1. The Hebrew word translated as reign here is מַלְכוּת (malkuth), which means reign or kingdom. This is not referring to the literal reign of Asa as king but the reign of the kingdom of which Asa was a member. The kingdom that had started thirty-six years earlier with his grandfather Rehoboam.

Rehoboam had become King of Israel after the death of his father Solomon.

2 Chronicles 9:31 And Solomon slept with his fathers, and he was buried in the city of David his father: and Rehoboam his son reigned in his stead.

1 Kings 11:43 And Solomon slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David his father: and Rehoboam his son reigned in his stead.

However, Jeroboam and the Northern tribes rebelled against Rehoboam, and this is when the Kingdom was divided.

1 Kings 12:20 And it came to pass, when all Israel heard that Jeroboam was come again, that they sent and called him unto the congregation, and made him king over all Israel: there was none that followed the house of David, but the tribe of Judah only.

We are told in 2 Chronicles that Rehoboam had established a kingdom.

2 Chronicles 12:1 And it came to pass, when Rehoboam had established the kingdom, and had strengthened himself, he forsook the law of the LORD, and all Israel with him.

The Hebrew word translated as kingdom is unsurprisingly מַלְכוּת (mulkuth), the same word translated as reign in 2 Chronicles 16:1.

The author of 2 Chronicles is giving us the year as per the founding of the Kingdom.

Rehoboam reigned for seventeen years.

1 Kings 14:21 And Rehoboam the son of Solomon reigned in Judah. Rehoboam was forty and one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city which the LORD did choose out of all the tribes of Israel, to put his name there. And his mother’s name was Naamah an Ammonitess.

Rehoboam's son Abijam reigned after him.

1 Kings 14:31 And Rehoboam slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in the city of David. And his mother’s name was Naamah an Ammonitess. And Abijam his son reigned in his stead.

Abijam reigned for three years.

2 Chronicles 13:2 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.

After the death of Abijam, Asa reigned in his stead. This was now the 20th year of the kingdom of Judah.

2 Chronicles 14:1 So Abijah slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the city of David: and Asa his son reigned in his stead. In his days the land was quiet ten years.

Reigned in both of these verses is מָלַךְ (Malak), so we are referring to the personal reign of each king.

So we see that there had, in fact, been 20 years since the founding of the 2 Kingdoms when Asa became the literal physical king of the house of Judah.

Baasha became king of the Northern tribes in the 3rd year of Asa, which was the 23rd year of the kingdom of Asa or rather the kingdom of the house of Judah. This means that Baasha's death, which we know occurred in the 26th year of Asa as king, was in the 46th year of the kingdom. 20 years + 26 years = 46 years.

Therefore, Baasha's death actually occurred a full 10 years after he had come against Asa in the 36th year of the kingdom, which was the 16th year of Asa’s own personal reign as king.

When we analyze the texts correctly, there simply is no contradiction between these two numbers.

13.

Response: The contradiction between 1 Kings and 2 Chronicles regarding the number of supervisors can be resolved by considering various factors. One plausible explanation is that the author of 2 Chronicles may have included reserves among the overseers, ready to step in for any supervisors who were unable to fulfill their duties due to illness or death. In their analysis of alleged Bible contradictions, Jay Smith, Alex Chowdhry, and others suggest this interpretation, highlighting the inclusion of reserves as a solution to the perceived inconsistency.

Another perspective offered by esteemed Old Testament commentators, Keil and Delitzsch, suggests that the difference in numbers arises from how the supervisors were categorized. They point out that while 1 Kings mentions a total of 3,850 supervisors, combining figures from different passages, 2 Chronicles also arrives at the same total. Keil and Delitzsch propose that the discrepancy lies not in the actual count but in the classification method used by each author. While one may have categorized supervisors based on nationality, the other may have organized them by authority.

In essence, these explanations demonstrate that what initially appears as a contradiction can be reconciled through careful consideration of context and interpretation. This underscores the importance of understanding nuances within biblical texts and highlights that apparent differences do not necessarily indicate contradictions.

14.

Response: One plausible explanation for the differing numbers in 1 Kings 7:26 and 2 Chronicles 4:5 lies in the method of counting. According to Matthew Henry and Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown, 1 Kings 7:26 may denote the practical capacity of the laver, indicating the amount it could comfortably hold for regular use. In contrast, 2 Chronicles 4:5 might refer to the total capacity of the laver if it were filled to the brim.

The "molten sea," a large brass basin designated for priestly ablutions, was positioned at the entrance of the priests' court, akin to a font at a church entrance. While its full capacity was noted as 3000 baths (as in 2 Chronicles 4:5), it typically contained only 2000 baths for regular use, as mentioned in 1 Kings 7:26.

Matthew Henry underscores this interpretation by highlighting the practical aspect, suggesting that the laver ordinarily held 2000 baths, while Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown emphasize the distinction between "receiving" and "holding," implying that the laver could receive up to 3000 baths but typically held less.

In essence, these perspectives suggest that the discrepancy in numbers stems from the different approaches to counting—whether to denote practical usage or total capacity—rather than a contradiction in the texts.

Another plausible explanation is that it's important to understand that "baths" in this context represents a unit of volume, with one bath roughly equivalent to 5.8 gallons. Thus, the discrepancy lies in whether the "Sea" held 11,600 gallons or 17,400 gallons.

One explanation is that 2 Chronicles could be referring to the Sea's total capacity, while 1 Kings could be describing the typical amount of water it held.

There's evidence suggesting that the dry volume bath was smaller than the liquid volume bath used in ancient Israel. The Targum indicates, "It received three thousand baths of dry measure, and held two thousand of liquid measure." Some scholars speculate that during the Babylonian captivity, the smaller volume bath became prevalent, and since 2 Chronicles was likely written towards the end of this period, it could account for the discrepancy, whereas 1 Kings was penned before the captivity.

15 - 23

Response: In the Hebrew Bible, Ezra-Nehemiah forms a cohesive unit, portraying the return of Israelites from Babylon to Jerusalem and Judea following the exile. Two distinct lists, Ezra 2:1-67 and Nehemiah 7:6-68, detail this return. Despite striking similarities in language, style, and the order of paragraphs, differences in spelling variations, the number of registered families, and leadership figures emerge.

Nehemiah's designation of his list as 'the book of the genealogy of those who came up first' suggests it captures the earliest wave of immigrants led by Zerubbabel, likely compiled in Jerusalem where the chronological order of arrivals could be accurately determined. Conversely, Ezra's list, likely compiled in Babylon, registers those who chose to journey with Zerubbabel and were recorded there before departure.

These discrepancies, such as spelling variations and the inclusion of additional families in Nehemiah's list, likely stem from the dynamic nature of the journey. For instance, the early days of travel likely saw the inclusion of more individuals, while certain groups might have lagged behind for various reasons, explaining the discrepancies in numbers and the addition of Nahamani to Nehemiah's list.

Furthermore, the figure of 42,360 recorded in both lists doesn't purport to represent every individual but rather focuses on the foundational families forming the nascent nation in Judea.

Ezra and Nehemiah, writing with prophetic insight, didn't perceive contradictions within these texts, viewing them as complementary perspectives of the same historical event. Thus, we too should view these differences as enriching the narrative rather than detracting from its authenticity.

24.

Response: In this passage, God's statement was not about the average human lifespan, but rather a declaration of judgment against wickedness, indicating when He would cleanse the earth with the Flood.

According to the biblical timeline, the Flood began around 2370 B.C., suggesting that God made this pronouncement around 2490 B.C.E., when Noah was 480 years old.

Approximately 20 years later, around 2470 B.C.E., Noah's sons were born, leaving about a century before the Flood. However, God did not reveal to Noah the specifics of his role or the timing of the event.

During those 120 years, Noah was able to build the ark, raise a family, and warn his contemporaries of the impending catastrophe, demonstrating God's patience and mercy.

Despite the impending judgment, human lifespans remained long, allowing Noah and his sons to live for many years after the Flood.

25-26

Response: Solomon is one of the biggest sinners in The Bible, he disobeyed God multiple times.

27.

I don't see a contradiction anywhere. Elaborate???

28.

Response: The discrepancy you're pointing out arises from differences in how the term "sons of Dan" is used in Genesis and Numbers. In Genesis 46:23, "sons of Dan" refers to Dan's direct descendants, whereas in Numbers 1:38-39, it refers to the entire tribe of Dan, including all its descendants and associated clans. This broader usage accounts for the larger number in the census.

29.

Response: There is a misunderstanding in the interpretation of the plagues in Exodus. While the plagues affected the livestock in various ways, not all the beasts died in each plague. For example:

- In plague number six, only the livestock of the Egyptians died (Exodus 9:6).
- In plague number seven, the livestock of the Egyptians are not specifically mentioned, but it's about boils afflicting people and animals (Exodus 9:10).
- In plague number eight, hail destroyed the Egyptian's livestock that were in the fields (Exodus 9:25).
- In plague number ten, the death of the firstborn affected humans, not livestock (Exodus 12:29).

So, not all the beasts died in every plague; the impact varied from one plague to another.

30.

Response: The discrepancy in the numbers arises from different contexts and methods of counting.

In Exodus 12:37, the figure of 600,000 refers to the number of Israelite men of military age who left Egypt during the Exodus. This count excludes women, children, and elderly individuals.

In 1 Kings 20:15, the figure of 7,000 likely refers to a different context or a specific group of people within Israel, rather than the entire population. Consider the context and the specific group being referenced when comparing numbers from different parts of the Bible.

31:

Response: The discrepancy in the number of Jesse's sons arises from differences in the way the sons are counted or named in different passages of the Bible.

In 1 Samuel 16:10-11 and 1 Samuel 17:12, Jesse's eight sons are mentioned, including David. However, in 1 Chronicles 2:13-15, only seven sons are listed. It's possible that one of Jesse's sons died or was not included in the genealogy mentioned in Chronicles. Alternatively, there could be variations in the naming or counting of the sons between the two passages.

32.

Response: The contradiction regarding Michal's children in the biblical passages of 2 Samuel 6:23 and 21:8 is reconciled through a detailed narrative analysis. Initially, Michal was promised to David, but due to Saul's manipulation, she was given to Adriel instead, with whom she had five sons. However, after Adriel's death, Michal was given to Paltiel. Later, David claimed Michal as his rightful wife, leading to her divorce from Paltiel and reunion with David. Despite having children with Adriel, Michal didn't bear any more children after reuniting with David. This explanation provides a coherent timeline of Michal's marriages and children, removing the contradiction between the two passages. Additionally, it suggests the involvement of Michal's sons in Saul's persecution against the Gibeonites, highlighting the complexities of familial dynamics and political intrigue within biblical narratives.

The contradiction regarding Michal having children can be explained by another way and that's by considering the possibility that the children mentioned in 2 Samuel 21:8 were not biologically hers but were perhaps adopted or raised by her. Meanwhile, 2 Samuel 6:23 may be emphasizing that she remained childless in terms of giving birth during her lifetime.

33.

Response: There's a difference between II Samuel 8:3 and I Chronicles 18:3 concerning David's conflict with Hadadezer, the king of Zobah. Some argue that these verses describe distinct battles. Another perspective, advocated by scholars like Matthew Henry and John Wesley, suggests that the variance lies in the method of enumeration: one verse tallies men while the other counts chariot companies, presuming ten men per unit.

However, a more nuanced explanation, championed by Peter Ruckman, gains traction when examining II Samuel 10:18 and I Chronicles 19:18, which recount a separate engagement between David and Hadadezer's forces. These passages describe how Syrian chariots likely operated with multiple crew members, including a commander, drivers, shieldmen, and bowmen. This setup implies that each chariot could accommodate several combatants, explaining the discrepancy in casualty counts between the two biblical accounts. Consequently, II Samuel 8:4's mention of 1000 chariots but only 700 horsemen could indicate that the 700 horsemen represent chariot units rather than individual riders, with the additional chariots serving as spares for battle damage or replacements.

34.

Response: In comparing the descriptions of the pillars in 1 Kings 7:15 and 2 Chronicles 3:15, we encounter a discrepancy in the measurement terminologies used. In 1 Kings, the height of the first pillar is specified as eighteen cubits, indicating a vertical measurement. Additionally, it mentions that a cord of twelve cubits would encircle the second pillar, implying its circumference. On the other hand, 2 Chronicles describes the pillars as thirty-five cubits high, employing the term "orekh" (אֹרֶךְ) which typically denotes length or extension rather than height. This discrepancy has led to debates over the interpretation of the measurements.

One interpretation suggests that the thirty-five cubits mentioned in 2 Chronicles is a summary measurement, combining the total height (including the capital) and the circumference of the pillar. This is derived from the assumption that the Chronicler used a convention where the total length of a three-dimensional object was represented by the sum of its dimensions. However, this interpretation is speculative and may not accurately reflect the conventions or intentions of the Chronicler.

The key distinction between the two accounts lies in the level of detail provided. While 1 Kings offers specific measurements for the height ("qomath" - קוֹמַת) and circumference of the pillars separately, 2 Chronicles presents a summary measurement that encompasses all dimensions of the pillars. Thus, while 1 Kings provides a more detailed breakdown of the measurements, 2 Chronicles offers a consolidated view of the total length of the pillars.

Ultimately, the differing measurement terminologies and levels of detail between the two accounts highlight the complexities of interpreting ancient texts and the importance of considering historical and cultural contexts when analyzing such passages.

A different point of view is that just as many "non-modern" units of measurement varied between different regions, the cubit also had differing meanings depending on the country. For example, a cubit measured 939 millimeters in Turkey and 457 millimeters in India. Therefore, 18 Turkish cubits would be equivalent to 37 Indian cubits. This illustrates how historical measurements could vary significantly across geographical and cultural boundaries, akin to the differences between the mile, and the nautical mile still observed today.

35.

Response: This number excluded Pashur the son of Melchiah (Jeremiah 21:1), and his apparent son Gedaliah (Jer 38:1), according to an apparent possible lack of genealogical record (Jeremiah 21:1, Ezr 2:59). Or, maybe they were eunuchs

36.

Response: In the books of Kings and Chronicles rulership complications many times give rise to numerical differences in the records between the four books but the differences aren’t mistakes, the different authors are just reckoning the same numerical information differently.

The "26th year of Asa’s reign" spoken of 1 Kings 16:8 only speaks about the amount of time that Asa had reigned alone, and these "26 years" do not include the period he co-reigned with his mother queen Maachah before she made an idol and was dethroned (see 1 Kings 15:10-13) which could have lasted ten years or more. This is very plausible as it wouldn’t be the first time that the author differentiates between a co-reign and an individual reign. This explains the seeming inconsistency with Baasha still being alive in the "36th year of Asa’s reign" in 2 Chronicles 16:1 (the "36 years" of 2 Chronicles 16:1 including both Asa’s co-reign and individual reign).

37.

Response: You're making me repeat myself for the 100th time. The discrepancy you mentioned arises from a difference in how the years of reign are counted. In ancient times, it was common to count the first partial year of a reign as the first year. Therefore, Omri's reign is counted as 12 years because his reign began in the 31st year of Asa's reign, and the year he died in was considered as his 12th year.



Notice how I didn't use the scribal errors argument when I could've used it many times. It was always over for Islam

Jesus Christ

 

[mogstars]

So, where do I even begin. I didn't come to this place to debate religion. To the people who are against this type of threads (@Psychophilly, sorry bestie), I just wanna say that I didn't come for this. I came here to looksmaxx and it's still the reason why I'm here. I'm a real looksmaxxer who actually does things to improve, not just rot and troll. I also post looksmaxxing and blackpill threads from time to time. The reason why I started debating religion is because this low IQ user @MaghrebGator was spamming his (wrong) faith like there is no tomorrow.

This thread is gonna be really long and it's probably gonna be a waste of time to make it because the muzzies aren't gonna read it. I already made a really long thread on one of the many gigantic fallacies of Islam. Link: https://looksmax.org/threads/a-huge...oves-the-whole-religion.964666/#post-14763207. So far nobody tried to disprove it (impossible). It's not just them, pretty much nobody will be interested in all this, but it's my duty as a Christian to defend my faith. As I like to say, Jesus died for my sins and so I can live, the least I could do for him is to live for him and defend him. As @ylrven once commented under on one of my other threads on religion: "rotting for a good cause"

The reason why I'm writing this is because @MaghrebGator thought he did something by copying and pasting some supposed numerical "contradictions" in the bible (this is where he stole it from: https://islamiat101.blogspot.com/2012/11/numerical-contradictions-in-bible.html?m=1 ). He wrote it as a reply to this thread of mine where I talk about how Allah was bad at maths. Link: https://looksmax.org/threads/mathematical-error-in-islam-its-so-over-for-muzzies.974830/ To refute him, it would require a lot of writing and I thought it would be a shame for all this work to be posted as a reply, so I'm making a whole thread about it.

Here's what he commented:

Now answer these Biblical numerical and mathematical errors one by one

1- On how many shekels of gold David brought threshing floor?
600 [1 Chronicles 21:25]
50 [2 Samuel 24:24]

2- How many years of famine?
Seven [2 Samuel 24:13]
Three [1 Chronicles 21:12]

3- The number of fighting men of Israel and Judah were?
Israel was 1,100,000 and Judah numbered 470,000 [1 Chronicles 21:5]
Israel was 800,000 and Judah numbered 500,000 [ 2 Samuel 24:9]

4- In which year did Ahaziah began to reign?
12 [2 Kings 8:25]
11 [2 Kings 9:29]

5- How old was Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem?
Twenty-two [2 Kings 8:26]
Forty-two [2 Chronicles 22:2]

6- How old was Jehoiachin when he became king of Jerusalem?
Eighteen [2 Kings 24:8]
Eight [2 Chronicles 36:9]

7- How long did he rule over Jerusalem?
Three months [2 Kings 24:8]
Three months and ten days [2 Chronicles 36:9]

8- The chief of the mighty men of David lifted up his spear and killed how many men at one time?
Eight hundred [2 Samuel 23:8]
Three hundred [I Chronicles 11: 11]

9- How many pairs of clean animals did God tell Noah to take into the Ark?
Two [Genesis 6:19, 20]
Seven [Genesis 7:2]. But despite this last instruction only two pairs went into the ark [Genesis 7:8-9]

10- When David defeated the King of Zobah, how many horsemen did he capture?
One thousand and seven hundred [2 Samuel 8:4]
Seven thousand [I Chronicles 18:4]

11- How many stalls for horses did Solomon have?
Forty thousand [I Kings 4:26]
Four thousand [2 chronicles 9:25]

12- In what year of King Asa's reign did Baasha, King of Israel die?
Twenty-sixth year [I Kings 15:33 - 16:8]
Still alive in the thirty-sixth year [2 Chronicles 16:1]

13- How many overseers did Solomon appoint for the work of building the temple?
Three thousand six hundred [2 Chronicles 2:2]
Three thousand three hundred [I Kings 5:16]

14- Solomon built a facility containing how many baths?
Two thousand [1 Kings 7:26]
Over three thousand [2 Chronicles 4:5]

15- Of the Israelites who were freed from the Babylonian captivity, how many were the children of Pahrath-Moab?
Two thousand eight hundred and twelve [Ezra 2:6]
Two thousand eight hundred and eighteen [Nehemiah 7:11]

16- How many were the children of Zattu?
Nine hundred and forty-five [Ezra 2:8]
Eight hundred and forty-five [Nehemiah 7:13]

17- How many were the children of Azgad?
One thousand two hundred and twenty-two [Ezra 2:12]
Two thousand three hundred and twenty-two [Nehemiah 7:17]

18- How many were the children of Adin?
Four hundred and fifty-four [Ezra 2:15]
Six hundred and fifty-five [Nehemiah 7:20]

19- How many were the children of Hashum?
Two hundred and twenty-three [Ezra 2:19]
Three hundred and twenty-eight [Nehemiah 7:22]

20- How many were the children of Bethel and Ai?
Two hundred and twenty-three [Ezra 2:28]
One hundred and twenty-three [Nehemiah 7:32]

21- How many singers accompanied the assembly?
Two hundred [Ezra 2:65]
Two hundred and forty-five [Nehemiah 7:67]

22-When the Israelites dwelt in Shittin they committed adultery with the daughters of Moab. God struck them with a plague. How many people died in that plague?
Twenty-four thousand [Numbers 25:1 and 9]
Twenty-three thousand [I Corinthians 10:8]

23- How many members of the house of Jacob came to Egypt?
Seventy souls [Genesis 4 & 27]
Seventy-five souls [Acts 7:14]

24- On life span?
God decided that the life-span of humans will be limited to 120 years [Genesis 6:3]
Many people born after that lived longer than 120. Arpachshad lived 438 years. His son Shelah lived 433 years. His son Eber lived 464 years, etc [Genesis 11:12-16]

25- Can King multiply his horses?
Solomon had thousands of horses. [1 Kings 4:26]
A King must not multiply horses to himself. [Deuteronomy 17:15-16]

26- Can King multiply his wives?
King Solomon had hundreds of wives. [1 Kings 11:1-3]
A King must not multiply wives to himself. [Deuteronomy 17:17]

27- On sons of Eliphaz
Eliphaz had six sons. [Genesis 36:11-12]
Eliphaz had seven sons. [Genesis 36:15-16]
Eliphaz had seven different sons. [1 Chronicles 1:36]

28- On sons of Dan
Dan had one son. [Genesis 46:23]
Amazingly, this one son produced over 62,000 military-age males by the first census. [Numbers1:38-39]

29- How many beasts died in Plague?
All the beasts died in plague number six. [Exodus 9:6]
All the beasts received boils in plague number seven. [Exodus 9:10]
All the beasts were hit with hail and fire in plague number eight. [Exodus 9:25]
All the beasts lost their firstborn in plague number ten. [Exodus 12:29]

30- On the journey
The number of Israelites, excluding children, was 600,000 [Exodus 12:37]
The number of Israelites, including children, was only 7000. [1 Kings 20:15]

31- How many sons Jesse had?
Jesse had eight sons. [1 Samuel 16:10-11; 1 Samuel 17:12]
Jesse had seven sons. [Chronicles 2:13-15]

32- Did Michal have child or not?
Michal had five children [2 Samuel 21:8]
Michal had no children till her death [2 Samuel 6:23]

33- How many chariots David destroys?
David destroys 700 chariots [2 Samuel 10:18]
David destroys 7000 chariots [1 Chronicles 19:18]

34- How many cubits were temple pillar built?
The Temple pillars were 18 cubits [1 Kings 7:15]
The Temple pillars were 35 cubits [2 Chronicles 3:15]

35- How many men captain took?
The captain takes 5 men of the king's council [2 Kings 25:19]
The captain takes 7 men of the king's council [Jeremiah 52:25]

36- On death of Baasha?
Baasha died in the 26tth year of King Asa's reign. [1 Kings16:6-8]
Baasha built a city in the 36th year of King Asa's reign. [2 Chronicles16:1]

37- How much years Omri reign?
Omri reigned 12 years beginning in the 31st year of Asa's reign. [1 Kings 16:23]O
mri died and his son began his reign in the 38th year of Asa's reign, making Omri's reign only 7-years. [1 Kings16:28-29]
@Fiqh
@Hamdan

Before I begin annihilating every single one of his (stolen) points one by one, I would like to say that he shouldn't be commenting the accuracy of the Bible as a Muslim because Allah and Muhammad, aka Qutham, affirm the preservation, inspiration, and the authority of the Bible. I briefly touch upon this issue of Islam in the first thread that I linked (the long one). This thread is not about that, so I wouldn't be writing a long explanation (already did). Instead, I'll just leave this video here


(Try to disprove it)

One more thing before I get to the meaty part. I wanna shoutout some .org defenders of Christ, our Lord: @Eternal_ @BigBiceps . Y'all are moggers for doing what you're doing. There could be more people doing the same but you're the ones I've seen do it the most. God bless you and your close ones.

Now let's get to the actual reason why I'm making this...

1.

Response: Read it in context, the account found in 2 Samuel 24 records only David’s purchase of the threshing floor and oxen. On the other hand, the account in 1 Chronicles 21 records a higher price for the full purchase, including the surrounding land.

2.

Response: So, according to the text, numbering the people was nearly a year-long process, and there is no clear indication that God had suspended the initial three-year famine prior to the events in chapter 24. Now, if God had combined three additional years of famine (1 Chronicles 21:12) with the three years of initial famine, and a possible intervening year while the census was conducted, the resulting overall famine would have totaled about seven years (2 Samuel 24:13).

I've heard some Christians propose another solution. They claim that these two passages describe the prophet Gad confronting me on two different occasions. According to this view, the “seven year” proposal was initially given four years prior to the “three year” proposal. Thus, the prophet would have confronted me and given me a few years to mull over my decision. During that time, I had repented of my actions, so God reduced the time of punishment—something God definitely has the authority to do. A problem with this view is that if God reduced the seven years to three years because of my repentance, then why didn’t He reduce the length of the other options as well? So, while this solution may seem less likely, it still provides another reasonable explanation.

It's crucial to understand that no matter which solution we opt for, the outcome remains consistent. The allegation of contradiction dissipates, all without asserting any error within the text. To sum up, these Scriptures not only align harmoniously but also complement each other by offering further insights into this specific event.

3.

Response:

(3.1) The solution lies in the translation. The first passage indicates that Joab presented the census to David, listing 800,000 individuals, while the second passage mentions 1,100,000 men who were ready for battle. The key lies in the term "valiant." Among the total 1,100,000 men, only 800,000 were considered valiant warriors. The remaining 300,000 served as reserves. This distinction underscores the difference between simply being a soldier and being a courageous and skilled warrior, akin to the contrast between military ranks such as a sergeant and a general. Both serve in their respective capacities, but their levels of skill and authority differ significantly.

(3.2) It is clear that, with regard to Judah, the figure of 470,000 - quoted in Chronicles - is just those who drew sword, whereas the Samuel number is all of Judah, 500,000.

The census report in 1 Chronicles reports that there were 470,000 soldiers of Judah who drew the sword, yet does not include the standing army of the 30,000 soldiers that are cited in 2 Samuel 6:1. It so happens that these numbers (400,000 + 30,000 = 500,000) add up to the number of soldiers reported in 2 Samuel.

Another historical fact to consider is that Joab was not able to finish counting all the men (1 Chronicles 21:6), which makes the census incomplete (explaining why there is a difference in the report of the numbers).

4.

Response: The initial passage indicates the moment Ahaziah ascended to the throne following his father's death. However, the second passage specifies when Ahaziah commenced his reign. While typically these events coincide, it's not always the case. In this instance, Joram, Ahaziah's father, succumbs to a prolonged illness before his demise. The logical conclusion is that Ahaziah assumed rulership when his father became incapacitated, during the eleventh year of Joram's reign, and formally ascended to the throne upon his father's passing in the twelfth year of Joram's reign. Such instances underscore the complexity of dating ancient events, often challenging assumptions of sequential reigns among kings.

5.

Response: Ahaziah reigned twice. The first time at 22 he reigned over Judah in Jerusalem. The second
time he reigned at 42 was after Israel and Judah were reunited into 1 nation and he was
chosen to reign over Israel. However both times he was removed from king because he was
wicked.

6.

Response: The Hebrew word "בְּמָלְכ֔וֹ" translates "when he became king", not "when he began to reign." In this way, it would support the co-regent argument because "בְּמָלְכ֔וֹ"and "מָלַ֖ךְ" ("he reigned") are not the same word.

If it is not an error, there were two separate crowning events—one at age 8 when his father ceremonially named him co-regent (much like David named Solomon king while he still lived and reigned, 1 Kings 1) and once at age 18 when Jehoiachin officially became king at his father’s death and then reigned for a mere three months.

7.

Response: 2 Kings 24:8 is just rounding to the nearest month, jfl

8.

Response: The discrepancy between the numbers 800 and 300, as recorded in 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles respectively, may initially seem contradictory. However, upon closer examination, it becomes evident that the apparent contradiction arises from mistranslations and actually pertains to two distinct individuals within David's mighty men. In 2 Samuel 23:8, Josheb-basshebeth, also known as Adino the Eznite, is described as having slain 800 enemies in a single encounter, earning him the title of chief among the three great heroes appointed by David. This distinction as one of the "third men" signifies his role as a leader among captains or commanders in David's army.

On the other hand, 1 Chronicles 11:11 recounts the valor of Jashobeam the Hachmonite, who is designated as the chief among David's thirty mighty men. Despite the discrepancy in translation, accurately rendering him as the leader of the thirty heroes, Jashobeam's feat involves the slaying of 300 adversaries in battle. It's important to note that these are two separate individuals with different names, origins, positions, and achievements.

While the mistranslations may lead to confusion, a careful reading of the passages clarifies that there is no contradiction. Rather, they highlight the valor and prowess of two distinct warriors within David's army, each contributing to the military success of the kingdom in their own right.

9.

Response: The narrative of Noah's ark in the Bible appears to present a discrepancy regarding the number of clean animals to be brought onto the ark. Critics point out that while Genesis 6:19 instructs Noah to bring two of every kind of animal, Genesis 7:2-3 adds that he should bring seven of each clean animal and two of each unclean animal. However, this contradiction is resolved when we understand the supplementation of instructions. Initially, Noah was instructed to bring two of every kind of animal, which included both clean and unclean. Later, God further instructed him to bring additional clean animals, not as a contradiction but as a necessary provision for future sacrifices after the Flood.

The analogy of a farmer instructing his son to take animals to the state fair and then providing additional instructions for a barbecue helps illustrate this point. Just as the farmer's additional instructions are not contradictory but supplemental, so too are God's instructions to Noah regarding the animals for the ark.

Additionally, the debate over whether Noah took seven or fourteen of each clean animal arises from translational differences in the Hebrew phrase "shibb’ah shibb’ah." Some translations interpret this phrase to mean seven pairs, while others interpret it as seven individual animals. Despite this uncertainty, the main point remains clear: Noah took different numbers of clean and unclean animals onto the ark, as specified in the biblical text.

Ultimately, while the exact number of clean animals brought onto the ark may remain unclear, there is no inherent contradiction in the biblical account. The narrative maintains its coherence, depicting Noah's faithful obedience to God's instructions amidst the cataclysmic event of the Flood.

10.

Response: The discrepancy between the accounts of David's capture of horsemen in 2 Samuel 8:4 and 1 Chronicles 18:4 is rooted in the understanding that horsemen were not necessarily exclusive from footmen but a subset within footmen. This aligns with historical military practices where soldiers trained as ground infantry could also serve as horsemen. This interpretation is supported by other biblical passages like 2 Samuel 10:18 and 1 Chronicles 19:18, where similar events are described using different terminology, suggesting that horsemen and footmen were essentially the same individuals described differently. In the case of the battle with Hadarezer, when 2 Samuel mentions "seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen," it's likely that the 700 horsemen were part of the larger group of footmen. Similarly, when 1 Chronicles lists "seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen," these were also likely part of the overall footmen count.

Furthermore, the discrepancy in the number of horsemen captured (700 vs. 7000) can be attributed to the flexible nature of the label "horsemen," which attaches to individuals when they are on horses but can detach when they are not. Therefore, depending on when the headcount was taken, one historian might report a higher number of horsemen if they counted before the battle, while another might report a lower number if they counted after the battle, considering only those still mounted on horses. This discrepancy underscores the different perspectives and methodologies of the historians compiling these accounts.

Additionally, both passages mention 1700 soldiers, which likely includes both horsemen and footmen. These soldiers would be part of the total count but not explicitly delineated as either horsemen or footmen.

Moreover, the existence of multiple historical sources used in compiling the biblical texts supports the idea that these accounts reflect different viewpoints. The superficial differences between 2 Samuel 10:18 and 1 Chronicles 19:18, where one mentions "forty thousand horsemen" and the other "forty thousand footmen" in the same battle, suggest that these are not mere duplicates but rather reflections of varying historical perspectives.

In conclusion, understanding horsemen as a subset of footmen and recognizing the flexible nature of the label "horsemen" helps reconcile the discrepancies between 2 Samuel 8:4 and 1 Chronicles 18:4. These differences highlight the complexities of historical interpretation and the multiplicity of sources underlying biblical narratives, allowing for a richer understanding of the events described in scripture.

11.

Response: One way to explain this is to acknowledge that the difference is due to time; that is, one account is at the beginning of Solomon’s reign (1 Kings 4:26), and the other at the end (2 Chron. 9:25)

Another way to explain this is that the contradiction between 1 Kings 4:26 and 2 Chronicles 9:25 can be reconciled by understanding the different types of stalls mentioned. In 1 Kings 4:26, the stalls were for horses used primarily by chariots and horsemen. On the other hand, 2 Chronicles 9:25 mentions stalls specifically for horses and chariots, which would logically be fewer in number compared
to stalls for horses alone. Considering the known number of chariots (1,400) from 2 Chronicles 1:14, it's reasonable to assume fewer stalls were needed for both horses and chariots.

Furthermore, while 2 Chronicles 9:25 describes the purpose of the stalls, 1 Kings 4:26 details the purpose of the horses, indicating they were for chariots and horsemen. Even with conservative estimates of horse usage, the number of stalls aligns with the needs for housing horses and accommodating chariots. Therefore, there were likely 40,000 stalls for housing horses and 4,000 stalls capable of storing horses and chariots, with each of the latter potentially subdivided to accommodate individual horses.

In conclusion, there were 40,000 stalls that were for housing horses, and 4,000 stalls that were for storing horses and chariots. The two numbers could be harmonized if each of the 4,000 stalls with the space to house a chariot had 10 subdividing stalls for individual horses.

12.

Response: Baasha came to power in the third year of the reign of King Asa and died in the twenty-sixth year of Asa’s reign, just as 1 Kings states. His son, Elah, reigned after him, as verse 6 in 1 Kings 16 states:

1 Kings 16:6 So Baasha slept with his fathers, and was buried in Tirzah: and Elah his son reigned in his stead.

This, as we already know from verse 8, was in the 26th year of Asa.

Yet, obviously, this does not coincide with the thirty-sixth year as stated in 2 Chronicles.

2 Chronicles, however, unlike 1 Kings, is not referring to the literal year of Asa’s reign. The thirty-sixth year is actually the 36th year since the division of the kingdom from the unified Israel into the Northern tribes of the house of Israel and the southern tribes, the house of Judah. While the author of 1 Kings records the year according to the literal reign of Asa, the author of 2 Chronicles records the year according to the division of the kingdom of Israel into two kingdoms.

When we look at the Hebrew in 1 Kings 15:33, there are two important things to note. Firstly, we will see that the word translated as reign is מָלַךְ (Malak), which means to reign as king or to become king (or queen). This is a literal reference as to when Baasha became king. He became the literal king in the third year of Asa. Here is the second point: it states clearly, “the third year of Asa”. This is a reference to the literal third year of Asa’s reign as king.

Now let’s look at 2 Chronicles 16:1. The Hebrew word translated as reign here is מַלְכוּת (malkuth), which means reign or kingdom. This is not referring to the literal reign of Asa as king but the reign of the kingdom of which Asa was a member. The kingdom that had started thirty-six years earlier with his grandfather Rehoboam.

Rehoboam had become King of Israel after the death of his father Solomon.

2 Chronicles 9:31 And Solomon slept with his fathers, and he was buried in the city of David his father: and Rehoboam his son reigned in his stead.

1 Kings 11:43 And Solomon slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David his father: and Rehoboam his son reigned in his stead.

However, Jeroboam and the Northern tribes rebelled against Rehoboam, and this is when the Kingdom was divided.

1 Kings 12:20 And it came to pass, when all Israel heard that Jeroboam was come again, that they sent and called him unto the congregation, and made him king over all Israel: there was none that followed the house of David, but the tribe of Judah only.

We are told in 2 Chronicles that Rehoboam had established a kingdom.

2 Chronicles 12:1 And it came to pass, when Rehoboam had established the kingdom, and had strengthened himself, he forsook the law of the LORD, and all Israel with him.

The Hebrew word translated as kingdom is unsurprisingly מַלְכוּת (mulkuth), the same word translated as reign in 2 Chronicles 16:1.

The author of 2 Chronicles is giving us the year as per the founding of the Kingdom.

Rehoboam reigned for seventeen years.

1 Kings 14:21 And Rehoboam the son of Solomon reigned in Judah. Rehoboam was forty and one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city which the LORD did choose out of all the tribes of Israel, to put his name there. And his mother’s name was Naamah an Ammonitess.

Rehoboam's son Abijam reigned after him.

1 Kings 14:31 And Rehoboam slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in the city of David. And his mother’s name was Naamah an Ammonitess. And Abijam his son reigned in his stead.

Abijam reigned for three years.

2 Chronicles 13:2 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.

After the death of Abijam, Asa reigned in his stead. This was now the 20th year of the kingdom of Judah.

2 Chronicles 14:1 So Abijah slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the city of David: and Asa his son reigned in his stead. In his days the land was quiet ten years.

Reigned in both of these verses is מָלַךְ (Malak), so we are referring to the personal reign of each king.

So we see that there had, in fact, been 20 years since the founding of the 2 Kingdoms when Asa became the literal physical king of the house of Judah.

Baasha became king of the Northern tribes in the 3rd year of Asa, which was the 23rd year of the kingdom of Asa or rather the kingdom of the house of Judah. This means that Baasha's death, which we know occurred in the 26th year of Asa as king, was in the 46th year of the kingdom. 20 years + 26 years = 46 years.

Therefore, Baasha's death actually occurred a full 10 years after he had come against Asa in the 36th year of the kingdom, which was the 16th year of Asa’s own personal reign as king.

When we analyze the texts correctly, there simply is no contradiction between these two numbers.

13.

Response: The contradiction between 1 Kings and 2 Chronicles regarding the number of supervisors can be resolved by considering various factors. One plausible explanation is that the author of 2 Chronicles may have included reserves among the overseers, ready to step in for any supervisors who were unable to fulfill their duties due to illness or death. In their analysis of alleged Bible contradictions, Jay Smith, Alex Chowdhry, and others suggest this interpretation, highlighting the inclusion of reserves as a solution to the perceived inconsistency.

Another perspective offered by esteemed Old Testament commentators, Keil and Delitzsch, suggests that the difference in numbers arises from how the supervisors were categorized. They point out that while 1 Kings mentions a total of 3,850 supervisors, combining figures from different passages, 2 Chronicles also arrives at the same total. Keil and Delitzsch propose that the discrepancy lies not in the actual count but in the classification method used by each author. While one may have categorized supervisors based on nationality, the other may have organized them by authority.

In essence, these explanations demonstrate that what initially appears as a contradiction can be reconciled through careful consideration of context and interpretation. This underscores the importance of understanding nuances within biblical texts and highlights that apparent differences do not necessarily indicate contradictions.

14.

Response: One plausible explanation for the differing numbers in 1 Kings 7:26 and 2 Chronicles 4:5 lies in the method of counting. According to Matthew Henry and Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown, 1 Kings 7:26 may denote the practical capacity of the laver, indicating the amount it could comfortably hold for regular use. In contrast, 2 Chronicles 4:5 might refer to the total capacity of the laver if it were filled to the brim.

The "molten sea," a large brass basin designated for priestly ablutions, was positioned at the entrance of the priests' court, akin to a font at a church entrance. While its full capacity was noted as 3000 baths (as in 2 Chronicles 4:5), it typically contained only 2000 baths for regular use, as mentioned in 1 Kings 7:26.

Matthew Henry underscores this interpretation by highlighting the practical aspect, suggesting that the laver ordinarily held 2000 baths, while Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown emphasize the distinction between "receiving" and "holding," implying that the laver could receive up to 3000 baths but typically held less.

In essence, these perspectives suggest that the discrepancy in numbers stems from the different approaches to counting—whether to denote practical usage or total capacity—rather than a contradiction in the texts.

Another plausible explanation is that it's important to understand that "baths" in this context represents a unit of volume, with one bath roughly equivalent to 5.8 gallons. Thus, the discrepancy lies in whether the "Sea" held 11,600 gallons or 17,400 gallons.

One explanation is that 2 Chronicles could be referring to the Sea's total capacity, while 1 Kings could be describing the typical amount of water it held.

There's evidence suggesting that the dry volume bath was smaller than the liquid volume bath used in ancient Israel. The Targum indicates, "It received three thousand baths of dry measure, and held two thousand of liquid measure." Some scholars speculate that during the Babylonian captivity, the smaller volume bath became prevalent, and since 2 Chronicles was likely written towards the end of this period, it could account for the discrepancy, whereas 1 Kings was penned before the captivity.

15 - 23

Response: In the Hebrew Bible, Ezra-Nehemiah forms a cohesive unit, portraying the return of Israelites from Babylon to Jerusalem and Judea following the exile. Two distinct lists, Ezra 2:1-67 and Nehemiah 7:6-68, detail this return. Despite striking similarities in language, style, and the order of paragraphs, differences in spelling variations, the number of registered families, and leadership figures emerge.

Nehemiah's designation of his list as 'the book of the genealogy of those who came up first' suggests it captures the earliest wave of immigrants led by Zerubbabel, likely compiled in Jerusalem where the chronological order of arrivals could be accurately determined. Conversely, Ezra's list, likely compiled in Babylon, registers those who chose to journey with Zerubbabel and were recorded there before departure.

These discrepancies, such as spelling variations and the inclusion of additional families in Nehemiah's list, likely stem from the dynamic nature of the journey. For instance, the early days of travel likely saw the inclusion of more individuals, while certain groups might have lagged behind for various reasons, explaining the discrepancies in numbers and the addition of Nahamani to Nehemiah's list.

Furthermore, the figure of 42,360 recorded in both lists doesn't purport to represent every individual but rather focuses on the foundational families forming the nascent nation in Judea.

Ezra and Nehemiah, writing with prophetic insight, didn't perceive contradictions within these texts, viewing them as complementary perspectives of the same historical event. Thus, we too should view these differences as enriching the narrative rather than detracting from its authenticity.

24.

Response: In this passage, God's statement was not about the average human lifespan, but rather a declaration of judgment against wickedness, indicating when He would cleanse the earth with the Flood.

According to the biblical timeline, the Flood began around 2370 B.C., suggesting that God made this pronouncement around 2490 B.C.E., when Noah was 480 years old.

Approximately 20 years later, around 2470 B.C.E., Noah's sons were born, leaving about a century before the Flood. However, God did not reveal to Noah the specifics of his role or the timing of the event.

During those 120 years, Noah was able to build the ark, raise a family, and warn his contemporaries of the impending catastrophe, demonstrating God's patience and mercy.

Despite the impending judgment, human lifespans remained long, allowing Noah and his sons to live for many years after the Flood.

25-26

Response: Solomon is one of the biggest sinners in The Bible, he disobeyed God multiple times.

27.

I don't see a contradiction anywhere. Elaborate???

28.

Response: The discrepancy you're pointing out arises from differences in how the term "sons of Dan" is used in Genesis and Numbers. In Genesis 46:23, "sons of Dan" refers to Dan's direct descendants, whereas in Numbers 1:38-39, it refers to the entire tribe of Dan, including all its descendants and associated clans. This broader usage accounts for the larger number in the census.

29.

Response: There is a misunderstanding in the interpretation of the plagues in Exodus. While the plagues affected the livestock in various ways, not all the beasts died in each plague. For example:

- In plague number six, only the livestock of the Egyptians died (Exodus 9:6).
- In plague number seven, the livestock of the Egyptians are not specifically mentioned, but it's about boils afflicting people and animals (Exodus 9:10).
- In plague number eight, hail destroyed the Egyptian's livestock that were in the fields (Exodus 9:25).
- In plague number ten, the death of the firstborn affected humans, not livestock (Exodus 12:29).

So, not all the beasts died in every plague; the impact varied from one plague to another.

30.

Response: The discrepancy in the numbers arises from different contexts and methods of counting.

In Exodus 12:37, the figure of 600,000 refers to the number of Israelite men of military age who left Egypt during the Exodus. This count excludes women, children, and elderly individuals.

In 1 Kings 20:15, the figure of 7,000 likely refers to a different context or a specific group of people within Israel, rather than the entire population. Consider the context and the specific group being referenced when comparing numbers from different parts of the Bible.

31:

Response: The discrepancy in the number of Jesse's sons arises from differences in the way the sons are counted or named in different passages of the Bible.

In 1 Samuel 16:10-11 and 1 Samuel 17:12, Jesse's eight sons are mentioned, including David. However, in 1 Chronicles 2:13-15, only seven sons are listed. It's possible that one of Jesse's sons died or was not included in the genealogy mentioned in Chronicles. Alternatively, there could be variations in the naming or counting of the sons between the two passages.

32.

Response: The contradiction regarding Michal's children in the biblical passages of 2 Samuel 6:23 and 21:8 is reconciled through a detailed narrative analysis. Initially, Michal was promised to David, but due to Saul's manipulation, she was given to Adriel instead, with whom she had five sons. However, after Adriel's death, Michal was given to Paltiel. Later, David claimed Michal as his rightful wife, leading to her divorce from Paltiel and reunion with David. Despite having children with Adriel, Michal didn't bear any more children after reuniting with David. This explanation provides a coherent timeline of Michal's marriages and children, removing the contradiction between the two passages. Additionally, it suggests the involvement of Michal's sons in Saul's persecution against the Gibeonites, highlighting the complexities of familial dynamics and political intrigue within biblical narratives.

The contradiction regarding Michal having children can be explained by another way and that's by considering the possibility that the children mentioned in 2 Samuel 21:8 were not biologically hers but were perhaps adopted or raised by her. Meanwhile, 2 Samuel 6:23 may be emphasizing that she remained childless in terms of giving birth during her lifetime.

33.

Response: There's a difference between II Samuel 8:3 and I Chronicles 18:3 concerning David's conflict with Hadadezer, the king of Zobah. Some argue that these verses describe distinct battles. Another perspective, advocated by scholars like Matthew Henry and John Wesley, suggests that the variance lies in the method of enumeration: one verse tallies men while the other counts chariot companies, presuming ten men per unit.

However, a more nuanced explanation, championed by Peter Ruckman, gains traction when examining II Samuel 10:18 and I Chronicles 19:18, which recount a separate engagement between David and Hadadezer's forces. These passages describe how Syrian chariots likely operated with multiple crew members, including a commander, drivers, shieldmen, and bowmen. This setup implies that each chariot could accommodate several combatants, explaining the discrepancy in casualty counts between the two biblical accounts. Consequently, II Samuel 8:4's mention of 1000 chariots but only 700 horsemen could indicate that the 700 horsemen represent chariot units rather than individual riders, with the additional chariots serving as spares for battle damage or replacements.

34.

Response: In comparing the descriptions of the pillars in 1 Kings 7:15 and 2 Chronicles 3:15, we encounter a discrepancy in the measurement terminologies used. In 1 Kings, the height of the first pillar is specified as eighteen cubits, indicating a vertical measurement. Additionally, it mentions that a cord of twelve cubits would encircle the second pillar, implying its circumference. On the other hand, 2 Chronicles describes the pillars as thirty-five cubits high, employing the term "orekh" (אֹרֶךְ) which typically denotes length or extension rather than height. This discrepancy has led to debates over the interpretation of the measurements.

One interpretation suggests that the thirty-five cubits mentioned in 2 Chronicles is a summary measurement, combining the total height (including the capital) and the circumference of the pillar. This is derived from the assumption that the Chronicler used a convention where the total length of a three-dimensional object was represented by the sum of its dimensions. However, this interpretation is speculative and may not accurately reflect the conventions or intentions of the Chronicler.

The key distinction between the two accounts lies in the level of detail provided. While 1 Kings offers specific measurements for the height ("qomath" - קוֹמַת) and circumference of the pillars separately, 2 Chronicles presents a summary measurement that encompasses all dimensions of the pillars. Thus, while 1 Kings provides a more detailed breakdown of the measurements, 2 Chronicles offers a consolidated view of the total length of the pillars.

Ultimately, the differing measurement terminologies and levels of detail between the two accounts highlight the complexities of interpreting ancient texts and the importance of considering historical and cultural contexts when analyzing such passages.

A different point of view is that just as many "non-modern" units of measurement varied between different regions, the cubit also had differing meanings depending on the country. For example, a cubit measured 939 millimeters in Turkey and 457 millimeters in India. Therefore, 18 Turkish cubits would be equivalent to 37 Indian cubits. This illustrates how historical measurements could vary significantly across geographical and cultural boundaries, akin to the differences between the mile, and the nautical mile still observed today.

35.

Response: This number excluded Pashur the son of Melchiah (Jeremiah 21:1), and his apparent son Gedaliah (Jer 38:1), according to an apparent possible lack of genealogical record (Jeremiah 21:1, Ezr 2:59). Or, maybe they were eunuchs

36.

Response: In the books of Kings and Chronicles rulership complications many times give rise to numerical differences in the records between the four books but the differences aren’t mistakes, the different authors are just reckoning the same numerical information differently.

The "26th year of Asa’s reign" spoken of 1 Kings 16:8 only speaks about the amount of time that Asa had reigned alone, and these "26 years" do not include the period he co-reigned with his mother queen Maachah before she made an idol and was dethroned (see 1 Kings 15:10-13) which could have lasted ten years or more. This is very plausible as it wouldn’t be the first time that the author differentiates between a co-reign and an individual reign. This explains the seeming inconsistency with Baasha still being alive in the "36th year of Asa’s reign" in 2 Chronicles 16:1 (the "36 years" of 2 Chronicles 16:1 including both Asa’s co-reign and individual reign).

37.

Response: You're making me repeat myself for the 100th time. The discrepancy you mentioned arises from a difference in how the years of reign are counted. In ancient times, it was common to count the first partial year of a reign as the first year. Therefore, Omri's reign is counted as 12 years because his reign began in the 31st year of Asa's reign, and the year he died in was considered as his 12th year.



Notice how I didn't use the scribal errors argument when I could've used it many times. It was always over for Islam

Read every word then lit up a H. Upmann

@Eternal_ @BigBiceps

 

[Mike141]

So, where do I even begin. I didn't come to this place to debate religion. To the people who are against this type of threads (@Psychophilly, sorry bestie), I just wanna say that I didn't come for this. I came here to looksmaxx and it's still the reason why I'm here. I'm a real looksmaxxer who actually does things to improve, not just rot and troll. I also post looksmaxxing and blackpill threads from time to time. The reason why I started debating religion is because this low IQ user @MaghrebGator was spamming his (wrong) faith like there is no tomorrow.

This thread is gonna be really long and it's probably gonna be a waste of time to make it because the muzzies aren't gonna read it. I already made a really long thread on one of the many gigantic fallacies of Islam. Link: https://looksmax.org/threads/a-huge...oves-the-whole-religion.964666/#post-14763207. So far nobody tried to disprove it (impossible). It's not just them, pretty much nobody will be interested in all this, but it's my duty as a Christian to defend my faith. As I like to say, Jesus died for my sins and so I can live, the least I could do for him is to live for him and defend him. As @ylrven once commented under on one of my other threads on religion: "rotting for a good cause"

The reason why I'm writing this is because @MaghrebGator thought he did something by copying and pasting some supposed numerical "contradictions" in the bible (this is where he stole it from: https://islamiat101.blogspot.com/2012/11/numerical-contradictions-in-bible.html?m=1 ). He wrote it as a reply to this thread of mine where I talk about how Allah was bad at maths. Link: https://looksmax.org/threads/mathematical-error-in-islam-its-so-over-for-muzzies.974830/ To refute him, it would require a lot of writing and I thought it would be a shame for all this work to be posted as a reply, so I'm making a whole thread about it.

Here's what he commented:

Now answer these Biblical numerical and mathematical errors one by one

1- On how many shekels of gold David brought threshing floor?
600 [1 Chronicles 21:25]
50 [2 Samuel 24:24]

2- How many years of famine?
Seven [2 Samuel 24:13]
Three [1 Chronicles 21:12]

3- The number of fighting men of Israel and Judah were?
Israel was 1,100,000 and Judah numbered 470,000 [1 Chronicles 21:5]
Israel was 800,000 and Judah numbered 500,000 [ 2 Samuel 24:9]

4- In which year did Ahaziah began to reign?
12 [2 Kings 8:25]
11 [2 Kings 9:29]

5- How old was Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem?
Twenty-two [2 Kings 8:26]
Forty-two [2 Chronicles 22:2]

6- How old was Jehoiachin when he became king of Jerusalem?
Eighteen [2 Kings 24:8]
Eight [2 Chronicles 36:9]

7- How long did he rule over Jerusalem?
Three months [2 Kings 24:8]
Three months and ten days [2 Chronicles 36:9]

8- The chief of the mighty men of David lifted up his spear and killed how many men at one time?
Eight hundred [2 Samuel 23:8]
Three hundred [I Chronicles 11: 11]

9- How many pairs of clean animals did God tell Noah to take into the Ark?
Two [Genesis 6:19, 20]
Seven [Genesis 7:2]. But despite this last instruction only two pairs went into the ark [Genesis 7:8-9]

10- When David defeated the King of Zobah, how many horsemen did he capture?
One thousand and seven hundred [2 Samuel 8:4]
Seven thousand [I Chronicles 18:4]

11- How many stalls for horses did Solomon have?
Forty thousand [I Kings 4:26]
Four thousand [2 chronicles 9:25]

12- In what year of King Asa's reign did Baasha, King of Israel die?
Twenty-sixth year [I Kings 15:33 - 16:8]
Still alive in the thirty-sixth year [2 Chronicles 16:1]

13- How many overseers did Solomon appoint for the work of building the temple?
Three thousand six hundred [2 Chronicles 2:2]
Three thousand three hundred [I Kings 5:16]

14- Solomon built a facility containing how many baths?
Two thousand [1 Kings 7:26]
Over three thousand [2 Chronicles 4:5]

15- Of the Israelites who were freed from the Babylonian captivity, how many were the children of Pahrath-Moab?
Two thousand eight hundred and twelve [Ezra 2:6]
Two thousand eight hundred and eighteen [Nehemiah 7:11]

16- How many were the children of Zattu?
Nine hundred and forty-five [Ezra 2:8]
Eight hundred and forty-five [Nehemiah 7:13]

17- How many were the children of Azgad?
One thousand two hundred and twenty-two [Ezra 2:12]
Two thousand three hundred and twenty-two [Nehemiah 7:17]

18- How many were the children of Adin?
Four hundred and fifty-four [Ezra 2:15]
Six hundred and fifty-five [Nehemiah 7:20]

19- How many were the children of Hashum?
Two hundred and twenty-three [Ezra 2:19]
Three hundred and twenty-eight [Nehemiah 7:22]

20- How many were the children of Bethel and Ai?
Two hundred and twenty-three [Ezra 2:28]
One hundred and twenty-three [Nehemiah 7:32]

21- How many singers accompanied the assembly?
Two hundred [Ezra 2:65]
Two hundred and forty-five [Nehemiah 7:67]

22-When the Israelites dwelt in Shittin they committed adultery with the daughters of Moab. God struck them with a plague. How many people died in that plague?
Twenty-four thousand [Numbers 25:1 and 9]
Twenty-three thousand [I Corinthians 10:8]

23- How many members of the house of Jacob came to Egypt?
Seventy souls [Genesis 4 & 27]
Seventy-five souls [Acts 7:14]

24- On life span?
God decided that the life-span of humans will be limited to 120 years [Genesis 6:3]
Many people born after that lived longer than 120. Arpachshad lived 438 years. His son Shelah lived 433 years. His son Eber lived 464 years, etc [Genesis 11:12-16]

25- Can King multiply his horses?
Solomon had thousands of horses. [1 Kings 4:26]
A King must not multiply horses to himself. [Deuteronomy 17:15-16]

26- Can King multiply his wives?
King Solomon had hundreds of wives. [1 Kings 11:1-3]
A King must not multiply wives to himself. [Deuteronomy 17:17]

27- On sons of Eliphaz
Eliphaz had six sons. [Genesis 36:11-12]
Eliphaz had seven sons. [Genesis 36:15-16]
Eliphaz had seven different sons. [1 Chronicles 1:36]

28- On sons of Dan
Dan had one son. [Genesis 46:23]
Amazingly, this one son produced over 62,000 military-age males by the first census. [Numbers1:38-39]

29- How many beasts died in Plague?
All the beasts died in plague number six. [Exodus 9:6]
All the beasts received boils in plague number seven. [Exodus 9:10]
All the beasts were hit with hail and fire in plague number eight. [Exodus 9:25]
All the beasts lost their firstborn in plague number ten. [Exodus 12:29]

30- On the journey
The number of Israelites, excluding children, was 600,000 [Exodus 12:37]
The number of Israelites, including children, was only 7000. [1 Kings 20:15]

31- How many sons Jesse had?
Jesse had eight sons. [1 Samuel 16:10-11; 1 Samuel 17:12]
Jesse had seven sons. [Chronicles 2:13-15]

32- Did Michal have child or not?
Michal had five children [2 Samuel 21:8]
Michal had no children till her death [2 Samuel 6:23]

33- How many chariots David destroys?
David destroys 700 chariots [2 Samuel 10:18]
David destroys 7000 chariots [1 Chronicles 19:18]

34- How many cubits were temple pillar built?
The Temple pillars were 18 cubits [1 Kings 7:15]
The Temple pillars were 35 cubits [2 Chronicles 3:15]

35- How many men captain took?
The captain takes 5 men of the king's council [2 Kings 25:19]
The captain takes 7 men of the king's council [Jeremiah 52:25]

36- On death of Baasha?
Baasha died in the 26tth year of King Asa's reign. [1 Kings16:6-8]
Baasha built a city in the 36th year of King Asa's reign. [2 Chronicles16:1]

37- How much years Omri reign?
Omri reigned 12 years beginning in the 31st year of Asa's reign. [1 Kings 16:23]O
mri died and his son began his reign in the 38th year of Asa's reign, making Omri's reign only 7-years. [1 Kings16:28-29]
@Fiqh
@Hamdan

Before I begin annihilating every single one of his (stolen) points one by one, I would like to say that he shouldn't be commenting the accuracy of the Bible as a Muslim because Allah and Muhammad, aka Qutham, affirm the preservation, inspiration, and the authority of the Bible. I briefly touch upon this issue of Islam in the first thread that I linked (the long one). This thread is not about that, so I wouldn't be writing a long explanation (already did). Instead, I'll just leave this video here


(Try to disprove it)

One more thing before I get to the meaty part. I wanna shoutout some .org defenders of Christ, our Lord: @Eternal_ @BigBiceps . Y'all are moggers for doing what you're doing. There could be more people doing the same but you're the ones I've seen do it the most. God bless you and your close ones.

Now let's get to the actual reason why I'm making this...

1.

Response: Read it in context, the account found in 2 Samuel 24 records only David’s purchase of the threshing floor and oxen. On the other hand, the account in 1 Chronicles 21 records a higher price for the full purchase, including the surrounding land.

2.

Response: So, according to the text, numbering the people was nearly a year-long process, and there is no clear indication that God had suspended the initial three-year famine prior to the events in chapter 24. Now, if God had combined three additional years of famine (1 Chronicles 21:12) with the three years of initial famine, and a possible intervening year while the census was conducted, the resulting overall famine would have totaled about seven years (2 Samuel 24:13).

I've heard some Christians propose another solution. They claim that these two passages describe the prophet Gad confronting me on two different occasions. According to this view, the “seven year” proposal was initially given four years prior to the “three year” proposal. Thus, the prophet would have confronted me and given me a few years to mull over my decision. During that time, I had repented of my actions, so God reduced the time of punishment—something God definitely has the authority to do. A problem with this view is that if God reduced the seven years to three years because of my repentance, then why didn’t He reduce the length of the other options as well? So, while this solution may seem less likely, it still provides another reasonable explanation.

It's crucial to understand that no matter which solution we opt for, the outcome remains consistent. The allegation of contradiction dissipates, all without asserting any error within the text. To sum up, these Scriptures not only align harmoniously but also complement each other by offering further insights into this specific event.

3.

Response:

(3.1) The solution lies in the translation. The first passage indicates that Joab presented the census to David, listing 800,000 individuals, while the second passage mentions 1,100,000 men who were ready for battle. The key lies in the term "valiant." Among the total 1,100,000 men, only 800,000 were considered valiant warriors. The remaining 300,000 served as reserves. This distinction underscores the difference between simply being a soldier and being a courageous and skilled warrior, akin to the contrast between military ranks such as a sergeant and a general. Both serve in their respective capacities, but their levels of skill and authority differ significantly.

(3.2) It is clear that, with regard to Judah, the figure of 470,000 - quoted in Chronicles - is just those who drew sword, whereas the Samuel number is all of Judah, 500,000.

The census report in 1 Chronicles reports that there were 470,000 soldiers of Judah who drew the sword, yet does not include the standing army of the 30,000 soldiers that are cited in 2 Samuel 6:1. It so happens that these numbers (400,000 + 30,000 = 500,000) add up to the number of soldiers reported in 2 Samuel.

Another historical fact to consider is that Joab was not able to finish counting all the men (1 Chronicles 21:6), which makes the census incomplete (explaining why there is a difference in the report of the numbers).

4.

Response: The initial passage indicates the moment Ahaziah ascended to the throne following his father's death. However, the second passage specifies when Ahaziah commenced his reign. While typically these events coincide, it's not always the case. In this instance, Joram, Ahaziah's father, succumbs to a prolonged illness before his demise. The logical conclusion is that Ahaziah assumed rulership when his father became incapacitated, during the eleventh year of Joram's reign, and formally ascended to the throne upon his father's passing in the twelfth year of Joram's reign. Such instances underscore the complexity of dating ancient events, often challenging assumptions of sequential reigns among kings.

5.

Response: Ahaziah reigned twice. The first time at 22 he reigned over Judah in Jerusalem. The second
time he reigned at 42 was after Israel and Judah were reunited into 1 nation and he was
chosen to reign over Israel. However both times he was removed from king because he was
wicked.

6.

Response: The Hebrew word "בְּמָלְכ֔וֹ" translates "when he became king", not "when he began to reign." In this way, it would support the co-regent argument because "בְּמָלְכ֔וֹ"and "מָלַ֖ךְ" ("he reigned") are not the same word.

If it is not an error, there were two separate crowning events—one at age 8 when his father ceremonially named him co-regent (much like David named Solomon king while he still lived and reigned, 1 Kings 1) and once at age 18 when Jehoiachin officially became king at his father’s death and then reigned for a mere three months.

7.

Response: 2 Kings 24:8 is just rounding to the nearest month, jfl

8.

Response: The discrepancy between the numbers 800 and 300, as recorded in 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles respectively, may initially seem contradictory. However, upon closer examination, it becomes evident that the apparent contradiction arises from mistranslations and actually pertains to two distinct individuals within David's mighty men. In 2 Samuel 23:8, Josheb-basshebeth, also known as Adino the Eznite, is described as having slain 800 enemies in a single encounter, earning him the title of chief among the three great heroes appointed by David. This distinction as one of the "third men" signifies his role as a leader among captains or commanders in David's army.

On the other hand, 1 Chronicles 11:11 recounts the valor of Jashobeam the Hachmonite, who is designated as the chief among David's thirty mighty men. Despite the discrepancy in translation, accurately rendering him as the leader of the thirty heroes, Jashobeam's feat involves the slaying of 300 adversaries in battle. It's important to note that these are two separate individuals with different names, origins, positions, and achievements.

While the mistranslations may lead to confusion, a careful reading of the passages clarifies that there is no contradiction. Rather, they highlight the valor and prowess of two distinct warriors within David's army, each contributing to the military success of the kingdom in their own right.

9.

Response: The narrative of Noah's ark in the Bible appears to present a discrepancy regarding the number of clean animals to be brought onto the ark. Critics point out that while Genesis 6:19 instructs Noah to bring two of every kind of animal, Genesis 7:2-3 adds that he should bring seven of each clean animal and two of each unclean animal. However, this contradiction is resolved when we understand the supplementation of instructions. Initially, Noah was instructed to bring two of every kind of animal, which included both clean and unclean. Later, God further instructed him to bring additional clean animals, not as a contradiction but as a necessary provision for future sacrifices after the Flood.

The analogy of a farmer instructing his son to take animals to the state fair and then providing additional instructions for a barbecue helps illustrate this point. Just as the farmer's additional instructions are not contradictory but supplemental, so too are God's instructions to Noah regarding the animals for the ark.

Additionally, the debate over whether Noah took seven or fourteen of each clean animal arises from translational differences in the Hebrew phrase "shibb’ah shibb’ah." Some translations interpret this phrase to mean seven pairs, while others interpret it as seven individual animals. Despite this uncertainty, the main point remains clear: Noah took different numbers of clean and unclean animals onto the ark, as specified in the biblical text.

Ultimately, while the exact number of clean animals brought onto the ark may remain unclear, there is no inherent contradiction in the biblical account. The narrative maintains its coherence, depicting Noah's faithful obedience to God's instructions amidst the cataclysmic event of the Flood.

10.

Response: The discrepancy between the accounts of David's capture of horsemen in 2 Samuel 8:4 and 1 Chronicles 18:4 is rooted in the understanding that horsemen were not necessarily exclusive from footmen but a subset within footmen. This aligns with historical military practices where soldiers trained as ground infantry could also serve as horsemen. This interpretation is supported by other biblical passages like 2 Samuel 10:18 and 1 Chronicles 19:18, where similar events are described using different terminology, suggesting that horsemen and footmen were essentially the same individuals described differently. In the case of the battle with Hadarezer, when 2 Samuel mentions "seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen," it's likely that the 700 horsemen were part of the larger group of footmen. Similarly, when 1 Chronicles lists "seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen," these were also likely part of the overall footmen count.

Furthermore, the discrepancy in the number of horsemen captured (700 vs. 7000) can be attributed to the flexible nature of the label "horsemen," which attaches to individuals when they are on horses but can detach when they are not. Therefore, depending on when the headcount was taken, one historian might report a higher number of horsemen if they counted before the battle, while another might report a lower number if they counted after the battle, considering only those still mounted on horses. This discrepancy underscores the different perspectives and methodologies of the historians compiling these accounts.

Additionally, both passages mention 1700 soldiers, which likely includes both horsemen and footmen. These soldiers would be part of the total count but not explicitly delineated as either horsemen or footmen.

Moreover, the existence of multiple historical sources used in compiling the biblical texts supports the idea that these accounts reflect different viewpoints. The superficial differences between 2 Samuel 10:18 and 1 Chronicles 19:18, where one mentions "forty thousand horsemen" and the other "forty thousand footmen" in the same battle, suggest that these are not mere duplicates but rather reflections of varying historical perspectives.

In conclusion, understanding horsemen as a subset of footmen and recognizing the flexible nature of the label "horsemen" helps reconcile the discrepancies between 2 Samuel 8:4 and 1 Chronicles 18:4. These differences highlight the complexities of historical interpretation and the multiplicity of sources underlying biblical narratives, allowing for a richer understanding of the events described in scripture.

11.

Response: One way to explain this is to acknowledge that the difference is due to time; that is, one account is at the beginning of Solomon’s reign (1 Kings 4:26), and the other at the end (2 Chron. 9:25)

Another way to explain this is that the contradiction between 1 Kings 4:26 and 2 Chronicles 9:25 can be reconciled by understanding the different types of stalls mentioned. In 1 Kings 4:26, the stalls were for horses used primarily by chariots and horsemen. On the other hand, 2 Chronicles 9:25 mentions stalls specifically for horses and chariots, which would logically be fewer in number compared
to stalls for horses alone. Considering the known number of chariots (1,400) from 2 Chronicles 1:14, it's reasonable to assume fewer stalls were needed for both horses and chariots.

Furthermore, while 2 Chronicles 9:25 describes the purpose of the stalls, 1 Kings 4:26 details the purpose of the horses, indicating they were for chariots and horsemen. Even with conservative estimates of horse usage, the number of stalls aligns with the needs for housing horses and accommodating chariots. Therefore, there were likely 40,000 stalls for housing horses and 4,000 stalls capable of storing horses and chariots, with each of the latter potentially subdivided to accommodate individual horses.

In conclusion, there were 40,000 stalls that were for housing horses, and 4,000 stalls that were for storing horses and chariots. The two numbers could be harmonized if each of the 4,000 stalls with the space to house a chariot had 10 subdividing stalls for individual horses.

12.

Response: Baasha came to power in the third year of the reign of King Asa and died in the twenty-sixth year of Asa’s reign, just as 1 Kings states. His son, Elah, reigned after him, as verse 6 in 1 Kings 16 states:

1 Kings 16:6 So Baasha slept with his fathers, and was buried in Tirzah: and Elah his son reigned in his stead.

This, as we already know from verse 8, was in the 26th year of Asa.

Yet, obviously, this does not coincide with the thirty-sixth year as stated in 2 Chronicles.

2 Chronicles, however, unlike 1 Kings, is not referring to the literal year of Asa’s reign. The thirty-sixth year is actually the 36th year since the division of the kingdom from the unified Israel into the Northern tribes of the house of Israel and the southern tribes, the house of Judah. While the author of 1 Kings records the year according to the literal reign of Asa, the author of 2 Chronicles records the year according to the division of the kingdom of Israel into two kingdoms.

When we look at the Hebrew in 1 Kings 15:33, there are two important things to note. Firstly, we will see that the word translated as reign is מָלַךְ (Malak), which means to reign as king or to become king (or queen). This is a literal reference as to when Baasha became king. He became the literal king in the third year of Asa. Here is the second point: it states clearly, “the third year of Asa”. This is a reference to the literal third year of Asa’s reign as king.

Now let’s look at 2 Chronicles 16:1. The Hebrew word translated as reign here is מַלְכוּת (malkuth), which means reign or kingdom. This is not referring to the literal reign of Asa as king but the reign of the kingdom of which Asa was a member. The kingdom that had started thirty-six years earlier with his grandfather Rehoboam.

Rehoboam had become King of Israel after the death of his father Solomon.

2 Chronicles 9:31 And Solomon slept with his fathers, and he was buried in the city of David his father: and Rehoboam his son reigned in his stead.

1 Kings 11:43 And Solomon slept with his fathers, and was buried in the city of David his father: and Rehoboam his son reigned in his stead.

However, Jeroboam and the Northern tribes rebelled against Rehoboam, and this is when the Kingdom was divided.

1 Kings 12:20 And it came to pass, when all Israel heard that Jeroboam was come again, that they sent and called him unto the congregation, and made him king over all Israel: there was none that followed the house of David, but the tribe of Judah only.

We are told in 2 Chronicles that Rehoboam had established a kingdom.

2 Chronicles 12:1 And it came to pass, when Rehoboam had established the kingdom, and had strengthened himself, he forsook the law of the LORD, and all Israel with him.

The Hebrew word translated as kingdom is unsurprisingly מַלְכוּת (mulkuth), the same word translated as reign in 2 Chronicles 16:1.

The author of 2 Chronicles is giving us the year as per the founding of the Kingdom.

Rehoboam reigned for seventeen years.

1 Kings 14:21 And Rehoboam the son of Solomon reigned in Judah. Rehoboam was forty and one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city which the LORD did choose out of all the tribes of Israel, to put his name there. And his mother’s name was Naamah an Ammonitess.

Rehoboam's son Abijam reigned after him.

1 Kings 14:31 And Rehoboam slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in the city of David. And his mother’s name was Naamah an Ammonitess. And Abijam his son reigned in his stead.

Abijam reigned for three years.

2 Chronicles 13:2 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.

After the death of Abijam, Asa reigned in his stead. This was now the 20th year of the kingdom of Judah.

2 Chronicles 14:1 So Abijah slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the city of David: and Asa his son reigned in his stead. In his days the land was quiet ten years.

Reigned in both of these verses is מָלַךְ (Malak), so we are referring to the personal reign of each king.

So we see that there had, in fact, been 20 years since the founding of the 2 Kingdoms when Asa became the literal physical king of the house of Judah.

Baasha became king of the Northern tribes in the 3rd year of Asa, which was the 23rd year of the kingdom of Asa or rather the kingdom of the house of Judah. This means that Baasha's death, which we know occurred in the 26th year of Asa as king, was in the 46th year of the kingdom. 20 years + 26 years = 46 years.

Therefore, Baasha's death actually occurred a full 10 years after he had come against Asa in the 36th year of the kingdom, which was the 16th year of Asa’s own personal reign as king.

When we analyze the texts correctly, there simply is no contradiction between these two numbers.

13.

Response: The contradiction between 1 Kings and 2 Chronicles regarding the number of supervisors can be resolved by considering various factors. One plausible explanation is that the author of 2 Chronicles may have included reserves among the overseers, ready to step in for any supervisors who were unable to fulfill their duties due to illness or death. In their analysis of alleged Bible contradictions, Jay Smith, Alex Chowdhry, and others suggest this interpretation, highlighting the inclusion of reserves as a solution to the perceived inconsistency.

Another perspective offered by esteemed Old Testament commentators, Keil and Delitzsch, suggests that the difference in numbers arises from how the supervisors were categorized. They point out that while 1 Kings mentions a total of 3,850 supervisors, combining figures from different passages, 2 Chronicles also arrives at the same total. Keil and Delitzsch propose that the discrepancy lies not in the actual count but in the classification method used by each author. While one may have categorized supervisors based on nationality, the other may have organized them by authority.

In essence, these explanations demonstrate that what initially appears as a contradiction can be reconciled through careful consideration of context and interpretation. This underscores the importance of understanding nuances within biblical texts and highlights that apparent differences do not necessarily indicate contradictions.

14.

Response: One plausible explanation for the differing numbers in 1 Kings 7:26 and 2 Chronicles 4:5 lies in the method of counting. According to Matthew Henry and Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown, 1 Kings 7:26 may denote the practical capacity of the laver, indicating the amount it could comfortably hold for regular use. In contrast, 2 Chronicles 4:5 might refer to the total capacity of the laver if it were filled to the brim.

The "molten sea," a large brass basin designated for priestly ablutions, was positioned at the entrance of the priests' court, akin to a font at a church entrance. While its full capacity was noted as 3000 baths (as in 2 Chronicles 4:5), it typically contained only 2000 baths for regular use, as mentioned in 1 Kings 7:26.

Matthew Henry underscores this interpretation by highlighting the practical aspect, suggesting that the laver ordinarily held 2000 baths, while Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown emphasize the distinction between "receiving" and "holding," implying that the laver could receive up to 3000 baths but typically held less.

In essence, these perspectives suggest that the discrepancy in numbers stems from the different approaches to counting—whether to denote practical usage or total capacity—rather than a contradiction in the texts.

Another plausible explanation is that it's important to understand that "baths" in this context represents a unit of volume, with one bath roughly equivalent to 5.8 gallons. Thus, the discrepancy lies in whether the "Sea" held 11,600 gallons or 17,400 gallons.

One explanation is that 2 Chronicles could be referring to the Sea's total capacity, while 1 Kings could be describing the typical amount of water it held.

There's evidence suggesting that the dry volume bath was smaller than the liquid volume bath used in ancient Israel. The Targum indicates, "It received three thousand baths of dry measure, and held two thousand of liquid measure." Some scholars speculate that during the Babylonian captivity, the smaller volume bath became prevalent, and since 2 Chronicles was likely written towards the end of this period, it could account for the discrepancy, whereas 1 Kings was penned before the captivity.

15 - 23

Response: In the Hebrew Bible, Ezra-Nehemiah forms a cohesive unit, portraying the return of Israelites from Babylon to Jerusalem and Judea following the exile. Two distinct lists, Ezra 2:1-67 and Nehemiah 7:6-68, detail this return. Despite striking similarities in language, style, and the order of paragraphs, differences in spelling variations, the number of registered families, and leadership figures emerge.

Nehemiah's designation of his list as 'the book of the genealogy of those who came up first' suggests it captures the earliest wave of immigrants led by Zerubbabel, likely compiled in Jerusalem where the chronological order of arrivals could be accurately determined. Conversely, Ezra's list, likely compiled in Babylon, registers those who chose to journey with Zerubbabel and were recorded there before departure.

These discrepancies, such as spelling variations and the inclusion of additional families in Nehemiah's list, likely stem from the dynamic nature of the journey. For instance, the early days of travel likely saw the inclusion of more individuals, while certain groups might have lagged behind for various reasons, explaining the discrepancies in numbers and the addition of Nahamani to Nehemiah's list.

Furthermore, the figure of 42,360 recorded in both lists doesn't purport to represent every individual but rather focuses on the foundational families forming the nascent nation in Judea.

Ezra and Nehemiah, writing with prophetic insight, didn't perceive contradictions within these texts, viewing them as complementary perspectives of the same historical event. Thus, we too should view these differences as enriching the narrative rather than detracting from its authenticity.

24.

Response: In this passage, God's statement was not about the average human lifespan, but rather a declaration of judgment against wickedness, indicating when He would cleanse the earth with the Flood.

According to the biblical timeline, the Flood began around 2370 B.C., suggesting that God made this pronouncement around 2490 B.C.E., when Noah was 480 years old.

Approximately 20 years later, around 2470 B.C.E., Noah's sons were born, leaving about a century before the Flood. However, God did not reveal to Noah the specifics of his role or the timing of the event.

During those 120 years, Noah was able to build the ark, raise a family, and warn his contemporaries of the impending catastrophe, demonstrating God's patience and mercy.

Despite the impending judgment, human lifespans remained long, allowing Noah and his sons to live for many years after the Flood.

25-26

Response: Solomon is one of the biggest sinners in The Bible, he disobeyed God multiple times.

27.

I don't see a contradiction anywhere. Elaborate???

28.

Response: The discrepancy you're pointing out arises from differences in how the term "sons of Dan" is used in Genesis and Numbers. In Genesis 46:23, "sons of Dan" refers to Dan's direct descendants, whereas in Numbers 1:38-39, it refers to the entire tribe of Dan, including all its descendants and associated clans. This broader usage accounts for the larger number in the census.

29.

Response: There is a misunderstanding in the interpretation of the plagues in Exodus. While the plagues affected the livestock in various ways, not all the beasts died in each plague. For example:

- In plague number six, only the livestock of the Egyptians died (Exodus 9:6).
- In plague number seven, the livestock of the Egyptians are not specifically mentioned, but it's about boils afflicting people and animals (Exodus 9:10).
- In plague number eight, hail destroyed the Egyptian's livestock that were in the fields (Exodus 9:25).
- In plague number ten, the death of the firstborn affected humans, not livestock (Exodus 12:29).

So, not all the beasts died in every plague; the impact varied from one plague to another.

30.

Response: The discrepancy in the numbers arises from different contexts and methods of counting.

In Exodus 12:37, the figure of 600,000 refers to the number of Israelite men of military age who left Egypt during the Exodus. This count excludes women, children, and elderly individuals.

In 1 Kings 20:15, the figure of 7,000 likely refers to a different context or a specific group of people within Israel, rather than the entire population. Consider the context and the specific group being referenced when comparing numbers from different parts of the Bible.

31:

Response: The discrepancy in the number of Jesse's sons arises from differences in the way the sons are counted or named in different passages of the Bible.

In 1 Samuel 16:10-11 and 1 Samuel 17:12, Jesse's eight sons are mentioned, including David. However, in 1 Chronicles 2:13-15, only seven sons are listed. It's possible that one of Jesse's sons died or was not included in the genealogy mentioned in Chronicles. Alternatively, there could be variations in the naming or counting of the sons between the two passages.

32.

Response: The contradiction regarding Michal's children in the biblical passages of 2 Samuel 6:23 and 21:8 is reconciled through a detailed narrative analysis. Initially, Michal was promised to David, but due to Saul's manipulation, she was given to Adriel instead, with whom she had five sons. However, after Adriel's death, Michal was given to Paltiel. Later, David claimed Michal as his rightful wife, leading to her divorce from Paltiel and reunion with David. Despite having children with Adriel, Michal didn't bear any more children after reuniting with David. This explanation provides a coherent timeline of Michal's marriages and children, removing the contradiction between the two passages. Additionally, it suggests the involvement of Michal's sons in Saul's persecution against the Gibeonites, highlighting the complexities of familial dynamics and political intrigue within biblical narratives.

The contradiction regarding Michal having children can be explained by another way and that's by considering the possibility that the children mentioned in 2 Samuel 21:8 were not biologically hers but were perhaps adopted or raised by her. Meanwhile, 2 Samuel 6:23 may be emphasizing that she remained childless in terms of giving birth during her lifetime.

33.

Response: There's a difference between II Samuel 8:3 and I Chronicles 18:3 concerning David's conflict with Hadadezer, the king of Zobah. Some argue that these verses describe distinct battles. Another perspective, advocated by scholars like Matthew Henry and John Wesley, suggests that the variance lies in the method of enumeration: one verse tallies men while the other counts chariot companies, presuming ten men per unit.

However, a more nuanced explanation, championed by Peter Ruckman, gains traction when examining II Samuel 10:18 and I Chronicles 19:18, which recount a separate engagement between David and Hadadezer's forces. These passages describe how Syrian chariots likely operated with multiple crew members, including a commander, drivers, shieldmen, and bowmen. This setup implies that each chariot could accommodate several combatants, explaining the discrepancy in casualty counts between the two biblical accounts. Consequently, II Samuel 8:4's mention of 1000 chariots but only 700 horsemen could indicate that the 700 horsemen represent chariot units rather than individual riders, with the additional chariots serving as spares for battle damage or replacements.

34.

Response: In comparing the descriptions of the pillars in 1 Kings 7:15 and 2 Chronicles 3:15, we encounter a discrepancy in the measurement terminologies used. In 1 Kings, the height of the first pillar is specified as eighteen cubits, indicating a vertical measurement. Additionally, it mentions that a cord of twelve cubits would encircle the second pillar, implying its circumference. On the other hand, 2 Chronicles describes the pillars as thirty-five cubits high, employing the term "orekh" (אֹרֶךְ) which typically denotes length or extension rather than height. This discrepancy has led to debates over the interpretation of the measurements.

One interpretation suggests that the thirty-five cubits mentioned in 2 Chronicles is a summary measurement, combining the total height (including the capital) and the circumference of the pillar. This is derived from the assumption that the Chronicler used a convention where the total length of a three-dimensional object was represented by the sum of its dimensions. However, this interpretation is speculative and may not accurately reflect the conventions or intentions of the Chronicler.

The key distinction between the two accounts lies in the level of detail provided. While 1 Kings offers specific measurements for the height ("qomath" - קוֹמַת) and circumference of the pillars separately, 2 Chronicles presents a summary measurement that encompasses all dimensions of the pillars. Thus, while 1 Kings provides a more detailed breakdown of the measurements, 2 Chronicles offers a consolidated view of the total length of the pillars.

Ultimately, the differing measurement terminologies and levels of detail between the two accounts highlight the complexities of interpreting ancient texts and the importance of considering historical and cultural contexts when analyzing such passages.

A different point of view is that just as many "non-modern" units of measurement varied between different regions, the cubit also had differing meanings depending on the country. For example, a cubit measured 939 millimeters in Turkey and 457 millimeters in India. Therefore, 18 Turkish cubits would be equivalent to 37 Indian cubits. This illustrates how historical measurements could vary significantly across geographical and cultural boundaries, akin to the differences between the mile, and the nautical mile still observed today.

35.

Response: This number excluded Pashur the son of Melchiah (Jeremiah 21:1), and his apparent son Gedaliah (Jer 38:1), according to an apparent possible lack of genealogical record (Jeremiah 21:1, Ezr 2:59). Or, maybe they were eunuchs

36.

Response: In the books of Kings and Chronicles rulership complications many times give rise to numerical differences in the records between the four books but the differences aren’t mistakes, the different authors are just reckoning the same numerical information differently.

The "26th year of Asa’s reign" spoken of 1 Kings 16:8 only speaks about the amount of time that Asa had reigned alone, and these "26 years" do not include the period he co-reigned with his mother queen Maachah before she made an idol and was dethroned (see 1 Kings 15:10-13) which could have lasted ten years or more. This is very plausible as it wouldn’t be the first time that the author differentiates between a co-reign and an individual reign. This explains the seeming inconsistency with Baasha still being alive in the "36th year of Asa’s reign" in 2 Chronicles 16:1 (the "36 years" of 2 Chronicles 16:1 including both Asa’s co-reign and individual reign).

37.

Response: You're making me repeat myself for the 100th time. The discrepancy you mentioned arises from a difference in how the years of reign are counted. In ancient times, it was common to count the first partial year of a reign as the first year. Therefore, Omri's reign is counted as 12 years because his reign began in the 31st year of Asa's reign, and the year he died in was considered as his 12th year.



Notice how I didn't use the scribal errors argument when I could've used it many times. It was always over for Islam

not a single molecule+ yall are all coping faggots

 

[i_love_roosters]

not a single molecule+ yall are all coping faggots

Thanks for the bump, gayboy

 

[Failinglooksmaxxing]

Hermeneutics arguments are so boring, just be based and philo mog the muzzies:

and in the same sense that an actual occurrence of a relation is all that is needed to count something relative.

Premise 3: Relational predicates and the subject to these relational predicates must contain at least two free variables (subject and one or more objects)

Premise 4: A relational predicate (Object), is standing for a category of Being, i.e. standing for a relational attribute and a subject of which the relational predicate is predicated, possessing a relational quality.


Premise 5: Allah conforms to Substance-Attribute Predication, where an attribute is predicated of a substance

Premise 6: Allah possess 99 names that are either present participle adjectives or agent nouns which have relational quality (i.e The most Loving or The giver)

Premise 7: If Allah’s substance consists of a plethora of relatives then Allah must assume the role of the Object as it is said the substance possesses the quality of the attribute predicated.

Premise 8: Allah must exhibit a quality of love to a subject or a mode of affection as the relatives only exist by supplementation of correlates and at least two underlying things that stand in the corresponding relation.

Premise 9:
9.1 Allah only loves creation
9.2 Allah loves himself

C.1 Allah is contingent upon his creation to possess his 99 attributes
C.2 Allah must be comprised of multiple persons and cannot be mono-personal

 

[Primalsplit]

Lol. Religion copers are debating their phantasies again.

 

[i_love_roosters]

Lol. Religion copers are debating their phantasies again.

- a dalit

 

[Thebuffdon690]

@MaghrebGator it’s funny how you think I’m the one getting made fun of when it’s really you getting mocked and destroyed by everyone on these threads

 

[i_love_roosters]

@MaghrebGator it’s funny how you think I’m the one getting made fun of when it’s really you getting mocked and destroyed by everyone on these threads

This happened so many times jfl

 

[Thebuffdon690]

This happened so many times jfl

Elab

 

[i_love_roosters]

Elab

I destroyed him many times in debates

 

[Thebuffdon690]

I destroyed him many times in debates

@MaghrebGator

 

[PrinceofDarkness]

Reminder op is a turkcel which are mainly Muslims.

 

[i_love_roosters]

Reminder op is a turkcel which are mainly Muslims.

My family is Christian. Turkey is barely Muslim nowadays

 

[PrinceofDarkness]

My family is Christian. Turkey is barely Muslim nowadays

Erdogan zindabad

 

[i_love_roosters]

Erdogan zindabad

It's funny cuz he's one of the main reasons why Turkey abandoned Islam

 

[PrinceofDarkness]

It's funny cuz he's one of the main reasons why Turkey abandoned Islam

So how is turkey now that is less religious, how are the women with other men. I’ve seen turk girls in jersey fuck around with almost anyone.

 

[i_love_roosters]

So how is turkey now that is less religious, how are the women with other men. I’ve seen turk girls in jersey fuck around with almost anyone.

It's basically like the west in my region and some others. The more conservative regions are not muzzy n shit, they're just not degenerate