Historical Problems in Bible

by IronGland 42 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • IronGland
    IronGland

    Historical problems, inconsistencies, and contradictions comprise a significant part of the Bible:

    • (1) "Thirty and two years old was he (Jehoram--Ed.) when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem 8 years, and departed without being desired. Howbeit they buried him in the city of David, but not in the sepulchres of the kings" (2 Chron. 21:20) and "the inhabitants of Jerusalem made Ahaziah his youngest son king in his stead.... So Ahaziah the son of Jehoram king of Judah reigned. Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign...." (1 Chron. 22:1-2). If Jehoram began to reign at age 32 and ruled 8 years, then he died at age 40. Yet, his son took over at age 42. Imagine a son two years older than his father!
    • (2) "In the thirty and first (31st) year of Asa king of Judah began Omri to reign over Israel, twelve years:...." (1 Kings 16:23) versus "So Omri slept with his fathers, and was buried in Samaria and Ahab his son reigned in his stead. And in the thirty and eighth (38th) year of Asa king of Judah began Ahab the son of Omri to reign over Israel" (1 Kings 16:28-29). How could Omri have reigned 12 years if he ruled from the 31st to the 38th year of Asa's rule? And how could Ahab have taken over from his father Omri in the 38th year of Asa's rule when Omri didn't give up his rule until the 43rd year of Asa's rule (31 + 12=43)?
    • (3) "Solomon had three score and ten thousand (70,000) that bare burdens, and four score thousand (80,000) hewers in the mountains; Beside the chief of Solomon's officers which were over the work, three thousand and three hundred (3,300) which ruled over the people that wrought in the work" (1 Kings 5:15-16) and "the house which king Solomon built for the Lord, the length thereof was threescore (60) cubits, and the breadth thereof twenty cubits and the height thereof thirty cubits" (1 Kings 6:2) and "...So he was 7 years in building it" (1 Kings 6:38). It took 153,300 men seven years to build a house that was 60 cubits by 20 cubits by 30 cubits or 96 X 32 X 48 feet. The mountain labored and brought forth a mouse.
    • (4) Now, behold, in my (David--Ed.) trouble I have prepared for the house of the Lord an hundred thousand talents of gold, and a thousand thousand talents of silver...." (1 Chron. 22:14). The gold collected amounted to $3 billion and the silver amounted to #2 billion. In other words, David gathered more bullion than was possessed by the Roman Empire at the height of its power.
    • (5) "Now the weight of gold that came to Solomon in one year was six hundred threescore and six (666) talents of gold...." (1 Kings 10:14). A talent of gold is worth over $29,000. The chief of a petty, barren district of Asia Minor without significant arts, manufacture, or civilization received $20,000,000 per year. Yet, the Romans only got $22,500,000 from all their Asiatic provinces.
    • (6) "Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, The Lord God of heaven hath given me all the kingdoms of the world...." (Ezra 1:2). When did Cyrus rule all the world or all the known world?
    • (7) "...so there fell down slain of Israel five hundred thousand (500,000) chosen men" (2 Chron. 13:17). If this is a correct figure, what a massacre! At Gettysburg, the greatest battle of the Civil War, the defeated army lost fewer than 5,000 men or 1/100th the number.
    • (8) "It came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth (480th) year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the 4th year of Solomon's reign over Israel...." (1 Kings 6:1) versus "About the time of forty years suffered he their manners in the wilderness. And when he had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, he divided their land to them by lot. And after that he gave unto them judges about the space of 450 years until Samuel the prophet (who lived before Solomon--Ed.)." If there were 480 years between the time they left Egypt until the 4th year of Solomon's reign and Judges ruled for 450 of these years, then that would mean that Saul and David, both of whom lived before Solomon, could only have ruled for a total of 30 years. Yet, David, alone, ruled 40 years as 2 Sam. 5:4 ("David was 30 years old when he began to reign, and he reigned 40 years") shows.
    • (9) "The first of the firstfruits of thy land thou shalt bring into the house of the Lord thy God" (Ex. 23:19). Exodus was supposedly written by Moses. Yet, how could this verse have been written before the time of Solomon; for God had no house prior to the erection of the temple in 1004 B.C. which was 447 years after Moses? When David proposed to build god a house He forbade it and said he had never lived in a house since they left Egypt. "Whereas I have not dwelt in any house since the time that I brought up the children of Israel out of Egypt, even to this day, but have walked in a tent and in a tabernacle" (2 Sam. 7:6).
    • (10) "Your children shall wander in the wilderness for forty years...." (Num. 14:33). Does "wander" mean "lost?" If so, how could they be lost for 40 years in an area only 400 miles wide at its widest part?
    • (11) "Huram said moreover, Blessed be the Lord God of Israel that made heaven and earth...." (2 Chron. 2:12). Hiram, king of Tyre, was not a Jew. Would he have said that the God of Israel made heaven and earth?
    • (12) "Abijah set the battle in array with an army of valiant men of war, even 400,000 chosen men; Jeroboam also set the battle in array against him with 800,000 chosen men, being mighty men of valour" (2 chron. 13:3). All these soldiers were Jews; all lived in Palestine, a poor miserable little country about 1/4th the size of New York. Yet, 1,200,000 soldiers were put in the field. This would have required a population of 10 to 12 million which is absurd. Palestine could have barely supported 2,000,000.
    • (13) "and the king of Egypt spake to the Hebrew midwives, of which the name of the one was Shiphrah, and the name of the other Puah: and he said, When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and see them upon the stools, if it be a son, then ye shall kill him: but it be a daughter, then she shall live" (Ex. 1:15-16). Would the Pharoah have entrusted the execution of a command on which he thought the safety of the kingdom depended, to Hebrews. It is all but certain that the midwives were Egyptian not Hebrew. Shiphrah and Puah are Egyptian names. Josephus says they were Egyptian (Antiq. B2, Ch. 9:2).
  • A Paduan
    A Paduan

    I ask - for what reason does it matter?

  • gumby
    gumby
    I ask - for what reason does it matter?

    It matters to people who have the right to know the truth of a matter when they are putting their entire hope, trust and actions on a book that has proved to be nothing but a book. People have a right to know whether or not the bible is gods word.........otherwise they believe a fairytale their entire lives ......and that isn't fair.

    Gumby

  • A Paduan
    A Paduan

    So, should people base their entire lives upon whether or not the bible is historically accurate?

    Hope not.

    "If you provide concrete proof then we'll do those things you're asking ( even though we mighn't want to ) " - wow, that's like jwism - it's not congruent with Christianity. 'a wicked generation seeks for a sign'

    You can tell God's Word when you hear it - it's good - and not what is heard, but how "be careful then how you hear, for to him who has more will be given"

    Truly " seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear" - for real "I do a deed in your days"

    paduan

  • archangel01
    archangel01

    IronG

    I think U are looking at the Bible in the wrong sense, meaning from a human view point.... but GOD is all Knowing and Powerful.

    "Your children shall wander in the wilderness for forty years

    So GOD had to do something (Powerwise) for them to wander 40 years!

    So bottomline just don't look at it from just a human view. Yes the are lots of human view points in the Bible but........There are LOT's of GODS view points as well. He did that so you know where everyone is coming from(View Point wise) an why they did/not do certain things/tasks for that matter. These are my throughts on this topic, thank U for reading with an open mind!

  • City Fan
    City Fan

    Thanks for the info IG.

    I've just read the battle account in 2 Chronicles 13 to get a picture of this battle. Here we have Abijah leading 400,000 hand picked Judahites against Jeroboam's 800,000 hand picked Israelites. By the end of the battle the Israelites have lost 500,000 troops.

    I've been trying to think of another battle that comes close to this sheer scale of troops and casualty numbers.

    The retreat of Napoleon from Russia cost the lives of nearly 600,000 soldiers of the Grande Armee.

    I can think of one more, The Battle of the Somme. Fought from July to November 1916 between the 3 greatest powers of the time, Germany, Britain and France, the combined casualties were about 1 million men. The British alone lost 19,240 troops on the first day of battle.

    If these two historical events don't cast doubt on the exagerated numbers in 2 Chronicles 13 then maybe the following will:

    It (Canaan) gradually developed into a mature system with large cities, medium sized regional market centers, and small villages. By the highpoint of this settlement wave in the eighth century BCE, after the establishment of the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, it encompassed over 500 sites, with a population of about 160,000. - Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel, Finkelstein and Silberman.

    The two states were simply not big enough to support armies of this size. With armies this size they could have conquered the whole ancient world.

  • Abaddon
    Abaddon
    So, should people base their entire lives upon whether or not the bible is historically accurate?

    Hope not.

    So, it doesn't matter if the Bible is historically accurate? If it is historically accurate and demonstarbly inspired, then I'd think people SHOULD base their entire lives on it, and if it's not , then they shouldn't.

    "If you provide concrete proof then we'll do those things you're asking ( even though we mighn't want to ) " - wow, that's like jwism - it's not congruent with Christianity. 'a wicked generation seeks for a sign'

    Do you know what casuistry is?

    You can tell God's Word when you hear it - it's good - and not what is heard, but how "be careful then how you hear, for to him who has more will be given"

    So, if we need to figure things out, we ask you, as you know which bits are God's Word (oooh! CAPITALS!!)? I think you are confusing the fact that as a work of literature the Bible has some nice bits in it. Shakespeare has nice bits in it. No one gets nailed to trees, and Shakespeare doesn't mind if you don't agree with him, and you are (outside of academic circles) quite unlikely to be burnt alive by Shakespeare followers for disageeing, but it still has nice bits in it;

    As You Like It, Act 2 Scene 7 All the world's a stage,
    And all the men and women merely players:
    They have their exits and their entrances;
    And one man in his time plays many parts,
    His acts being seven ages. At first the infant,
    Mewling and puking in the nurse's arms.
    And then the whining school-boy, with his satchel
    And shining morning face, creeping like snail
    Unwillingly to school. And then the lover,
    Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad
    Made to his mistress' eyebrow. Then a soldier,
    Full of strange oaths and bearded like the pard,
    Jealous in honour, sudden and quick in quarrel,
    Seeking the bubble reputation
    Even in the cannon's mouth. And then the justice,
    In fair round belly with good capon lined,
    With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
    Full of wise saws and modern instances;
    And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts
    Into the lean and slipper'd pantaloon,
    With spectacles on nose and pouch on side,
    His youthful hose, well saved, a world too wide
    For his shrunk shank; and his big manly voice,
    Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
    And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,
    That ends this strange eventful history,
    Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
    Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.

    The Bible as a work of literature, fine. The Bible as God's Word, prove it. It's almost blasphemous to suggest it IS God's Word.

    Truly " seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear" - for real "I do a deed in your days"

    More casuistry. Very writing department.

  • A Paduan
    A Paduan

    So, it doesn't matter if the Bible is historically accurate? Not for me - I understand from what you wrote that it matters a lot to you - though I still ask - how come

    So, if we need to figure things out, we ask you, as you know which bits are God's Word Did I say that - you suggest that only some bits are God's Word - is that to do with the historical accuracy thing?

    The Bible as God's Word, prove it can't get it across - so to speak

    Do you know what casuistry is? resolution of conscience - may also be done in rationalisation w/ moral contempt

    Is it that your saying, I employ casuistry to rationalise biblical historical inaccuracy - If that be the case, I can assure you, I believe that it would not be a good if the Bible were passed and accepted as life rules through such kinds of scrutinies - that's back to the idea " a wicked generation seeks for a sign " - not that we don't all enjoy to see a sign - but is that a reason for whether or not to do right?

    And I do believe that, "I do a deed in your days". Because of casuistry? Who knows - I just witness it, and it still amazes me - really astounds me, like a miracle.

    If it is historically accurate and demonstarbly inspired, then I'd think people SHOULD base their entire lives on it, and if it's not , then they shouldn't. like a consumer?

    paduan

  • Abaddon
    Abaddon

    So, it doesn't matter if the Bible is historically accurate? Not for me - I understand from what you wrote that it matters a lot to you - though I still ask - how come

    Because people who believe the Bible is accurate and inspired will use it as justification for their behaviour, and I'm sure we both know that's been bad at times. If someone realises that the Bible is niether accurate or inspired, it means they are less likely to try to impose their beliefs on others, or commit actions only justified relgiously.

    So, if we need to figure things out, we ask you, as you know which bits are God's Word Did I say that - you suggest that only some bits are God's Word - is that to do with the historical accuracy thing?

    Paduan, you said "You can tell God's Word when you hear it - it's good", thus my question. I don't think it's inspired.

    Do you know what casuistry is? resolution of conscience - may also be done in rationalisation w/ moral contempt

    I was more going for having a specious argument, i.e. one with a false look of truth or genuineness. A lot of scriptures like that in the Bible are exactly what I'd expect someone to say if they needed people to believe them without direct evidence;

    Person 1; "The world's going to end!"

    Person 2; "What's happened, wife left you, lost your job?"

    Person1; "No, no, I mean the world is going to end!"

    Person 2; "Is it? Well, I dunno, looks like it might rain, but tomorrow's sunny for sure."

    Person 1; "No, I mean END, as in cease to be, God kicking ass, smiting the rightou... er smiting the unrightous and being nice to his friends; you can be his friedn if you do this!"

    Person 2; "But that's what they ALL say. Had a Third Day Hoppist here saying more or less the same thing, and we had other ones back in me Pa's day, and we're still here!"

    Person 1; "AhHa!"

    Person 2; "What, the Swedish band?"

    Person 1; "No, I mean, here in the Second Book of I Told You So it says "Yay, verrilly, and whene sommeonee sayeth 'don't be so bleedin' stupid, for it all be as it was and isn't gonna change much, and anyways, alls you bastards say that and nothing happens', that is whenne the endde will comme".

    Person 2; "Oh lordy! Lawks! The end is nigh!"

    etc..

    It's just not very convincing, it's almost as bad as using the 'All scriptures are inspired...' to prove the Bible was inspired!

    Is it that your saying, I employ casuistry to rationalise biblical historical inaccuracy - If that be the case, I can assure you, I believe that it would not be a good if the Bible were passed and accepted as life rules through such kinds of scrutinies - that's back to the idea " a wicked generation seeks for a sign " - not that we don't all enjoy to see a sign - but is that a reason for whether or not to do right?

    I think I may have misunderstood where you were going in your initial comment

    And I do believe that, "I do a deed in your days". Because of casuistry? Who knows - I just witness it, and it still amazes me - really astounds me, like a miracle.

    But I think you still believe in it as inspired whereas I do not

    If it is historically accurate and demonstarbly inspired, then I'd think people SHOULD base their entire lives on it, and if it's not , then they shouldn't. like a consumer?

    No. I mean if someone showed me a book that really did show it was inspired of god and accurate, I'd be silly not to believe if that book also said I would be punished for not believing. Whether it is moral for a deity to expect love with such a punishment for failure is another issue.

  • gumby
    gumby

    So basically paduan you don't CARE whether the bible is true or not or whether people believe it's true or not.

    I suggest you do a study of the attrocities done in the name of Chrisianity and then see if it doesn't matter to you. How about all the people that live in fear from the bibles message such as hell, armaggedon for non believers, and the fear in believers that don't feel they are "cutting it".

    Does any of that matter to you?

    I understand their are many happy Christian people who feel they are living good happy lives, so why mess with them? Why not be happy they believe the bible if it is working in their lives and their family's?

    Because if it is a lie they are living......then they have the right to know so they can continue to CHOOSE and believe a lie..........or face reality....... and still be good happy people.

    Gumby

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit