How can you be sure that there are no mistakes in the bible?

I love this thread! My sister is a Mormon, and I am an Agnostic (that's greek for Fool, I believe) and I never understood religious belief. One of the reasons is because I don't understand the origin of the scriptures. Everyone is using the scriptures as a basis for what they believe (with some additional personal revelations thrown in in some cases) and everyone seems to believe that the scriptures are THE WORD OF GOD, without any flaws or misinterpretations. So here is my question:

How can you be sure that there are no mistakes or blatant, politically-motivated corruptions of the bible?

The 'original texts' no longer exist and the document has been translated from Aramaic, to Hebrew, to Greek, to Latin, to German and then every other language. There have been religious leaders and emperors with complete and total control of the words in that document at many periods in time. How can you POSSIBLY trust it as an absolute word of a deity? If I printed a book that approximated the Bible, but was very wrong at several critical points, the text would not just magically rewrite itself after the ink dried...It would still be wrong 100 years later.

Aren't there even several 'versions' of the Bible in circulation right now? That is ridiculous! If you tried to teach a chemistry class where every student had a slightly different book, it would be pandemonium!

My question leads me to my biggest concerns about religion; If you can't be sure about where your information is coming from, then you must be VERY CAREFUL how far you are willing to go in following the beliefs you create from it. YOU are fallible, and you should understand that weakness in yourself and exercise a great deal of restraint and common sense when it comes to the practical application of your faith. This means no murdering people because you think God would want you to, or banning someone elses religion because you feel you have received THE ULTIMATE PROOF because God spoke to you. You may be experincing a sel-induced hallucination!

Someone help me out here. Explain to me why common sense seems to go out the window when it comes to this particular book. Thanks.

The answer to your question, I believe, is faith. Now, I'm Athiest, as well as a skeptic, but I know many Christians, and I've enjoyed reading my share of the Bible. What those Christians have that I lack is faith. They believe in God, and all those other things, just because. There may be irrefutable evidence stating that there is no God, but that will not convince them, only make their resolve stronger. Faith is something that I find hard to understand. I guess mine is a scientific mind, but I need some kind of hard proof if I plan on believing something. The Bible is not it for me. There are so many things in there that go against my moral grain, that I almost shun it. Where is the social equality in the Bible, for example? I'll end my discussion here, but yeah, I have to say that faith is the one thing that any Christian is required to have, and if they don't, they are not a true Christian.

I'm not going to try writing you a thesis on the subject and what credentials do I have anyway. But there is already a very credible answer to your questions that is written and so far out of my class that I couldn't hold a candle to it and that is in the form of two books written by 'Hans Kung', a renoun German theologian, historian,philospher, etc. and author. He's a hard read but if you read with an open mind and have the vocabulary and intelligence to understand him, I believe he can convince you in an intellectual manner like no other man could. The first book I read of his is titled, 'Does God Exist' and the second one is, 'On Being a Christian'. Believe me this guy has read every work by every philospher, every theologian, every historian, and every atheist/agnostic that ever lived and he's the only person I know of that can even come close to debating with them or with the most intelligent scientists. Do yourself a big favor and read some of his works. One of my favorite sayings of his is; 'Why is there something rather than nothing'. No scientist/atheist who doesn't believe in God can give a logical answer to this question. And no one can prove God doesn't exist just as no one can prove God does exist. You can't prove a negative and God cannot be put to a scienticfic test. If he could he wouldn't be God, would he? Read Hans Kung and get back to me in a couple weeks. You can't read him in a few nights like some fictional novel. He's extremely brilliant and profound.
And you are correct, the bible is not infallible or without error. It was written by men mostly after the fact but it isn't meant to be historically correct. Hans will expain this for you much better than I can.

The Bible has enterpretations because of how people are raised. Different upbringing, cultures, feelings. All you need to know is that if you are a good person to all including yourself that is all that counts. Love is God and God is love. You wouldn't steal from your neighbor if you have love for your neighbor. All things good is what you need to keep in perspective. This is my only simple explanation to you of what the Bible should be about. It teaches us to be good.

Because it is the inspired Word of God and He doesn't make mistakes - an almighty God is certainly capable of guiding man what to write..man is free to either accept or reject this, just as he is free to accept or reject or reject Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savour..I am a sinner saved by His grace - not perfect, but forgiven..I wish you the best !!

So, amblessed, let me see if I understand your argument.. You believe that it is pure and unadulterated, 'just because'? You have avoided responding to any reference of the corruption or censorship of the document and your argument is only, 'it just is'? What about the Council of Nicea? Were the untold documents concerning the life of Christ which were destroyed and forbidden to be in the Bible not worth mentioning? How do you overlook such a well-documented event which chops the bible into pieces and throws much of it away? Was that work directed by God?

I choose to accept - you choose to reject - the consequences will be eternal - simple as that, have a great week !!

amblessed, I have a great opportunity for you! There is a bridge in Brooklyn and I just inherited it from my uncle. I don't want it and I'll sell it to you for $10,000, and it must be worth millions. Believe this, just because! Don't think about it!

WOW Smart comment. I must say.. I wonder why amblessed has added me as a friend?? And you know what are really annoying are words spelled incorrectly.

I'd buy that bridge, but you know what - it won't last forever - my salvation will..have a great week !!

I'm with Amblessed on this one. . . . . as for the word Agnostic. http://en.wikipedia....

rnealw, Thanks for the link to the Wiki Agnostic page. very informative.

Hey Heathenscum,
God has allowed His word to be protected and preserved over the generations. All throughout history man has to eradicate the bible because of its lack of liberal theology. There are many documented proofs of this. Hitler for example tried to have every bible burned, Russia made it against the law to even have a bible, China will arrest you and condemn you for mentioning or gathering in a place to have a bible discussion. Why then in all these areas are Christian underground churches thriving if there is no truth to God's word. Surely not by accident. These are only a few places that today are hungering and yearning for biblical truth not because it only gives them hope but because the bible is,'living, breathing and active' as is described within its pages.
People like acronyms. B I B L E. Beautiful. Instruction, Before, Leaving, Earth.
Try typing in 'The peoples gospel hour' or 'Perry F. Rockwood. They have very good resources for your query.

gasmanobt3,
I don't understand your argument. basically I think you have made three statements:

1. God has protected his word... Great! How do you know? I am asking for some kind of examination of the facts, not just a statement of belief.

2. People have tried to eradicate the bible throughout history and failed. OK, how does this statement address the question of it's accuracy?

3.People are hungering for the bible and underground churches are thriving because it gives them hope. Great! Again, does this address the question of the accuracy of the bible?

I am glad that you believe in the bible unquestioningly, you must take great comfort from it. What I was hoping for from you was some sort of statement of any kind of evidence or facts that were, at least, related to my question. Better yet I would love to hear an explanation that would illuminate in any way the inconsistencies in the bible. My greatest hope would be to have someone give me a scholarly or at least well-thought-out opinion on how well-educated christians can believe the book is accurate when there are so many well documented mistranslations and that huge parts of the scriptures were rewritten or just dropped rom the bible in the centuries after christ. That would be GREAT! Just stating your opinion that it is true is not an argument. It is just a feeling that is un-examined.

I told myself that I wasn't going to get in on this thread any more but one of gasmanobt3's claims is new to me. Hitler wanted to burn Bibles? I never heard that one before. Even though Hitler's religious views were rather Bizare he still considered himself a good Catholic. Hitler had an concordant with the Roman Catholic Church where in exchange for agreeing not to criticize the NAZI party they were allowed to operate freely in Germany. The RCC itself stayed neutral in WWII having followers on both sides.

Odd. . . I thought the Church was alive and well in both Russia and China. Actually I know it is. I know people Who are involved in mission work in both places.

Lets see, the bible having no flaws huh? Let me see. The catholic book has more books then the NIV Bible. Thats the first step. Also many have thought that the scribs placed in the bible words to make the Roman Catholic right or something like that. Although I must say there are some things the Catholic hold in their religion that many dont have. Both catholic and chritian have the same people and God in their books, Yet the two are not the same. Adding and removing was as God said a geat sin. But The pope who holds such power over these documents can it be changed or not changed we may never know. Yet I guess if there was a false thing in the Bible we really wouldn't know where to start looking. Some say the Knights templar held a truth that the church was trying to destory and many of the Knights were killed for it and they went underground after wards. They are now The Mansons and the Illumanti. Maybe they had a secret thats wasn't allowed to be known about Religion. I must say that your question is a tough one. The best answer may just be, who knows. Till we have prof of which is right and which is wrong I guess we just gotta hope its right or just reject it ,say its wrong. Its a path which you give all the way or give nothing. Hopefully something may lead you further to answer you seek. Good luck on finding your answer though.

Heathen..., I'll do a bit of non litergical research and get back to you on inerrancy issues and accuracy for you. It shouldn't take long. I'm glad that you're open minded about trying to find the truth about issues.
As for the other people, yes I know the church in these areas are and were very hard pressed and have been present in those countries and others for years. I'm not that naive. Anyways, my point is that the church had been forced underground and despite that the church had grown. I know a missionary in our congregation who said to us that from O.M.'s people in these countries, people are coming to faith in Christ at enormous numbers.
Also, yes Hitler did try to form his own system of religion and therefore ordered all other sources of faith, not just bibles, be destroyed.

Heathen..,
Try this web site..

http://www.ucgstp.org/lit/gn/gn053/bibletrue.htm
It's a big site and maybe it'll help.

kmr1763 said it in a couple of words up top. Faith=Forsaking All In Trusting Him (Jesus) Hebrews 11:1 clearly states, 'Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.' I'm sure this doesn't help you tho, since you don't believe the Holy Bible is accurate. If your really interested in some evidence go to youtube and look up The Bible vs the book of mormon, infact here is the link for you http://youtube.com/watch?v=G1mFdO1wB08 I found that packed full of evidences that you are looking for. As for your belief in the apostasy (that the Bible is flawed) that is mormonism. God tells us in Revelation 22:18-19 'For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book: and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.' Another good source for the things that are being talked about here is http://www.carm.org/. Down in the religious movements you will find information regarding things of different 'religions'. But, Jesus isn't about religion, He is Salvation.

This is a tough question to answer.

First, I think that the Bible teaches correctly what G-d wanted it to teach, how human beings are saved and restored to a right relationship with G-d and themselves and the rest of creation. To do this, G-d intervened in history. No other people makes such an outrageous claim, but the Jews and Christians and Muslims. Other religions have myths, set outside of history, or stories such as of the Buddha, of holy people but not G-d.

The Bible, then, is the record of the dialogue between G-d and G-d's people. We can trust it because it does fit history, remarkably well (given its origin), and because the faithful still remember and hand on the experience. Furthermore, as C.S.Lewis noted, if there were such a G-d as the Christians believe in, and this G-d decided to save the world (rather than starting over), the Bible tells just the right sort of improbable story that such a being would do.

More, the experience of the faithful continues to tell us that the heart of the Bible is true, that it does describe the G-d we find. So experience is shaped by and also confirms the Bible.

Now, what about the differences? Well, we might expect variations after a 2000-3000+ year tradition of oral tradition followed by written copying by hand. However, the central parts of the story are generally the best preserved, and most variations are minor. Even the additional books in the Orthodox and Catholic Old Testaments (the Apocrypha) are generally viewed as not so critical as, say, the Law and Prophets.

Nor does the Pope have, or did they ever have, that sort of power over the word. Consider: after the Council of Nicea (325), there were literally battles, wars with death and all, over whether Jesus was like (homoi) or of like substance (homoiousious) or of the same substance (homoousious). These lasted some fifty or more years. Later, when Jerome retranslated the Bible into Latin, the Vulgate, and changed Jonah's 'gourd' plant into another kind, there were riots in Carthage that Augustine had to reprimand his people severely about. 'Give us back our gourds!' they demanded. Given that sort of feeling, how likely is it that there could be an organized campaign to change the Word of God, and have it meekly accepted? No, there is no historical record, because it didn't happen.

Similarly, the question of what books were kept and which ones rejected: the Church kept those books that best described the G-d they had experienced. They rejected the ones that told of another G-d, such as a Jesus who only seemed to be human (docetism), which makes G-d a liar, or a Jesus who kept the crucial teaching to just a few (gnosticism), which describes a G-d who really doesn't care about most of us. Neither is the G-d I have experience, or been taught about.

In the end, we believe the Bible, among other things, because we know the history of it and of the people that believe and keep it. And because it confirms what we ourselves have experienced of G-d.

Just another thought. It came up how the Catholic and Protestant Bibles differ. The Catholics (and Orthodox) have about seven more books and parts of books in the Old Testament than the Protestants (and Jews). Sometimes these are included as 'Aprocrypha,' either between the Old and New Testament or after the rest.

Anyway, this is what happened. The Jews had a set of scriptures, the Torah (Pentateuch, Genesis through Deutronomy) and the Prophets (The Histories from Joshua to Kings plus the books we now call the Prophets). Thus, Jesus speaks of the Law and the Prophets as the Scriptures. They also had a set of less well defined books, the Writings, including the Psalms, Proverbs and other Wisdom literature, and Esther, among other books.

Now, in Alexandria, a Greek-speaking community of Jews developed, and they translated the Bible (OT) into Greek, eventually getting the Septuagint. This Old Testament included some other works on the fringe of the Bible, like Maccabees, Judith, Tobit, Sirach. That was OK, as long as nobody griped. However, when the Christians came along and took over this Greek Bible as their own Old Testament, the Jews reacted by tightening their own Scriptures, rejecting those books and parts that were not found in Hebrew.

Fast forward to the Reformation. Luther wanted to purify the Bible of excessive Catholic tendencies, and one way was to reject these 'additional' books not in the Jewish Scriptures. The Catholics, though, just kept on using the Bible as they had kept it for 1500 years. So, we say it's not that the Catholics added stuff to the Bible; it's that the Protestants took stuff away. Anyway, that's how we have two (or more) different versions of the Bible.

Someone said that 'God doesn't make mistakes...'

Then why did he have to flood the world and start over?

It was because of man's extremely unrepentant and defying attitude that brought His righteous judgment on mankind. God was NOT the One who made the mistake it was mankinds own choice of free will. Mankind grieved the Lord in His heart because of the sin that overwhelmingly permiated through the society of Noah's day.
It was man who defaced the earth and man's own freedom to choose to disobey God's law that brought judgment. Not to mention the people were warned to turn from their wicked ways, so they were given a second chance and yet man turned aside to his own devices and depravities. Much like today.

So... he made a 'defiant' creation... that was a mistake...

No, He gave us the freedom to choose whom to serve. Think about like this. If you had no freedom to choose to believe what you wanted, where to live, what job to have, to go where you wanted and when you wanted. Then what would you be? A robot, forced to do someone else's way. Alomst like a dictatorship. God isn't like that though. He wants us to freely choose His way because we want to. Not to be forced to. Man, because of his sinful heart, will, without God's help not force, choose to do his own thing. Thereby causing himself no end of problems and heartaches. God's design for us is that we would choose to follow Him and avoid a lifetime and eternity of not knowing Him.

There's a lot of truth in what gasmanobt3 has written and I think he's on the right tract. I would like to suggest to gasmanobt3 and to others who have stated their opinions on this thread to take the time to read the book by Hans King called, 'Why I Am Still a Christian'. It's a much shorter and concise version of his book 'On Being a Christian', ie. it's only 82 pages compared to the latter of something like 700 pages. IMO, It will be of interest to both Christians and non Christian alike. You can read this 82 page book in an hour and I firmly believe you will find some very profound food for thought. If you enjoy his writing you can go to the next step and read his more detailed book On Being a Christian, a much harder read but extremely profound. Hans Kung is a true 'genius', a theologian, a scientist, historian, and philosopher but still a firm believer in Christ. I won't even try quoting him as it would be a great injustice to his incredible intellect.

There's been WAAAY more of mankind's 'extremely unrepentant and defying attitude' since biblical times, why has God not flooded the world again?

Oh, and has he figured out a way to keep the ducks and fish from surviving?

101 Clear Contradictions in the Bible

1. Who incited David to count the fighting men of Israel?

God did (2 Samuel 24: 1)
Satan did (I Chronicles 2 1:1)
2. In that count how many fighting men were found in Israel?

Eight hundred thousand (2 Samuel 24:9)
One million, one hundred thousand (I Chronicles 21:5)
3. How many fighting men were found in Judah?

Five hundred thousand (2 Samuel 24:9)
Four hundred and seventy thousand (I Chronicles 21:5)
4. God sent his prophet to threaten David with how many years of famine?

Seven (2 Samuel 24:13)
Three (I Chronicles 21:12)
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. When did David bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem? Before defeating the Philistines or after?

After (2 Samuel 5 and 6)
Before (I Chronicles 13 and 14)
10. 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)
11. 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)
12. How many stalls for horses did Solomon have?

Forty thousand (I Kings 4:26)
Four thousand (2 chronicles 9:25)
13. 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)
14. 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)
15. Solomon built a facility containing how many baths?

Two thousand (1 Kings 7:26)
Over three thousand (2 Chronicles 4:5)
16. 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)
17. How many were the children of Zattu?

Nine hundred and forty-five (Ezra 2:8)
Eight hundred and forty-five (Nehemiah 7:13)
18. 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)
19. How many were the children of Adin?

Four hundred and fifty-four (Ezra 2:15)
Six hundred and fifty-five (Nehemiah 7:20)
20. How many were the children of Hashum?

Two hundred and twenty-three (Ezra 2:19)
Three hundred and twenty-eight (Nehemiah 7:22)
21. 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)
22. Ezra 2:64 and Nehemiah 7:66 agree that the total number of the whole assembly was 42,360. Yet the numbers do not add up to anything close. The totals obtained from each book is as follows:

29,818 (Ezra)
31,089 (Nehemiah)
23. How many singers accompanied the assembly?

Two hundred (Ezra 2:65)
Two hundred and forty-five (Nehemiah 7:67)
24. What was the name of King Abijahs mother?

Michaiah, daughter of Uriel of Gibeah (2 Chronicles 13:2)
Maachah, daughter of Absalom (2 Chronicles 11:20) But Absalom had only one daughter whose name was Tamar (2 Samuel 14:27)
25. Did Joshua and the Israelites capture Jerusalem?

Yes (Joshua 10:23, 40)
No (Joshua 15:63)
26. Who was the father of Joseph, husband of Mary?

Jacob (Matthew 1:16)
Hell (Luke 3:23)
27. Jesus descended from which son of David?

Solomon (Matthew 1:6)
Nathan(Luke3:31)
28. Who was the father of Shealtiel?

Jechoniah (Matthew 1:12)
Neri (Luke 3:27)
29. Which son of Zerubbabel was an ancestor of Jesus Christ?

Abiud (Matthew 1: 13)
Rhesa (Luke 3:27) But the seven sons of Zerubbabel are as follows: I.Meshullam, I. Hananiah, iii. Hashubah, I've. Ohel, v.Berechiah, vi. Hasadiah, viii. Jushabhesed (I Chronicles 3:19, 20). The names Abiud and Rhesa do not fit in anyway.
30. Who was the father of Uzziah?

Joram (Matthew 1:8)
Amaziah (2 Chronicles 26:1)
31. Who was the father of Jechoniah?

Josiah (Matthew 1:11)
Jeholakim (I Chronicles 3:16)
32. How many generations were there from the Babylonian exile until Christ?

Matthew says fourteen (Matthew 1:17)
But a careful count of the generations reveals only thirteen (see Matthew 1: 12-16)
33. Who was the father of Shelah?

Cainan (Luke 3:35-36)
Arphaxad (Genesis I: 12)
34. Was John the Baptist Elijah who was to come?

Yes (Matthew I: 14, 17:10-13)
No (John 1:19-21)
35. Would Jesus inherit Davids throne?

Yes. So said the angel (Luke 1:32)
No, since he is a descendant of Jehoiakim (see Matthew 1: I 1, I Chronicles 3:16). And Jehoiakim was cursed by God so that none of his descendants can sit upon Davids throne (Jeremiah 36:30)
36. Jesus rode into Jerusalem on how many animals?

One - a colt (Mark 11:7; cf Luke 19:3 5). And they brought the colt to Jesus and threw their garments on it; and he sat upon it.
Two - a colt and an a*s (Matthew 21:7). They brought the a*s and the colt and put their garments on them and he sat thereon.
37. How did Simon Peter find out that Jesus was the Christ?

By a revelation from heaven (Matthew 16:17)
His brother Andrew told him (John 1:41)
38. Where did Jesus first meet Simon Peter and Andrew?

By the sea of Galilee (Matthew 4:18-22)
On the banks of river Jordan (John 1:42). After that, Jesus decided to go to Galilee (John 1:43)
39. When Jesus met Jairus was Jairus daughter already dead?

Yes. Matthew 9:18 quotes him as saying, My daughter has just died.
No. Mark 5:23 quotes him as saying, My little daughter is at the point of death.
40. Did Jesus allow his disciples to keep a staff on their journey?

Yes (Mark 6:8)
No (Matthew 10:9; Luke 9:3)
41. Did Herod think that Jesus was John the Baptist?

Yes (Matthew 14:2; Mark 6:16)
No (Luke 9:9)
42. Did John the Baptist recognize Jesus before his baptism?

Yes (Matthew 3:13-14)
No (John 1:32,33)
43. Did John the Baptist recognize Jesus after his baptism?

Yes (John 1:32, 33)
No (Matthew 11:2)
44. According to the Gospel of John, what did Jesus say about bearing his own witness?

If I bear witness to myself, my testimony is not true (John 5:3 1)
Even if I do bear witness to myself, my testimony is true (John 8:14)
45. When Jesus entered Jerusalem did he cleanse the temple that same day?

Yes (Matthew 21:12)
No. He went into the temple and looked around, but since it was very late he did nothing. Instead, he went to Bethany to spend the night and returned the next morning to cleanse the temple (Mark I 1:1- 17)
46. The Gospels say that Jesus cursed a fig tree. Did the tree wither at once?

Yes. (Matthew 21:19)
No. It withered overnight (Mark I: 20)
47. Did Judas kiss Jesus?

Yes (Matthew 26:48-50)
No. Judas could not get close enough to Jesus to kiss him (John 18:3-12)
48. What did Jesus say about Peters denial?

The co*k will not crow till you have denied me three times (John 13:38)
Before the co*k crows twice you will deny me three times (Mark 14:30) . When the co*k crowed once, the three denials were not yet complete (see Mark 14:72). Therefore prediction (a) failed.
49. Did Jesus bear his own cross?

Yes (John 19:17)
No (Matthew 27:31-32)
50. Did Jesus die before the curtain of the temple was torn?

Yes (Matthew 27:50-51; Mark lS:37-38)
No. After the curtain was torn, then Jesus crying with a loud voice, said, Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit! And having said this he breathed his last (Luke 23:45-46)
51. Did Jesus say anything secretly?

No. I have said nothing secretly (John 18:20)
Yes. He did not speak to them without a parable, but privately to his own disciples he explained everything (Mark 4:34). The disciples asked him Why do you speak to them in parables? He said, To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given (Matthew 13: 1 0-11)
52. Where was Jesus at the sixth hour on the day of the crucifixion?

On the cross (Mark 15:23)
In Pilates court (John 19:14)
53. The gospels say that two thieves were crucified along with Jesus. Did both thieves mock Jesus?

Yes (Mark 15:32)
No. One of them mocked Jesus, the other defended Jesus (Luke 23:43)
54. Did Jesus ascend to Paradise the same day of the crucifixion?

Yes. He said to the thief who defended him, Today you will be with me in Paradise (Luke 23:43)
No. He said to Mary Magdelene two days later, I have not yet ascended to the Father (John 20:17)
55. When Paul was on the road to Damascus he saw a light and heard a voice. Did those who were with him hear the voice?

Yes (Acts9:7)
No (Acts22:9)
56. When Paul saw the light he fell to the ground. Did his traveling companions also fall to the ground?

Yes (Acts 26:14)
No (Acts 9:7)
57. Did the voice spell out on the spot what Pauls duties were to be?

Yes (Acts 26:16-18)
No. The voice commanded Paul to go into the city of Damascus and there he will be told what he must do. (Acts9:7;22: 10)
58. 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)
59. How many members of the house of Jacob came to Egypt?

Seventy souls (Genesis 4 & 27)
Seventy-five souls (Acts 7:14)
60. What did Judas do with the blood money he received for betraying Jesus?

He bought a field (Acts 1: 18)
He threw all of it into the temple and went away. The priests could not put the blood money into the temple treasury, so they used it to buy a field to bury strangers (Matthew 27:5)
61. How did Judas die?

After he threw the money into the temple he went away and hanged himself (Matthew 27:5)
After he bought the field with the price of his evil deed he fell headlong and burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out (Acts 1:18)
62. Why is the field called Field of Blood?

Because the priests bought it with the blood money (Matthew 27:8)
Because of the bloody death of Judas therein (Acts 1:19)
63. Who is a ransom for whom?

The Son of Man came...to give his life as a ransom for many (Mark 10:45). Christ Jesus who gave himself as a ransom for all... (I Timothy 2:5-6)
The wicked is a ransom for the righteous, and the faithless for the upright (Proverbs 21:18)
64. Is the law of Moses useful?

Yes. All scripture is... profitable... (2 Timothy 3:16)
No. . . . A former commandment is set aside because of its weakness and uselessness... (Hebrews 7:18)
65. What was the exact wording on the cross?

This is Jesus the King of the Jews (Matthew 27:37)
The King of the Jews (Mark 15:26)
This is the King of the Jews (Luke 23:38)
Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews (John 19:19)
66. Did Herod want to kill John the Baptist?

Yes (Matthew 14:5)
No. It was Herodias, the wife of Herod who wanted to kill him. But Herod knew that he was a righteous man and kept him safe (Mark 6:20)
67. Who was the tenth disciple of Jesus in the list of twelve?

Thaddaeus (Matthew 10: 1-4; Mark 3:13 -19)
Judas son of James is the corresponding name in Lukes gospel (Luke 6:12-16)
68. Jesus saw a man sitat the tax collectors office and called him to be his disciple. What was his name?

Matthew (Matthew 9:9)
Levi (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27)
69. Was Jesus crucified on the daytime before the Passover meal or the daytime after?

After (Mark 14:12-17)
Before. Before the feast of the Passover (John 1) Judas went out at night (John 13:30). The other disciples thought he was going out to buy supplies to prepare for the Passover meal (John 13:29). When Jesus was arrested, the Jews did not enter Pilates judgment hail because they wanted to stay clean to eat the Passover (John 18:28). When the judgment was pronounced against Jesus, it was about the sixth hour on the day of Preparation for the Passover (John 19:14)
70. Did Jesus pray to The Father to prevent the crucifixion?

Yes. (Matthew 26:39; Mark 14:36; Luke 22:42)
No. (John 12:27)
71. In the gospels which say that Jesus prayed to avoid the cross, how many times did he move away from his disciples to pray?

Three (Matthew 26:36-46 and Mark 14:32-42)
One. No opening is left for another two times. (Luke 22:39-46)
72. Matthew and Mark agree that Jesus went away and prayed three times. What were the words of the second prayer?

Mark does not give the words but he says that the words were the same as the first prayer (Mark 14:3 9)
Matthew gives us the words, and we can see that they are not the same as in the first (Matthew 26:42)
73. What did the centurion say when Jesus dies?

Certainly this man was innocent (Luke 23:47)
Truly this man was the Son of God (Mark 15:39)
74. When Jesus said My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken Me ? in what language did he speak?

Hebrew: the words are Eloi, Eloi ..(Matthew 27:46)
Aramaic: the words are Eloi, Eloi .. (Mark 15:34)
75. According to the gospels, what were the last words of Jesus before he died?

Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit! (Luke 23:46)
'It is finished' (John 19:30)
76. When Jesus entered Capernaum he healed the slave of a centurion. Did the centurion come personally to request Jesus for this?

Yes (Matthew 8:5)
No. He sent some elders of the Jews and his friends (Luke 7:3,6)
77.

Adam was told that if and when he eats the forbidden fruit he would die the same day (Genesis 2:17)
Adam ate the fruit and went on to live to a ripe old age of 930 years (Genesis 5:5)
78.

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)
79. Apart from Jesus did anyone else ascend to heaven?

No (John 3:13)
Yes. And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven (2 Kings 2:11)
80. Who was high priest when David went into the house of God and ate the consecrated bread?

Abiathar (Mark 2:26)
Ahimelech, the father of Abiathar (I Samuel 1:1; 22:20)
81. Was Jesus body wrapped in spices before burial in accordance with Jewish burial customs?

Yes and his female disciples witnessed his burial (John 19:39-40)
No. Jesus was simply wrapped in a linen shroud. Then the women bought and prepared spices so that they may go and anoint him [Jesus) (Mark 16: 1)
82. When did the women buy the spices?

After the Sabbath was past (Mark 16:1)
Before the Sabbath. The women prepared spices and ointments. Then, on the Sabbath they rested according to the commandment (Luke 23:55 to 24:1)
83. At what time of day did the women visit the tomb?

Toward the dawn (Matthew 28: 1)
When the sun had risen (Mark 16:2)
84. What was the purpose for which the women went to the tomb?

To anoint Jesus body with spices (Mark 16: 1; Luke 23:55 to 24: 1)
To see the tomb. Nothing about spices here (Matthew 28: 1)
For no specified reason. In this gospel the wrapping with spices had been done before the Sabbath (John 20: 1)
85. A large stone was placed at the entrance of the tomb. Where was the stone when the women arrived?

They saw that the stone was Rolled back (Mark 16:4) They found the stone rolled away from the tomb (Luke 24:2) They saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb (John 20:1)
As the women approached, an angel descended from heaven, rolled away the stone, and conversed with the women. Matthew made the women witness the spectacular rolling away of the stone (Matthew 28:1-6)
86. Did anyone tell the women what happened to Jesus body?

Yes. A young man in a white robe (Mark 16:5). Two men ... in dazzling apparel later described as angels (Luke 24:4 and 24:23). An angel - the one who rolled back the stone (Matthew 16:2). In each case the women were told that Jesus had risen from the dead (Matthew 28:7; Mark 16:6; Luke 24:5 footnote)
No. Mary met no one and returned saying, They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him (John 20:2)
87. When did Mary Magdelene first meet the resurrected Jesus? And how did she react?

Mary and the other women met Jesus on their way back from their first and only visit to the tomb. They took hold of his feet and worshipped him (Matthew 28:9)
On her second visit to the tomb Mary met Jesus just outside the tomb. When she saw Jesus she did not recognize him. She mistook him for the gardener. She still thinks that Jesus body is laid to rest somewhere and she demands to know where. But when Jesus said her name she at once recognized him and called him Teacher. Jesus said to her, Do not hold me... (John 20:11 to 17)
88. What was Jesus instruction for his disciples?

Tell my brethren to go to Galilee, and there they will see me (Matthew 2 8: 10)
Go to my brethren and say to them, I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God (John 20:17)
89. When did the disciples return to Galilee?

Immediately, because when they saw Jesus in Galilee some doubted (Matthew 28:17). This period of uncertainty should not persist
After at least 40 days. That evening the disciples were still in Jerusalem (Luke 24:3 3). Jesus appeared to them there and told them, stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high (Luke 24:49). He was appearing to them during forty days (Acts 1:3), and charged them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise ... (Acts 1:4)
90. To whom did the Midianites sell Joseph?

To the Ishmaelites (Genesis 37:28)
To Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh (Genesis 37:36)
91. Who brought Joseph to Egypt?

The Ishmaelites bought Joseph and then took Joseph to Egypt (Genesis 37:28)
The Midianites had sold him in Egypt (Genesis 37:36)
Joseph said to his brothers I am your brother, Joseph, whom you sold into Egypt (Genesis 45:4)
92. Does God change his mind?

Yes. The word of the Lord came to Samuel: I repent that I have made Saul King... (I Samuel 15:10 to 11)
No. God will not lie or repent; for he is not a man, that he should repent (I Samuel 15:29)
Yes. And the Lord repented that he had made Saul King over Israel (I Samuel 15:35). Notice that the above three quotes are all from the same chapter of the same book! In addition, the Bible shows that God repented on several other occasions:

I. The Lord was sorry that he made man (Genesis 6:6)

I am sorry that I have made them (Genesis 6:7)

I. And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do to his people (Exodus 32:14).

iii. (Lots of other such references).

93. The Bible says that for each miracle Moses and Aaron demonstrated the magicians did the same by their secret arts. Then comes the following feat:

Moses and Aaron converted all the available water into blood (Exodus 7:20-21)
The magicians did the same (Exodus 7:22). This is impossible, since there would have been no water left to convert into blood.
94. Who killed Goliath?

David (I Samuel 17:23, 50)
Elhanan (2 Samuel 21:19)
95. Who killed Saul?

Saul took his own sword and fell upon it... Thus Saul died... (I Samuel 31:4-6)
An Amalekite slew him (2 Samuel 1:1- 16)
96. Does every man sin?

Yes. There is no man who does not sin (I Kings 8:46; see also 2 Chronicles 6:36; Proverbs 20:9; Ecclesiastes 7:20; and I John 1:810)
No. True Christians cannot possibly sin, because they are the children of God. Every one who believes that Jesus is the Christ is a child of God.. (I John 5:1). We should be called children of God; and so we are (I John 3: 1). He who loves is born of God (I John 4:7). No one born of God commits sin; for Gods nature abides in him, and he cannot sin because he is born of God (I John 3:9). But, then again, Yes! If we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us (I John 1:8)
97. Who will bear whose burden?

Bear one anothers burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ (Galatians 6:2)
Each man will have to bear his own load (Galatians 6:5)
98. How many disciples did Jesus appear to after his resurrection?

Twelve (I Corinthians 15:5)
Eleven (Matthew 27:3-5 and Acts 1:9-26, see also Matthew 28:16; Mark 16:14 footnote; Luke 24:9; Luke 24:3 3)
99. Where was Jesus three days after his baptism?

After his baptism, the spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. And he was in the wilderness forty days ... (Mark 1:12-13)
Next day after the baptism, Jesus selected two disciples. Second day: Jesus went to Galilee - two more disciples. Third day: Jesus was at a wedding feast in Cana in Galilee (see John 1:35; 1:43; 2:1-11)
100. Was baby Jesus life threatened in Jerusalem?

Yes, so Joseph fled with him to Egypt and stayed there until Herod died (Matthew 2:13 23)
No. The family fled nowhere. They calmly presented the child at the Jerusalem temple according to the Jewish customs and returned to Galilee (Luke 2:21-40)
101. When Jesus walked on water how did the disciples respond?

They worshipped him, saying, Truly you are the Son of God (Matthew 14:33)
They were utterly astounded, for they did not understand about the loaves, but their hearts were hardened (Mark 6:51-52)
Here is the question for all 2 billion christians.

Do you Christians attribute all these contradictions to God Almighy?

A rebuttal:
1. Does God incite David to conduct the census of his people (2 Samuel 4:1), or does Satan (1 Chronicles 21:1)?

(Category: misunderstood how God works in history)

This seems an apparent discrepancy unless of course both statements are true. It was towards the end of David's reign, and David was looking back over his brilliant conquests, which had brought the Canaanite, Syrian, and Phoenician kingdoms into a state of vassalage and dependency on Israel. He had an attitude of pride and self-admiration for his achievements, and was thinking more in terms of armaments and troops than in terms of the mercies of God.

The Lord therefore decided that it was time that David be brought to his knees, where he would once again be cast back onto the mercy of God. So he let him go ahead with his census, in order to find out just how much good it would do him, as the only thing this census would accomplish would be to inflate the national ego (intimated in Joab's warning against carrying out the census in 1 Chronicles 21:3). As soon as the numbering was completed, God intended to chasten the nation with a disastrous plague which would bring about an enormous loss of life (in fact the lives of 70,000 Israelites according to 2 Samuel 24:15).

What about Satan? Why would he get himself involved in this affair (according to 1 Chronicles 21:1) if God had already prompted David to commit the folly he had in mind? It seems his reasons were entirely malicious, knowing that a census would displease the Lord (1 Chronicles 21:7-8), and so he also incited David to carry it through.

Yet this is nothing new, for there are a number of other occurrences in the Bible where both the Lord and Satan were involved in soul-searching testings and trials:

In the book of Job, chapters one and two we find a challenge to Satan from God allowing Satan to bring upon Job his calamities. God's purpose was to purify Job's faith, and to strengthen his character by means of discipline through adversity, whereas Satan's purpose was purely malicious, wishing Job as much harm as possible so that he would recant his faith in his God.

Similarly both God and Satan are involved in the sufferings of persecuted Christians according to 1 Peter 4:19 and 5:8. God's purpose is to strengthen their faith and to enable them to share in the sufferings of Christ in this life, that they may rejoice with Him in the glories of heaven to come (1 Peter 4:13-14), whereas Satan's purpose is to 'devour' them (1 Peter 5:8), or rather to draw them into self-pity and bitterness, and down to his level.

Both God and Satan allowed Jesus the three temptations during his ministry on earth. God's purpose for these temptations was for him to triumph completely over the very tempter who had lured the first Adam to his fall, whereas Satan's purpose was to deflect the saviour from his messianic mission.

In the case of Peter's three denials of Jesus in the court of the high priest, it was Jesus himself who points out the purposes of both parties involvement when he says in Luke 22:31-32, 'Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for you Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.'

And finally the crucifixion itself bears out yet another example where both God and Satan are involved. Satan exposed his purpose when he had the heart of Judas filled with treachery and hate (John 13:27), causing him to betray Jesus. The Lord's reasoning behind the crucifixion, however, was that Jesus, the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world should give his life as a ransom for many, so that once again sinful man could relish in the relationship lost at the very beginning, in the garden of Eden, and thereby enter into a relationship which is now eternal.

Thus we have five other examples where both the Lord and Satan were involved together though with entirely different motives. Satan's motive in all these examples, including the census by David was driven by malicious intent, while the Lord in all these cases showed an entirely different motive. His was a benevolent motive with a view to eventual victory, while simultaneously increasing the usefulness of the person tested. In every case Satan's success was limited and transient; while in the end God's purpose was well served furthering His cause substantially.

(Archer 1982:186-188)

2. 2 Samuel 24:9 gives the total population for Israel as 800,000, whereas 1 Chronicles 21:5 says it was 1,100,000.

(Category: misunderstood the historical context or misunderstood the author's intent)

There are a number of ways to understand not only this problem but the next challenge as well, since they both refer to the same passages and to the same census.

It is possible that the differences between the two accounts are related to the unofficial and incomplete nature of the census (which will be discussed later), or that the book of Samuel presents rounded numbers, particularly for Judah.

The more likely answer, however, is that one census includes categories of men that the other excludes. It is quite conceivable that the 1 Chronicles 21:5 figure included all the available men of fighting age, whether battle-seasoned or not, whereas the 2 Samuel 24:9 account is speaking only of those who were ready for battle. Joab's report in 2 Samuel 24 uses the word 'is hayil, which is translated as 'mighty men', or battle-seasoned troops, and refers to them numbering 800,000 veterans. It is reasonable that there were an additional 300,000 men of military age kept in the reserves, but not yet involved in field combat. The two groups would therefore make up the 1,100,000 men in the 1 Chronicles 21 account which does not employ the Hebrew term 'is hayil to describe them.

(Archer 1982:188-189 and Light of Life I 1992:189-190)

3. 2 Samuel 24:9 gives the round figure Of 500,000 fighting men in Judah, which was 30,000 more than the corresponding item in 1 Chronicles 21:5.

(Category: misunderstood the historical context)

Observe that 1 Chronicles 21:6 clearly states that Joab did not complete the numbering, as he had not yet taken a census of the tribe of Benjamin, nor that of Levi's either, due to the fact that David came under conviction about completing the census at all. Thus the different numbers indicate the inclusion or exclusion of particular unspecified groups in the nation. We find another reference to this in 1 Chronicles 27:23-24 where it states that David did not include those twenty years old and younger, and that since Joab did not finish the census the number was not recorded in King David's Chronicle.

The procedure for conducting the census had been to start with the trans-Jordanian tribes (2 Samuel 24:5) and then shift to the northern most tribe of Dan and work southward towards Jerusalem (verse 7). The numbering of Benjamin, therefore, would have come last. Hence Benjamin would not be included with the total for Israel or of that for Judah, either. In the case of 2 Samuel 24, the figure for Judah included the already known figure of 30,000 troops mustered by Benjamin. Hence the total of 500,000 included the Benjamite contingent.

Observe that after the division of the United Kingdom into the North and the South following the death of Solomon in 930 BC, most of the Benjamites remained loyal to the dynasty of David and constituted (along with Simeon to the south) the kingdom of Judah. Hence it was reasonable to include Benjamin with Judah and Simeon in the sub-total figure of 500,000, even though Joab may not have itemized it in the first report he gave to David (1 Chronicles 21:5). Therefore the completed grand total of fighting forces available to David for military service was 1,600,000 (1,100,000 of Israel, 470,000 of Judah-Simeon, and 30,000 of Benjamin).

(Archer 1982:188-189 and Light of Life I 1992:189)

4. 2 Samuel 24:13 mentions that there will be seven years of famine whereas 1 Chronicles 21:12 mentions only three.

(Category: misunderstood the author's intent, and misunderstood the wording)

There are two ways to look at this. The first is to assume that the author of 1 Chronicles emphasized the three-year period in which the famine was to be most intense, whereas the author of 2 Samuel includes the two years prior to and after this period, during which the famine worsened and lessened respectively.

Another solution can be noticed by observing the usage of words in each passage. When you compare the two passages you will note that the wording is significantly different in 1 Chronicles 21 from that found in a 2 Samuel 24. In 2 Samuel 24:13 the question is 'shell seven years of famine come to you?' In 1 Chronicles 21:12 we find an alternative imperative, 'take for yourself either three years of famine...' From this we may reasonably conclude that 2 Samuel records the first approach of the prophet Gad to David, in which the alternative prospect was seven years; whereas the Chronicles account gives us the second and final approach of Nathan to the King, in which the Lord (doubtless in response to David's earnest entreaty in private prayer) reduced the severity of that grim alternative to three years rather than an entire span of seven. As it turned out, however, David opted for God's third preference, and thereby received three days of severe pestilence, resulting in the deaths of 70,000 men in Israel.

(Archer 1982:189-190 and Light of Life I 1992:190)

5. Was Ahaziah 22 (2 Kings 8:26) or 42 (2 Chronicles 22:2) when he began to rule over Jerusalem?

(Category: copyist error)

Because we are dealing with accounts which were written thousands of years ago, we would not expect to have the originals in our possession today, as they would have disintegrated long ago. We are therefore dependent on the copies taken from copies of those originals, which were in turn continually copied out over a period of centuries. Those who did the copying were prone to making two types of scribal errors. One concerned the spelling of proper names, and the other had to do with numbers.

The two examples of numerical discrepancy here have to do with a decade in the number given. Ahaziah is said to have been 22 in 2 Kings 8:26; while in 2 Chronicles 22:2 Ahaziah is said to have been 42. Fortunately there is enough additional information in the Biblical text to show that the correct number is 22. Earlier in 2 Kings 8:17 the author mentions that Ahaziah's father Joram ben Ahab was 32 when he became King, and he died eight years later, at the age of 40. Therefore Ahaziah could not have been 42 at the time of his father's death at age 40! Such scribal errors do not change Jewish or Christian beliefs in the least. In such a case, another portion of scripture often corrects the mistake (2 Kings 8:26 in this instance). We must also remember that the scribes who were responsible for the copies were meticulously honest in handling Biblical texts. They delivered them as they received them, without changing even obvious mistakes, which are few indeed.

(Refer to the next question for a more in-depth presentation on how scribes could misconstrue numbers within manuscripts)

(Archer 1982:206 and Light of Life I 1992:201)

6. Was Jehoiachin 18 years old (2 Kings 24:8) or 8 years old (2 Chronicles 36:9) when he became king of Jerusalem?

(Category: copyist error)

Once again there is enough information in the context of these two passages to tell us that 8 is wrong and 18 right. The age of 8 is unusually young to assume governmental leadership. However, there are certain commentators who contend that this can be entirely possible. They maintain that when Jehoiachin was eight years old, his father made him co-regent, so that he could be trained in the responsibilities of leading a kingdom. Jehoiachin then became officially a king at the age of eighteen, upon his father's death.

A more likely scenario, however, is that this is yet another case of scribal error, evidenced commonly with numbers. It may be helpful to interject here that there were three known ways of writing numbers in Hebrew. The earliest, a series of notations used by the Jewish settlers in the 5th century BC Elephantine Papyri (described in more detail below) was followed by a system whereby alphabetical letters were used for numbers. A further system was introduced whereby the spelling out of the numbers in full was prescribed by the guild of so-perim. Fortunately we have a large file of documents in papyrus from these three sources to which we can refer.

As with many of these numerical discrepancies, it is the decade number that varies. It is instructive to observe that the number notations used by the Jewish settlers in the 5th century BC Elephantine Papyri, during the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, from which this passage comes, evidences the earlier form of numerical notation. This consisted of a horizontal stroke ending in a downward hook at its right end to represent the numbers in tens (thus two horizontal strokes one above the other would be 20). Vertical strokes were used to represent anything less than ten. Thus eight would be /III III, but eighteen would be /III III with the addition of a horizontal line and downward hook above it. Similarly twenty-two would be /I followed by two horizontal hooks, and forty-two would be /I followed by two sets of horizontal hooks (please forgive the deficiencies of my computer; it is not the scholar Dr. Archer is).

If, then, the primary manuscript from which a copy was being carried out was blurred or smudged, one or more of the decadal notations could be missed by the copyist. It is far less likely that the copyist would have mistakenly seen an extra ten stroke that was not present in his original then that he would have failed to observe one that had been smudged.

In the New International Version (NIV) of the Bible, the corrections have been included in the texts. However, for clarity, footnotes at the bottom of the page mention that earlier Hebrew MSS include the scribal error, while the Septuagint MSS and Syriac as well as one Hebrew MSS include the correct numerals. It only makes sense to correct the numerals once the scribal error has been noted. This, however, in no way negates the authenticity nor the authority of the scriptures which we have.

Confirmation of this type of copyist error is found in various pagan writers as well. For example in the Behistun rock inscription set up by Darius 1, we find that number 38 gives the figure for the slain of the army of Frada as 55,243, with 6,572 prisoners, according to the Babylonian column. Copies of this inscription found in Babylon itself, records the number of prisoners as 6,973. However in the Aramaic translation of this inscription discovered at the Elephantine in Egypt, the number of prisoners was only 6,972.

Similarly in number 31 of the same inscription, the Babylonian column gives 2,045 as the number of slain in the rebellious army of Frawartish, along with 1,558 prisoners, whereas the Aramaic copy has over 1,575 as the prisoner count.

(Archer 1982:206-207, 214-215, 222, 230; Nehls pg.17-18; Light of Life I 1992:204-205)

7. Did king Jehoiachin rule over Jerusalem for three months (2 Kings 24:8), or for three months and ten days (2 Chronicles 36:9)?

(Category: misunderstood the author's intent)

Here again, as we found in challenge number 2 and 4, the author of the Chronicles has been more specific with his numbering, whereas the author of Kings is simply rounding off the number of months, assuming that the additional ten days is not significant enough to mention.

8. Did the chief of the mighty men of David lift up his spear and killed 800 men (2 Samuel 23:8) or only 300 men (1 Chronicles 11:11)?

(Category:misunderstood the historical context or misunderstood the author's intent)

It is quite possible that both authors may have described two different incidents, though by the same man, or one author may have only mentioned in part what the other author mentions in full.

(Light of Life I 1992:187)

9. Did David bring the Ark of the Covenant to Jerusalem after defeating the Philistines (2 Samuel 5 and 6), or before (1 Chronicles chapters 13 and 14)?

(Category: didn't read the entire text)

This is not really a problem. Shabbir Ally should have continued reading on further to 1 Chronicles 15, as he would then have seen that David brought the Ark after defeating the Philistines. The reason for this is that the Israelites moved the Ark of the covenant twice. The first time, they moved it from Baal, prior to the defeat of the Philistines, as we see in 2 Samuel 5 and 6 and in 1 Chronicles 15. Once the prophet Samuel narrates David's victory over the Philistines, he tells us about both times when the Ark was moved. However in 1 Chronicles, the order is as follows: the Ark was first moved from baal; then David defeated the Philistines; and finally, the Ark was moved from the House of Obed-Edom.

Therefore the two accounts are not contradictory at all. What we have here is simply one prophet choosing to give us the complete history of the Ark at once (rather than referring to it later) and another presenting the history in a different way. In both cases the timing of events is the same.

The same could be said of the Qur'an. In Sura 2 we are introduced to the fall of Adam, then God's mercy is shown to the Israelites, followed by Pharaoh's drowning, followed by Moses and the Golden calf, followed by the Israelites complaint about food and water, and then we are introduced to the account of the golden calf again. Following this, we read about Moses and Jesus, then we read about Moses and the golden calf, and then about Solomon and Abraham. If one wants to talk about chronology, what does Moses have to do with Jesus, or Solomon with Abraham? Chronologically the sura should have begun with Adam's fall, then moved to Cain and Abel, Enoch, Abraham, Lot, Isaac, Jacob and Esau, Joseph, the sons of Israel and Moses, in that order. If such a blatant chronological mix-up can be found in this sura of the Qur'an, then Shabbir would do well to explain it before criticizing what they deem to be an error in the Bible.

(Light of Life I 1992:176)

10. Was Noah supposed to bring 2 pairs of all living creatures (Genesis 6:19-20), or was he to bring 7 pairs of 'clean' animals (Genesis 7:2; see also Genesis 7:8,9)?

(Category: misquoted the text)

This indeed is an odd question to raise. It is obvious that Shabbir Ally has misquoted the text in the 6th chapter of Genesis, which makes no mention of any 'clean' animals in its figure, while the 7th chapter specifically delineates between the clean and unclean animals. Genesis 7:2 says Noah was to bring in 7 pairs of 'clean' animals and 2 pairs of every kind of 'unclean' animal. Why did Shabbir not mention the second half of this verse which stipulates 2 pairs in his challenge? It is obvious that there is no discrepancy between the two accounts. The problem is the question itself.

Shabbir attempts to back his argument by mentioning that verses 8 and 9 of chapter 7 prove that only two pairs went into the ark. However, these verses say nothing about two pairs entering the ark. They simply say that it was pairs of clean and unclean animals or birds and creatures which entered the ark.

The reason for including seven of the clean species is perfectly evident: they were to be used for sacrificial worship after the flood had receded (as indeed they were, according to Genesis 8:20). Obviously if there had not been more than two of each of these clean species, they would have been rendered extinct by their being sacrificed on the altar. But in the case of the unclean animals and birds, a single pair would suffice, since they would not be needed for blood sacrifice.

(Archer 1982:81-82)

11. Did David capture 1,700 of King Zobah's horsemen (2 Samuel 8:4), or was it 7,000 (1 Chronicles 18:4)?

(Category: copyist error)

There are two possible solutions to these differing figures. The first by Keil and Delitzsh (page 360) is a most convincing solution. They maintain that the word for chariotry (rekeb) was inadvertently omitted by the scribe in copying 2 Samuel 8:4, and that the second figure, 7,000 (for the parasim 'cavalrymen'), was necessarily reduced to 700 from the 7,000 he saw in his Vorlage for the simple reason that no one would write 7,000 after he had written 1,000 in the recording the one and the same figure. The omission of rekeb might have occurred with an earlier scribe, and a reduction from 7,000 to 700 would have then continued with the successive copies by later scribes. But in all probability the Chronicles figure is right and the Samuel numbers should be corrected to agree with that.

A second solution starts from the premise that the number had been reduced to 700 as it refers to 700 rows, each consisting of 10 horse men, making a total of 7,000.

(Archer 1982:184: Keil & Delitzsch 1949:360; Light of Life I 1992:182)

12. Did Solomon have 40,000 stalls for his horses (1 Kings 4:26), or 4,000 stalls (2 Chronicles 9:25)?

(Category: copyist error, or misunderstood the historical context)

There are a number of ways to answer these puzzling differences. The most plausible is analogous to what we found earlier in challenge numbers five and six above, where the decadal number has been rubbed out or distorted due to constant use.

Others believe that the stalls mentioned in 2 Chronicles were large ones that housed 10 horses each (that is, a row of ten stalls). Therefore 4,000 of these large stalls would be equivalent to 40,000 small ones.

Another commentator maintains that the number of stalls recorded in 1 Kings was the number at the beginning of Solomon's reign, whereas the number recorded in 2 Chronicles was the number of stalls at the end of his reign. We know that Solomon reigned for 40 years; no doubt, many changes occurred during this period. It is quite likely that he reduced the size of the military machine his father David had left him.

(Light of Life I 1992:191)

13. According to the author, did Baasha, the king of Israel die in the 26th year of king Asa's reign (1 Kings 15:33), or was he still alive in the 36th year ( 2 Chronicles 16:1)?

(Category: misunderstood the historical context, or copyist error)

There are two possible solutions to this problem. To begin with, scholars who have looked at these passages have concluded that the 36th year of Asa should be calculated from the withdrawal of the 10 tribes from Judah and Benjamin which brought about the division of the country into Judah and Israel. If we look at it from this perspective, the 36th year of the divided monarchy would be in the 16th year of Asa. This is supported by the Book of the Kings of Judah and Israel, as well as contemporary records, which follow this convention. (note: for a fuller explanation of this theory, see Archer, page 225-116).

Keil and Delitzsch (pp. 366-367) preferred to regard the number 36 in 2 Chronicles 16:1 and the number 35 in 15:19 as a copyist's error for 16 and 15, respectively. This problem is similar to question numbers five and six above. In this case, however, the numbers were written using Hebrew alphabetical type (rather than the Egyptian multiple stroke type used in the Elephantine Papyri, referred to in questions 5 and 6). It is therefore quite possible that the number 16 could quite easily be confused with 36. The reason for this is that up through the seventh century BC the letter yod (10) greatly resembled the letter lamed (30), except for two tiny strokes attached to the left of the main vertical strokes. It required only a smudge from excessive wear on this scroll-column to result in making the yod look like a lamed. It is possible that this error occurred first in the earlier passage, in 2 Chronicles 15:19 (with its 35 wrongly copied from an original 15); then to make it consistent in 16:1, the same scribe (or perhaps a later one) concluded that 16 must be an error for 36 and changed it accordingly on his copy.

(Archer 1982:226: Keil & Delitzsch 1949:366-367; Light of Life I 1992:194)

14. Did Solomon appoint 3,600 overseers (2 Chronicles 2:2) for the work of building the temple, or was it only 3,300 (1 Kings 5:16)?

(Category: misunderstood the author's intent)

This is not too great a problem. The most likely solution is that the author of 2 Chronicles included the 300 men who were selected as reservists to take the place of any supervisors who would become ill or who had died, while the author of the 1 Kings 5:16 passage includes only the supervisory force. With the group as large as the 3,300, sickness and death certainly did occur, requiring reserves who would be called up as the need arose.

(Light of Life I 1992:192)

15. Did Solomon build a facility containing 2,000 baths (1 Kings 7:26), or over 3,000 baths (2 Chronicles 4:5)?

(Category: misunderstood the author's intent, or copyist error)

The Hebrew verb rendered 'contained' and 'held' is different from that translated 'received'; and the meaning may be that the sea ordinarily contained 2,000 baths. But when filled to its utmost capacity it received and held 3,000 baths. Thus the chronicler simply mentions the amount of water that would make the sea like a flowing spring rather than a still pool. This informs us that 3,000 gallons of water were required to completely fill the sea which usually held 2,000 gallons.

Another solution follows a theme mentioned earlier, that the number in Hebrew lettering for 2000 has been confounded by the scribe with a similar alphabetical number for the number 3,000.

It should be noted that Shabbir (in his debate on 25th February 1998 against Jay Smith in Birmingham, UK) quoted this 'contradiction' and added to it saying that if the bath had a diameter of 10 cubits it cannot possibly have had a circumference of 30 cubits as the text says (since 'pi' dictates that it would have a circumference of 31.416 or a 9.549 diameter).

Shabbir made the humorous comment 'Find me a bath like that and I will get baptized in it!' But Shabbir did not read the text properly or was just going for a cheap, displaced laugh. Why? Because the text says that it was about 8cm thick and had a rim shaped like a lily. Therefore it depends on where you measure from. The top or bottom of the rim or the inside or outside for the vessel would all give a different diameter; and depending on whether you measure at the top of the rim or at the narrower point, you would get a different circumference.

In other words, Shabbir may well be getting baptized if someone can be bothered to make a replica!

(Haley pg. 382; Light of Life I 1992:192)

16-21. Are the numbers of Israelites freed from Babylonian captivity correct in Ezra (Ezra 2:6, 8, 12, 15, 19, 28) or in Nehemiah (Nehemiah 7:11, 13, 17, 20, 22, 32)?

(note: because numbers 16-21 deal with the same census, I have included them as one)

(Category: misunderstood the historical context)

In chapter 2 of Ezra and in chapter 7 of Nehemiah there are about thirty-three family units that appear in both lists of Israelites returning from Babylon to Judea. Of these 33 family units listed in Ezra and Nehemiah, nineteen of the family units are identical, while fourteen show discrepancies in the number of members within the family units (though Shabbir only lists six of them). Two of the discrepancies differ by 1, one differs by 4, two by 6, two differ by 9, another differs by 11, another two by 100, another by 201, another differs by 105, a further family differs by 300, and the largest difference is the figure for the sons of Azgad, a difference of 1,100 between the accounts of Ezra 2 and Nehemiah 7.

How, then, are we to account for the 14 discrepancies? The answer is quite simple, and Shabbir, had he done any study into the history of these two accounts would never have bothered to waste his time in asking these questions. The fact that there are both similarities and discrepancies side-by-side should have pointed him to the solution as well (as you who are reading this are probably even now concluding).

There are two important factors to bear in mind when looking at these discrepancies between the two lists. The first is the probability that though members of the units or families had enrolled their names at first as intending to go; in the interval of preparation, some possibly died, others were prevented by sickness or other insurmountable obstacles, so that the final number who actually went was not the same as those who had intended to go. Anyone who has planned a school-coach trip to the beach can understand how typical a scenario this really is.

A second and more important factor are the different circumstances in which the two registers were taken, an important fact of which Shabbir seems to be acutely unaware. Ezra's register was made up while still in Babylon (in the 450s BC), before the return to Jerusalem (Ezra 2:1-2), whereas Nehemiah's register was drawn up in Judea (around 445 BC), after the walls of Jerusalem had been rebuilt (Nehemiah 7:4-6). The lapse of so many years between the two lists (between 5-10 years) would certainly make a difference in the numbers of each family through death or by other causes.

Most scholars believe that Nehemiah recorded those people who actually arrived at Jerusalem under the leadership of Zerubbabel and Jeshua in 537 or 536 BC (Nehemiah 7:7). Ezra, on the other hand, uses the earlier list of those who originally announced their intention to join the caravan of returning colonists back in Babylon, in the 450s BC.

The discrepancies between these two lists point to the fact that there were new factors which arose to change their minds. Some may have fallen into disagreement, others may have discovered business reasons to delay their departure until later, whereas in some cases there were certainly some illnesses or death, and in other cases there may have been some last-minute recruits from those who first decided to remain in Babylon. Only clans or city-group's came in with a shrunken numbers. All the rest picked up last-minute recruits varying from one to 1,100.

When we look at the names we find that certain names are mentioned in alternate forms. Among the Jews of that time (as well as those living in the East), a person had a name, title, and surname. Thus, the children of Hariph (Nehemiah 7:24) are the children of Jorah (Ezra 2:18), while the children of Sia (Nehemiah 7:47) are also the children of Siaha (Ezra 2:44).

When we take all these factors into consideration, the differences in totals that do appear in these two tallies should occasion no surprise whatsoever. The same sort of arbitration and attrition has featured every large migration in human history.

(Archer 1982:229-230 and Light of Life I 1992:219-220)

22. Both Ezra 2:64 and Nehemiah 7:66 agree that the totals for the whole assembly was 42,360, yet when the totals are added, Ezra - 29,818 and Nehemiah - 31,089?

(Category: copyist error)

There are possibly two answers to this seeming dilemma. The first is that this is most likely a copyist's error. The original texts must have had the correct totals, but somewhere along the line of transmission, a scribe made an error in one of the lists, and changed the total in the other so that they would match, without first totaling up the numbers for the families in each list. There is the suggestion that a later scribe upon copying out these lists purposely put down the totals for the whole assembly who were in Jerusalem at his time, which because it was later would have been larger.

The other possibility is forwarded by the learned Old Testament scholar R.K. Harrison, who suggests that at any rate the figure of 42,000 may be metaphorical, following '...the pattern of the Exodus and similar traditions, where the large numbers were employed as symbols of the magnitude of God, and in this particular instance indicating the triumphant deliverance that God achieved for His captive people' (Harrison 1970:1142-1143).

Such errors do not change the historicity of the account, since in such cases another portion of Scripture usually corrects the mistake (the added totals in this instance). As the well-known commentator, Matthew Henry once wrote, 'Few books are not printed without mistakes; yet, authors do not disown them on account of this, nor are the errors by the press imputed to the author. The candid reader amends them by the context or by comparing them with some other part of the work.'

(Light of Life I 1992:201, 219)

23. Did 200 singers (Ezra 2:65) or 245 singers (Nehemiah 7:67) accompany the assembly?

(Category: copyist error)

As in question number 7, this is a copyist error, where a scribe copying the numbers in the Ezra account simply rounded off the figure of 245 to 200.

24. Was King Abijah's mother's name Michaiah, daughter of Uriel of Gibeah (2 Chronicles 13:2) or Maachah, daughter of Absalom (2 Chronicles 11:20 & 2 Samuel 13:27)?

(Category: misunderstood the Hebrew usage)

This apparent contradiction rests on the understanding of the Hebrew word bat, equivalent to the English daughter. Although usually used to denote a first generation female descendant, it can equally refer to more distant kinship. An example of this is 2 Samuel 1:24, which states: 'O daughters of Israel, weep for Saul...' As this is approximately 900 years after Israel (also called Jacob) actually lived, it is clear that this refers to the Israelite women, his distant female descendants.

When seen in this light, the 'contradiction' vanishes. 2 Chronicles 13:2 correctly states that Michaiah is a daughter of Uriel. We can assume that Uriel married Tamar, Absalom's only immediate daughter. Together they had Michaiah who then married king Rehoboam and became the mother of Abijah. 2 Chronicles 11:20 and 1 Kings 15:2, in stating that Maachah was a daughter of Absalom, simply link her back to her more famous grandfather, instead of her lesser known father, to indicate her royal lineage. Abishalom is a variant of Absalom and Michaiah is a variant of Maachah. Therefore, the family tree looks like this:

Absalom/Abishalom
|
Tamar---Uriel
|
Rehoboam---Maachah/Michaiah
|
Abijah

25. Joshua and the Israelites did (Joshua 10:23,40) or did not (Joshua 15:63) capture Jerusalem?

(Category: misread the text)

The short answer is, not in this campaign. The verses given are in complete harmony and the confusion arises solely from misreading the passage concerned.

In Joshua 10, it is the king of Jerusalem that is killed: his city is not captured (verses 16-18 and 22-26). The five Amorite kings and their armies left their cities and went to attack Gibeon. Joshua and the Israelites routed them and the five kings fled to the cave at Makkedah, from which Joshua's soldiers brought them to Joshua, who killed them all. Concerning their armies, verse 20 states: 'the few who were left reached their fortified cities', which clearly indicates that the cities were not captured. So it was the kings, not their cities, who were captured.

Joshua 10:28-42 records the rest of this particular military campaign. It states that several cities were captured and destroyed, these being: Makkedah, Libnah, Lachish, Eglon, Hebron and Debir. All of these cities are south-west of Jerusalem. The king of Gezer and his army were defeated in the field whilst helping Lachish (v.33) and in verse 30 comparison is made to the earlier capture of Jericho, but neither of these last two cities were captured at this time. Verses 40 & 41 delineate the limits of this campaign, all of which took place to the south and west of Jerusalem. Importantly, Gibeon, the eastern limit of this campaign, is still approximately 10 miles to the north-west of Jerusalem.

Jerusalem is, therefore, not stated as captured in Joshua 10. This agrees completely with Joshua 15:63, which states that Judah could not dislodge the Jebusites in Jerusalem.

26. Was Jacob (Matthew 1:16) or Heli (Luke 3:23) the father of Joseph and husband of Mary?

(Category: misunderstood the Hebrew usage)

The answer to this is simple but requires some explanation. Most scholars today agr