contradiction or not?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
B

Bryancampbell

Guest
#1
#1
I would love to do a study on this with you guys, I believe I figured it out. Not that I'm any smarter, but I want to discuss with you guys about this, to see what you guys figure out about this. Just in case someone comes up to you and asks about it.

So I was finishing the 2 book of Samuel and I was screening through some commentary, and I came across a "contradiction", not really, or is it?? Some of you might already know, or others will look it up, but I challenge you to figure it on your own with the Spirit.

David sinned against God by doing a census on the people of Israel out of boosting, and the Lord through the prophet Gad, told David of what punishment was to be accept because of it. Now both the book of Samuel and Chronicle has this exact account of this scene. But they both say something different. Can you figure it out why?

2 Samuel 24:13 NASB

So Gad came to David and told him, and said to him, "Shall seven years of famine come to you in your land? Or will you flee three months before your foes while they pursue you? Or shall there be three days' pestilence in your land? Now consider and see what answer I shall return to Him who sent me."

1 Chronicles 21:11-12 NASB

So Gad came to David and said to him, "Thus says the Lord , 'Take for yourself either three years of famine, or three months to be swept away before your foes, while the sword of your enemies overtakes you, or else three days of the sword of the Lord, even pestilence in the land, and the angel of the Lord destroying throughout all the territory of Israel.' Now, therefore, consider what answer I shall return to Him who sent me."

By the way, the NASB, KJV, and some others only have this. Reason is because some latest versions used the Septuagint (Greek OT) in translation, instead of Masoretic (Hebrew OT) in translation. (Though the Greek is said to be older)

So in terms, I'm talking about the bible that have this version of the text, to see if we have found a conclusion? Is it a miscopy? Is it a contradiction? Or a wait a minute? Lol

I really want this to be fun for all of us, please respect the OP and what it seeks, as a Christian's fruits show.
 
B

Bryancampbell

Guest
#2
#2
You know, you don't have to have the perfect answer on your first try. It's more of a discussion than one post stance lol. nothing wrong with attempting a couple times with talk. :)
 
HeRoseFromTheDead

HeRoseFromTheDead

Senior Member
#3
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
689
113
#3
The Masoretic Text version of 2 Samuel 24:13 is obviously wrong. 1 Chronicles 21:11-12 agrees in both the LXX and the MT, and the LXX version of 2 Samuel 24:13 agrees with them.
 
B

Bryancampbell

Guest
#4
#4
Hmm let's say when the Lxx saw this mistake and corrected it by changing it. It is a possibility the Masoretic had it correct even though it was a later version.
 
J

J-Kay

Guest
#5
#5
You lost me.... I must be getting old. :D
However I must warn you the newer versions are under scrutiny due
to some leaving out important parts about Jesus. I really did not understand
what you want. Duh !!
I remember David did anger God for numbering his people when he was told
not to. That would indicate pride as well as disobedience.
I don't remember the second part you wanted... See told ya' I'm getting ::sigh:: old.
Oh I could go look it up if it is important to you. But, I bet you will a lot of help. ( I hope )
Bless you ~
 
J

J-Kay

Guest
#6
#6
Bryancampbell said:
Hmm let's say when the Lxx saw this mistake and corrected it by changing it. It is a possibility the Masoretic had it correct even though it was a later version.
Click to expand...
[h=3]The Masoretic Text[/h] The Masortic Text was compiled by the Jewish Masorete scribes in the last few hundred years of the first millenium A.D., with the oldest available editions date between 900 and 1100 AD. It is the Hebrew scriptures used to translate the OT. Its production is legendary and its accuracy is heralded my many. When compared to the much older Dead Sea Scrolls, its accuracy is considered by some to be incredible to the point of being miraculous, and does much to prove the accuracy and reliability of the Bible. The scribes themselves went to great pains to be as accurate as possible. They did things like:

  • Saying each word aloud as it was read and copied from manuscripts (No word or letter could be written from memory)
  • Always pausing to wipe the tip of the pen before writing the sacred name of God
  • Counting every single word and every letter to verify accuracy and to be sure they matched the original.
  • Completely washing themselves in a ritual bath to remind them of the seriousness and sacredness of copying the scriptures
  • Discarding their work if any errors were detected
Several KJV-only authors and other supporters know all that very well, and often relate this information to prove the amazing accuracy of the Hebrew scriptures we use to translate the Old Testament. Most even say the Masoretic Text is God's perfect word in Hebrew. However, they don't realize that by making such a strong (and appropriate!) argument for the Masoretic Text, they've just smashed their own KJV-only position to pieces.
 
HeRoseFromTheDead

HeRoseFromTheDead

Senior Member
#7
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
689
113
#7
Bryancampbell said:
Hmm let's say when the Lxx saw this mistake and corrected it by changing it. It is a possibility the Masoretic had it correct even though it was a later version.
Click to expand...
IMO not likely. I have seen this kind of corruption in the MT before. I have also seen corruption in the LXX, but it is obvious to me that it was a translation error in that particular case.

Keep in mind that the LXX is around 1000 years older (or more) than the MT. The LXX is a snapshot of more ancient Hebrew scrolls. It is well known that the Masoretes introduced corruption into their version; so having this snapshot, while though not always accurate, is valuable evidence for what the bible authors actually wrote.
 
B

Bryancampbell

Guest
#8
#8
Don't worry sister, sorry for the confusion. See there is many good versions of the bible (even the King James) that have these confusing contradicting bible verses. Why is that? Or is it really a contradiction?

Does this mean the versions that have this must be burned because it has a miscopy, or what? Or is there an explanation for it? I really want people to find out on their own though :)
 
J

J-Kay

Guest
#9
#9
Bryancampbell said:
Hmm let's say when the Lxx saw this mistake and corrected it by changing it. It is a possibility the Masoretic had it correct even though it was a later version.
Click to expand...
The Masoretic Text

The Masortic Text was compiled by the Jewish Masorete scribes in the last few hundred years of the first millenium A.D., with the oldest available editions date between 900 and 1100 AD. It is the Hebrew scriptures used to translate the OT. Its production is legendary and its accuracy is heralded my many. When compared to the much older Dead Sea Scrolls, its accuracy is considered by some to be incredible to the point of being miraculous, and does much to prove the accuracy and reliability of the Bible. The scribes themselves went to great pains to be as accurate as possible. They did things like:

  • Saying each word aloud as it was read and copied from manuscripts (No word or letter could be written from memory)
  • Always pausing to wipe the tip of the pen before writing the sacred name of God
  • Counting every single word and every letter to verify accuracy and to be sure they matched the original.
  • Completely washing themselves in a ritual bath to remind them of the seriousness and sacredness of copying the scriptures
  • Discarding their work if any errors were detected
Several KJV-only authors and other supporters know all that very well, and often relate this information to prove the amazing accuracy of the Hebrew scriptures we use to translate the Old Testament. Most even say the Masoretic Text is God's perfect word in Hebrew. However, they don't realize that by making such a strong (and appropriate!) argument for the Masoretic Text, they've just smashed their own KJV-only position to pieces.

Something "qere" Is Going On In The KJV
 
B

Bryancampbell

Guest
#10
#10
HeRoseFromTheDead said:
IMO not likely. I have seen this kind of corruption in the MT before. I have also seen corruption in the LXX, but it is obvious to me that it was a translation error in that particular case.

Keep in mind that the LXX is around 1000 years older (or more) than the MT. The LXX is a snapshot of more ancient Hebrew scrolls. It is well known that the Masoretes introduced corruption into their version; so having this snapshot, while though not always accurate, is valuable evidence for what the bible authors actually wrote.
Click to expand...
I would be curious to know more places that it is corrupted? Even though the LXX is older, doesn't exactly mean it's accurate on everything, like you said, you have seen the same in LXX, but I don't believe translation into English is the only problem.

This position might influence people to burn these miscopies. I do stand on the Masoretic, because I find how the "corruptions" aren't really corruptions, just mistaken. But I could be wrong.
 
B

Bryancampbell

Guest
#11
#11
J-Kay said:
The Masoretic Text

The Masortic Text was compiled by the Jewish Masorete scribes in the last few hundred years of the first millenium A.D., with the oldest available editions date between 900 and 1100 AD. It is the Hebrew scriptures used to translate the OT. Its production is legendary and its accuracy is heralded my many. When compared to the much older Dead Sea Scrolls, its accuracy is considered by some to be incredible to the point of being miraculous, and does much to prove the accuracy and reliability of the Bible. The scribes themselves went to great pains to be as accurate as possible. They did things like:

  • Saying each word aloud as it was read and copied from manuscripts (No word or letter could be written from memory)
  • Always pausing to wipe the tip of the pen before writing the sacred name of God
  • Counting every single word and every letter to verify accuracy and to be sure they matched the original.
  • Completely washing themselves in a ritual bath to remind them of the seriousness and sacredness of copying the scriptures
  • Discarding their work if any errors were detected
Several KJV-only authors and other supporters know all that very well, and often relate this information to prove the amazing accuracy of the Hebrew scriptures we use to translate the Old Testament. Most even say the Masoretic Text is God's perfect word in Hebrew. However, they don't realize that by making such a strong (and appropriate!) argument for the Masoretic Text, they've just smashed their own KJV-only position to pieces.

Something "qere" Is Going On In The KJV
Click to expand...
This is some very very interesting stuff!!! Thanks! :D
 
J

J-Kay

Guest
#12
#12
Bryancampbell said:
Don't worry sister, sorry for the confusion. See there is many good versions of the bible (even the King James) that have these confusing contradicting bible verses. Why is that? Or is it really a contradiction?

Does this mean the versions that have this must be burned because it has a miscopy, or what? Or is there an explanation for it? I really want people to find out on their own though :)
Click to expand...
Okay, I know how you feel about the issue of KJV and ASV are supposedly the best to read from.
I also understand the versions that are supposedly in error and purposely leaving out Jesus and
words that are important to what God is saying. I have many versions, and find them helpful, yet
at same time since I learned from KJV I never caught the errors. Guess I was not looking for them.
Okay, forgive me for getting you off topic.... I shall leave you and the 'hunters' in the jungle and
come back and see the answers you are seeking. ~ :cool:
 
J

J-Kay

Guest
#13
#13
Bryancampbell said:
This is some very very interesting stuff!!! Thanks! :D
Click to expand...
You are too cute Bryan... You are welcome. I have a son Brian. BTW clicking on the link
you will get a lot more of what is posted there. Night ~
 
B

Bryancampbell

Guest
#14
#14
J-Kay said:
Okay, I know how you feel about the issue of KJV and ASV are supposedly the best to read from.
I also understand the versions that are supposedly in error and purposely leaving out Jesus and
words that are important to what God is saying. I have many versions, and find them helpful, yet
at same time since I learned from KJV I never caught the errors. Guess I was not looking for them.
Okay, forgive me for getting you off topic.... I shall leave you and the 'hunters' in the jungle and
come back and see the answers you are seeking. ~ :cool:
Click to expand...
Actually sister I have tons of bibles, even in different languages, but many people have always enjoyed their bible versions before stumbling on these "mistakes". This thread is more on how to solve the contradiction and somewhat translation use. So you won't think your bible is wrong. :)
 
J

J-Kay

Guest
#15
#15
Bryancampbell said:
Actually sister I have tons of bibles, even in different languages, but many people have always enjoyed their bible versions before stumbling on these "mistakes". This thread is more on how to solve the contradiction and somewhat translation use. So you won't think your bible is wrong. :)
Click to expand...
In other words you are saying you want to make all the Bibles come out saying
the same thing ? I am not with you on that. Really, there are some very important
teachings we must hold onto. Important Truths the KJV holds. I think this could
cause a lot of confusion when we start jumping around with different translations.
Not to put you down, just looking at it as a very serious issue. We have to be
careful not to mislead. I personally prefer to use a commentary when I am needing
to know more about a scripture. What is the difference you ask? Well, I guess I
have to say, we should be sure to read the entire verses surrounding the scripture,
and get what it is all about. Then if I still need more understanding, I prefer to go
to Matthew Henry. This is just my preference. To try to go into as deep as you
are, for me, I really would be concerned by what others might be taking out of
Gods Word. I hope you understand where I am coming from. You certainly have
peaked my curiosity ~
 
B

Bryancampbell

Guest
#16
#16
No, I'm actually against the translations that are literally changed and chopped up like the new niv. I'm defending the translations that aren't bad that people like the kjv only people say they are. I don't agree with every translation hear me out. But I use different translations to see what is truly the meaning of words, some are too watered down, some are too hard, some are too chopped up, and some are mistaken for wrong.

But this thread isn't about translations, it's about contradicting bible verses that been around before English translations exist.
 
R

reject-tech

Guest
#17
#17
The numbers "Seven" and "Three" both have "completion" aspects to them.

Contradiction only in the way the story tellers expressed the magnitude of the famine.
A complete and deadly famine that will not be survived.

3 and 7 when used together also refer to the two major aspects of the law of love.
First 3 commandments - Love God
Second 7 commandments - Love others
And #4 is a transition between the two, "proper orientation"
Example - the numbering of Job's possessions and children, how he handled the law of love.

So you might read "Seven years of famine" as "starving from lack of loving others"
and "Three years of famine" as "starving from lack of loving God"

Because both result from trying to put a number on how many God has saved so far.
Any number just isn't good enough is it?

Our death on this matter was slow starvation, being hunted, or sudden terminal illness.
Think of starving over 7 years, think of being on the run and lasting 3 months, think of coming down with sudden organ failure, and we consider the answer on a one by one personal basis -
The way we died on this matter is clear by looking at our own personal past, once we decided to stop numbering the saved, which is, basing it on visible religious affiliation instead of unseen condition of the heart.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
B

Bryancampbell

Guest
#18
#18
I see your trying to use number of completion to gather it into one. But I don't know, I don't think the two books say one version of the story a tiny different to describe those aspects. I don't know if it has a prophetic meaning as your putting it. Could these bible verses actually mean the same thing? Be the same meaning? What is your take on that?
 
R

reject-tech

Guest
#19
#19
I see your trying to use number of completion to gather it into one. But I don't know, I don't think the two books say one version of the story a tiny different to describe those aspects. I don't know if it has a prophetic meaning as your putting it. Could these bible verses actually mean the same thing? Be the same meaning? What is your take on that?
Click to expand...
Yes. The "contradictions" in the bible are there on purpose to make you think about the meaning.
God is in control of everything, including the "contradictions", not man.

If it's just a historical record of a guy named David, it's milk. It pacifies.
If it applies to you right now, it's meat. It's a real life experience.

Every word of the bible is past, present and future.
"Was, is, and is to come"
 
HeRoseFromTheDead

HeRoseFromTheDead

Senior Member
#20
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
689
113
#20
Bryancampbell said:
I would be curious to know more places that it is corrupted? Even though the LXX is older, doesn't exactly mean it's accurate on everything, like you said, you have seen the same in LXX, but I don't believe translation into English is the only problem.
Click to expand...
Ask and ye shall receive:

  1. Zechariah 14:5 is grossly mistranslated in bibles that use the Masoretic Text version of this verse. The reason is because a Hebrew word in this verse can be pronounced two different ways, which results in two very different meanings. The original meaning was preserved in the LXX. Read about it here > Deciphering Zechariah 14:5 | An indepth analysis of Zechariah 14:5
  2. In the MT, Genesis 7:11 states that Noah’s ark rested on the 17th day ; yet the ark rested on the 27th day in the LXX. Based on the following reasoning, it appears that the MT is correct.
In the MT, the ark rested on the third day of the 7-day festival of Tabernacles, which is the 7th festival (or appointed time) of YHWH. The number 7 always signifies rest from labor. This seems very significant.

The MT states that the the ark rested in the 17th day (שבעה־עשר יום) of the month (Genesis 8:4). However, the LXX states that the ark rested on the 27th of the month (no day). The Hebrew word for 17 is spelled שבעה־עשר; and the Hebrew word for 27 is spelled שבעה־עשרים. Notice that the only difference between the Hebrew spelling of 27 and the Hebrew spelling of 17th day is one letter, the letter vav (ו) that is the middle letter of the Hebrew word for day (יום). Also notice that the word day is missing in the LXX. So it appears that the translators of the LXX misread 17th day as 27, and translated it as such.

Of course, it could be the other way around; the LXX is right, and 27th was changed to 17th day by the Masoretes.​
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.