Biblical Error?

I am reposting this under a new title in the hopes of getting more interest and response. This originally comes from my thread Gradual Dominance: Esau's Descendants and The Rulers of Edom: Genesis 36

In the Bible there is the following conflict in reporting on Esau's wives...

Genesis 26
When Esau was forty years old, he married Judith daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and also Basemathdaughter of Elon the Hittite

Genesis 36
Esau took his wives from the women of Canaan: Adah daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Oholibamahdaughter of Anah and granddaughter of Zibeon the Hivite— also Basemath daughter of Ishmael and sister of Nebaioth.

Granted that in Genesis 26 we might allow that Esau only married two wives at that time, we have one match but the other wife in Genesis 26 doesn't match either of the other two offered in later scripture. And Oholibamah's father seems to be different in each case.

It would appear that either there was an unfortunate failure on the part of the editor to correct these contradictions or it was felt that both sources were authentic and although contradictory had to be kept intact. Perhaps the separation of ten chapters was the best the authors could come up with in order to minimize the impact of the contradiction. In any case this would appear to be a fairly clear cut example of literalistic error in the Bible.

It isn’t an error.

http://jbqnew.jewishbible.org/assets/Uploads/424/jbq_424_Kleinwivesofesau.pdf

sealchan said:

I am reposting this under a new title in the hopes of getting more interest and response. This originally comes from my thread Gradual Dominance: Esau's Descendants and The Rulers of Edom: Genesis 36

In the Bible there is the following conflict in reporting on Esau's wives...

Genesis 26
When Esau was forty years old, he married Judith daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and also Basemathdaughter of Elon the Hittite

Genesis 36
Esau took his wives from the women of Canaan: Adah daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Oholibamahdaughter of Anah and granddaughter of Zibeon the Hivite— also Basemath daughter of Ishmael and sister of Nebaioth.

Granted that in Genesis 26 we might allow that Esau only married two wives at that time, we have one match but the other wife in Genesis 26 doesn't match either of the other two offered in later scripture. And Oholibamah's father seems to be different in each case.

It would appear that either there was an unfortunate failure on the part of the editor to correct these contradictions or it was felt that both sources were authentic and although contradictory had to be kept intact. Perhaps the separation of ten chapters was the best the authors could come up with in order to minimize the impact of the contradiction. In any case this would appear to be a fairly clear cut example of literalistic error in the Bible.

Click to expand...

Or perhaps there were more wives than could be named and they only listed those which were of importance?

Of course, if you want it to be the evidence for "error", it will just that for you.

Shaul said:

It isn’t an error.

http://jbqnew.jewishbible.org/assets/Uploads/424/jbq_424_Kleinwivesofesau.pdf

Click to expand...

Thanks I'm reading through this...it does validate the concern I have raised as it shows four different historic commentators differing approaches to the the problem.

Perhaps this "discrepancy" has long bothered those most known for being insightful and thoughtful regarding the Word of God.

sealchan said:

I am reposting this under a new title in the hopes of getting more interest and response. This originally comes from my thread Gradual Dominance: Esau's Descendants and The Rulers of Edom: Genesis 36

In the Bible there is the following conflict in reporting on Esau's wives...

Genesis 26
When Esau was forty years old, he married Judith daughter of Beeri the Hittite, and also Basemathdaughter of Elon the Hittite

Genesis 36
Esau took his wives from the women of Canaan: Adah daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Oholibamahdaughter of Anah and granddaughter of Zibeon the Hivite— also Basemath daughter of Ishmael and sister of Nebaioth.

Granted that in Genesis 26 we might allow that Esau only married two wives at that time, we have one match but the other wife in Genesis 26 doesn't match either of the other two offered in later scripture. And Oholibamah's father seems to be different in each case.

It would appear that either there was an unfortunate failure on the part of the editor to correct these contradictions or it was felt that both sources were authentic and although contradictory had to be kept intact. Perhaps the separation of ten chapters was the best the authors could come up with in order to minimize the impact of the contradiction. In any case this would appear to be a fairly clear cut example of literalistic error in the Bible.

Click to expand...

I believe potential errors in the Geneology described in the Bible is a superficial issue concerning whether the Bible has errors and other related problems.

KenS said:

Or perhaps there were more wives than could be named and they only listed those which were of importance?

Of course, if you want it to be the evidence for "error", it will just that for you.

Click to expand...

Whether one choose to apologize for or attempt to explain this "discrepancy", a discrepancy it is. Error is a word that implies that the original author's were as concerned as many are today with logical consistency. Perhaps, their understanding of God's word did not focus on that quality. I suspect that they did try to resolve any discrepancies but were forced to on occasion when two different traditions were seen as equally valid. Separating the two stories helps to minimize the contradiction.

I will grant that it could be that Esau took two wives who did not figure into the later genealogy and that later it just so happened that one of the wives had the same name. This is not an unreasonable explanation. Apparently that didn't work, however, for some.

shunyadragon said:

I believe potential errors in the Geneology described in the Bible is a superficial issue concerning whether the Bible has errors and other related problems.

Click to expand...

I was a little disappointed after studying Genesis from Chapter 1 to find this contradiction. So far I had found that someone could offer a fairly good explanation for other seeming conflicts. In each case the explanations showed a strong literary sophistication in the text.

I don't want to give up on the author(s) yet and see this as just a mistake.

sealchan said:

Thanks I'm reading through this...it does validate the concern I have raised as it shows four different historic commentators differing approaches to the the problem.

Perhaps this "discrepancy" has long bothered those most known for being insightful and thoughtful regarding the Word of God.

Click to expand...

It isn’t a “problem”. It is simply a matter of which interpretation is used. It is not a fundamental issue.

Shaul said:

It isn’t a “problem”. It is simply a matter of which interpretation is used. It is not a fundamental issue.

Click to expand...

Its not fundamental to belief unless your belief is that the Bible is the perfect Word of God with absolutely no error in it. I have found that other than errors in scientific knowledge (which I do not take to be critical to the meaning of the Bible as its author's originally intended), the text offers few unintentional conflicts. Sometimes its very terse language creates a perceived conflict.

I might prefer KenS's explanation as the simplist. But now with other famous Biblical interpreters taking the same concern, I have to wonder.

sealchan said:

Its not fundamental to belief unless your belief is that the Bible is the perfect Word of God with absolutely no error in it. I have found that other than errors in scientific knowledge (which I do not take to be critical to the meaning of the Bible as its author's originally intended), the text offers few unintentional conflicts. Sometimes its very terse language creates a perceived conflict.

I might prefer KenS's explanation as the simplist. But now with other famous Biblical interpreters taking the same concern, I have to wonder.

Click to expand...

No, it is not fundamental at all. Scripture is perfect. The use of the different names are neither an error nor a problem. Nor do the Jewish sages think this was a “concern”. Don’t project onto them your own issues.

Shaul said:

It isn’t a “problem”. It is simply a matter of which interpretation is used. It is not a fundamental issue.

Click to expand...

From the last paragraph...

The commentators offer several approaches to explain the inconsistency between the Bible's account of Esau's wives in Genesis 26 and Genesis 36, some closer than others to the plain meaning of the text. Rashi takes them to be the same women listed under different names. Sefer ha-Yashar and a slew of other commentators basically agree with Rashi, but maintain that Esau had four wives, since they refuse to identify Judith and Oholibamah as the same woman. Nahmanides mostly agrees, with the caveat that Adah daughter of REUVEN CHAIM (RUDOLPH) KLEIN JEWISH BIBLE QUARTERLY 218 Elon the Hittite and Basemath daughter of Elon the Hittite were not identical but sisters. In his view, therefore, Esau took five wives. Abraham Maimuni utterly rejects the notion of the Bible mentioning Esau's wives under different names. His explanation is that the three wives in Genesis 26 and the three in Genesis 36 are entirely different people, indicating that Esau had a total of six wives.

Click to expand...

I just skimmed through the article to catch its scope and I assume this concluding paragraph accurately summarizes what preceded it.

It would seem that some issues are left unresolved given they are, perhaps, considered relatively unimportant. But when one makes extraordinary claims such that the Bible transcends error, one has an extraordinary burden.

I do not burden the Bible with a need to be perfect in order that it teach us about God. Perhaps the claim that the Bible is perfect should be considered unimportant if this historically considered discrepancy is unimportant.

Shaul said:

No, it is not fundamental at all. Scripture is perfect. The use of the different names are neither an error nor a problem. Nor do the Jewish sages think this was a “concern”. Don’t project onto them your own issues.

Click to expand...

What issue would I be projecting upon scripture? That is must be rational and consistent?

sealchan said:

Whether one choose to apologize for or attempt to explain this "discrepancy", a discrepancy it is. Error is a word that implies that the original author's were as concerned as many are today with logical consistency. Perhaps, their understanding of God's word did not focus on that quality. I suspect that they did try to resolve any discrepancies but were forced to on occasion when two different traditions were seen as equally valid. Separating the two stories helps to minimize the contradiction.

I will grant that it could be that Esau took two wives who did not figure into the later genealogy and that later it just so happened that one of the wives had the same name. This is not an unreasonable explanation. Apparently that didn't work, however, for some.

Click to expand...

However, since it also says "He took WIVES", as it does in many other parts without naming it all, it doesn't have to be "a discrepancy" unless you want it to.

I'm not sure where I "apologized", unless that is what you want it to look like.

Shaul said:

No, it is not fundamental at all. Scripture is perfect. The use of the different names are neither an error nor a problem. Nor do the Jewish sages think this was a “concern”. Don’t project onto them your own issues.

Click to expand...

I think that the author's of scripture have intentionally used terse language in order to leave open questions. If this discrepancy between two descriptions of Esau's wives is meant to leave open questions (which it apparently has), then I wonder what useful questions for spiritual teaching it might have hoped to promote?

The more I lean on this the more it makes sense to me that these two passages of scripture simply focus on two separate and only superficially related acquisitions by Esau of wives and that one has nothing to do with the other. In the larger context of the story this might potentially show how unimportant the accumulation of wives was to Esau in opposition to Jacob's 14+ years worth of effort to obtain the one wife he intended to have. Maybe the wives having the same name is meant to show just how unimportant the wives were such that two had the same name as if they were interchangeable. Perhaps it is no coincidence that Esau also seems to morph into Edom in this account of his descendants.

KenS said:

However, since it also says "He took WIVES", as it does in many other parts without naming it all, it doesn't have to be "a discrepancy" unless you want it to.

I'm not sure where I "apologized", unless that is what you want it to look like.

Click to expand...

By apology I meant Biblical apologetics in which someone argues against an attempt to critique the Bible.

sealchan said:

By apology I meant Biblical apologetics in which someone argues against an attempt to critique the Bible.

Click to expand...

OK. No attempt against critiquing what we read.

It has be common knowledge for centuries that there are copy errors. Also, the difference about wives has been noted a long time ago. Explanations have been given some time ago. One can agree or disagree, for an example:

one of his wives was of the family of Ishmael, as after related: Adah the daughter of Elon the Hittite;
according to Jarchi and Aben Ezra, this is the same with Bashemath, ( Genesis 26:34 ) ; and that she had two names: and Aholibamah the daughter of Anah, the daughter of Zibeon theHivite;the daughter of the one, and the granddaughter of the other, it being usual in Scripture to call grandchildren children, for Zibeon and Anah were father and son, ( Genesis 36:24 Genesis 36:25 ) ; and the Samaritan, Septuagint, and Syriac versions read here, "the daughter of Anah the son of Zibeon": there are an Anah and a Zibeon who were brethren, ( Genesis 36:20 ) ; wherefore Aben Ezra supposes that these two brothers, or the father and son, lay with the same woman, and it could not be known whose child it was that was born of her, and therefore this was called the daughter of them both. Jarchi supposes this wife of Esau to be the same with Judith, ( Genesis 26:34 ) ; but not only the names differ, but also the names of their fathers, and of the tribe or nation they were of. (John Gill)

Ultimately, we don't know which answer is correct. At the same time, there is no definitive statement that says it is wrong since, indeed, two names were quite common.

sealchan said:

What issue would I be projecting upon scripture? That is must be rational and consistent?

Click to expand...

I wrote that you were projecting upon the sages your own issues of concern, which they don’t share. I never said you were projecting onto scripture. Yet scripture has a purpose. It certainly doesn’t give information not necessary for its purpose. That doesn’t make it less perfect for its purpose.

sealchan said:

Its not fundamental to belief unless your belief is that the Bible is the perfect Word of God with absolutely no error in it. I have found that other than errors in scientific knowledge (which I do not take to be critical to the meaning of the Bible as its author's originally intended), the text offers few unintentional conflicts. Sometimes its very terse language creates a perceived conflict.

I might prefer KenS's explanation as the simplist. But now with other famous Biblical interpreters taking the same concern, I have to wonder.

Click to expand...

I think if you want to get the most out of the Bible, especially with regards to things like this, is to be skeptical. We pass through seemingly contradicting passages many times in the Bible. The different genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3; Bartholomew being replaced by Nathaniel in the Gospel of John etc. The correct approach for a Christian, in my opinion, is to do research on these matters. What you come to learn afterwards is another aspect of the truth which the Bible is trying to convey, and a deeper appreciation of the inspired Word of God.

I haven't dived into the passage in the OP yet, but I will post a reply as soon as I do

Shaul said:

I wrote that you were projecting upon the sages your own issues of concern, which they don’t share. I never said you were projecting onto scripture. Yet scripture has a purpose. It certainly doesn’t give information not necessary for its purpose. That doesn’t make it less perfect for its purpose.

Click to expand...

excellently said.

I think the confusion came in when we thought that Bashemath daughter of Elon in Genesis 26:34 was the same person as Bashemath daughter of Ishmael in Genesis 36:2. To solve this issue we need to refer to the Apocryphal book of Jasher as well. Note that the spelling in the name varies a little in the two books.

I assorted this to a natural chronological order as made sense to me:

And Esau was forty years old when he took to wife Judith the daughter of Be-e´ri the Hittite, and Bash´emath the daughter of Elon the Hittite: which were a grief of mind unto Isaac and to Rebekah.' - Genesis 26:34-35

“And when Esau saw that Jacob had fled and escaped from him, and that Jacob had cunningly obtained the blessing, then Esau grieved exceedingly, and he was also vexed at his father and mother; and he also rose up and took his wife and went away from his father and mother to the land of Seir, and he dwelt there; and Esau saw there a woman from amongst the daughters of Heth whose name was Bosmath, the daughter of Elon the Hittite, and he took her for a wife in addition to his first wife, and Esau called her name Adah, saying the blessing had in that time passed from him.” - Jasher 29:12

'and Esau seeing that the daughters of Canaan pleased not Isaac his father; then went Esau unto Ish´ma-el, and took unto the wives which he had Ma´halath the daughter of Ish´ma-el Abraham's son, the sister of Neba´joth, to be his wife. ' - Genesis 28:8-9
“Then he went to the house of Ishmael his uncle, and in addition to his older wives he took Machlath the daughter of Ishmael, the sister of Nebayoth, for a wife.” - Jasher 29:43

"And in the third year of Jacob's dwelling in Haran, Bosmath, the daughter of Ishmael, the wife of Esau, bare unto him a son, and Esau called his name Reuel." - Jasher 30:17

"And in the sixth year Esau took for a wife, in addition to his other wives, Ahlibamah, the daughter of Zebeon the Hivite, and Esau brought her to the land of Canaan." - Jasher 30:24

Esau took his wives of the daughters of Canaan; Adah the daughter of Elon the Hittite, and Aholiba´mah the daughter of Anah the granddaughter of Zib´e-on the Hivite; and Bash´emath Ish´ma-el's daughter, sister of Neba´joth.' - Genesis 36:2-3

So in the course of Esau's life we see that he married to at least 4 different women:
1. Judith daughter of Beeri (does not appear in Genesis 36) [deceased?]
2. Bashemath daughter of Elon. Name later changed to Adah.
3. Aholibamah daughter of Anah
4. Mahalath daughter of Ishmael. Name later changed to Bashemath.