SA Huguenot
Well-Known Member
Here is another "Contradiction" by the Atheist:
How old was Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem?
(a) Twenty-two (2 Kings 8:26).
(b) Forty-two (2 Chronicles 22:2).
Answer:
I learned that the Hebrew numbers was written in Hebrew numerals, similar as would Roman numbers be written by I, X, V, L, M etc.
In Hebrew the number 22 is “KAF+BEIT” and 42 is “MEM+BEIT”.
If I have it correct, this is how it will appear. ב+נ and מ+נ.
Now, anyone that would like to call this a contradiction should first take the following into consideration.
The books of Chronicles were written on either Papyri or parchment and the ink was hand mixed. Both the ink and writing materials was highly degradable and taken into account that these passages were written between 930 BC and 440 BC, it passed through many scribes and copyists to what leftover manuscripts we have today.
Conclusion.
The possibility that one manuscript in a lineage of hundreds had some damage, or the ink smudged is almost certain, no, not “almost”, but certainly to have occurred. Look at what an insignificant change in the Hebrew of say, Ezra, or Nechemia’s time could have resulted in writing a MEM in stead of a KAF.
Most manuscripts of the Septuagint have the number twenty, and one has twenty-two. Twenty-two is also reflected in the Syriac and the Arabic versions.
Therefore, to have a lineage of at least 200 consecutive copying, with such an insignificant error is actually incredible to say the least. Think of this, the copying of the Bible was done for at least 2400 years, and the copyists who re wrote this incorrect number had such a lot of respect for the Bible, they did not even attempt to change this small fact of their history. Now that’s what I call inherent honesty.
Another surprise hit the Atheists in 1935 when the Tel Dan stelae was discovered at Lachish and on it we have Hazael bosting he killed both Jehoram and his son Ahaziah.
Damn but the Bible is trustworthy!
For the record, Ahazia was 22.
How old was Ahaziah when he began to rule over Jerusalem?
(a) Twenty-two (2 Kings 8:26).
(b) Forty-two (2 Chronicles 22:2).
Answer:
I learned that the Hebrew numbers was written in Hebrew numerals, similar as would Roman numbers be written by I, X, V, L, M etc.
In Hebrew the number 22 is “KAF+BEIT” and 42 is “MEM+BEIT”.
If I have it correct, this is how it will appear. ב+נ and מ+נ.
Now, anyone that would like to call this a contradiction should first take the following into consideration.
The books of Chronicles were written on either Papyri or parchment and the ink was hand mixed. Both the ink and writing materials was highly degradable and taken into account that these passages were written between 930 BC and 440 BC, it passed through many scribes and copyists to what leftover manuscripts we have today.
Conclusion.
The possibility that one manuscript in a lineage of hundreds had some damage, or the ink smudged is almost certain, no, not “almost”, but certainly to have occurred. Look at what an insignificant change in the Hebrew of say, Ezra, or Nechemia’s time could have resulted in writing a MEM in stead of a KAF.
Most manuscripts of the Septuagint have the number twenty, and one has twenty-two. Twenty-two is also reflected in the Syriac and the Arabic versions.
Therefore, to have a lineage of at least 200 consecutive copying, with such an insignificant error is actually incredible to say the least. Think of this, the copying of the Bible was done for at least 2400 years, and the copyists who re wrote this incorrect number had such a lot of respect for the Bible, they did not even attempt to change this small fact of their history. Now that’s what I call inherent honesty.
Another surprise hit the Atheists in 1935 when the Tel Dan stelae was discovered at Lachish and on it we have Hazael bosting he killed both Jehoram and his son Ahaziah.
Damn but the Bible is trustworthy!
For the record, Ahazia was 22.
Last edited:
And I have a good idea you know it, but don't have the courage to admit it to yourself. 