|
Hi Dave.
I don't think you can imagine the joy I get when harmonizing
some passages. I agree that some people carry it too far if they
are not open to the idea that there might just be mistakes. Nevertheless,
those who are too eager to accept mistakes miss out on some interesting
study.
When I looked up the passage about Solomon's stables some years ago, you
cannot imagine my amazement to discover the yod in the actual Hebrew
text. The lexicons all make out like the word is the same. Then, to
realize that the yod is 10, and to see the math all work out, well, it certainly
brings to bear what Jesus said when he said not one jot or tittle shall pass
from the law until all be fulfilled.
Concerning your example of the age of Jehoiachin, I am not aware of
any explanation other than a copyist error here. That is not the same
thing as a translation error. I hope you can appreciate this
distinction. It also does not mean that the text was wrong in the
autographs. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that we can use our knowledge of
this matter to know that Jehoiachin was 18 and not 8, so the truth has not been
lost.
Peace be with you.
David Miller.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2005 3:52
AM
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk]
corrector/revisor
DAVEH: Thank you for taking the time
to respond, DavidM. I know you are a busy guy, and I appreciate you
sharing your thoughts.
As I see it, when one
goes to extremes to harmonize numerous apparent discrepancies to fit one's
belief paradigm, it reduces the credibility of the believer. If there
were just one example of such numerical errors in the Bible, perhaps
rationalizing it would be understandable. But to do it time after time
on passages that seem out of whack causes an independent spectator to conclude
that the guy doing the rationalizing probably has a tendency to rationalize
other doctrines that are not quite so trivial. To me it would seem much
better to reexamine the basic root belief that forces one to do the
harmonizing. Why stick to a theory that is not obviously and explicitly
Biblically supported.....especially when there are so many examples that bring
the theory into serious question. Isn't it just better to believe the
Bible as far as it is translated correctly rather than die on the hill that
claims it is absolutely translated correctly? Common sense dictates it
is risky to believe any given translation reflects the Word of God correctly
in all instances.
For instance, what are your
thoughts on........
2Kgs 24
[8] Jehoiachin was eighteen
years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three
months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of
Jerusalem.
.......and........
2Chr. 36
[9]
Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned
three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the
sight of the LORD.
...........Do those discrepancies strike you as a
distinct error that has crept into the KJV Bible, or do you feel comfortable
harmonizing them?
David Miller wrote:
Dean wrote:
1Kg 4:26---Solomon had 40,000 stalls for the horses
2Chronicles 9:25---Solomon had 4,000 stalls for the horses
cd: Can the KJV be so accurate that is talking of two different
timelines and that the barn might have grown? Or can it be
possibly speaking of two different barns one with 40,000 and
another with 4,000 stalls which he bestowed to the chariot cities
and the King of Jerusalem 2 CHR: 9: 25?
Perhaps, but I think the point is that the King James says "stalls" in both
places.
Some scholars point out that the word translated in 2 Chron. 9:25 is
slightly different. It has a yod in it that is lacking in the word found in
1 Kings 4:26. The yod stands for ten, so some think that 2 Chron. 9:25
refers to 4,000 stables, each with 10 stalls in it, and the 1 Kings 4:26
passage refers to each individual stall, making 40,000 in all.
Dean wrote:
........or........
Mt 10:10 and Lk 9:3 where no staves are to be taken
compared to Mk 6:8 where a staff is to be taken
cd: I will have to study this comparison more it may
be one of those things taken out of the Bible that allows
Satan to have great power over us and make a great
many stumble.(I Nephi 13:29) I mean without a staff
how can one beat him off right? Maybe he likes some
(Mathew,John...etc) and told them to take staffs-but
then there is Judas and his bunch ( similar to your
side of the room) whom he maybe told not to take staffs
to give them the butt kicking they deserved:-) Who really
knows-right?
Consider that in Mark 6:8, the word staff is singular, whereas in the other
passages, it refers to staves (plural). Also note how the Mat. passage
refers to not taking shoes (plural). The Mark passage refers to being shod
with sandals. Therefore, the solution here is that they were to take one
staff but not more than that, one pair of sandals that they wore, but not
extra.
I think it is interesting that Mark is the one who focuses upon these
individual items being allowed, because he was the one who abandoned Paul
and Barnabas on their apostolic ministry trip. It seems to me that he might
have picked Peter's brain a bit about exactly what they were allowed to
bring with them. :-)
DaveH, I don't think there is any translating problem in these latter
passages. You have a point about the first examples.
Peace be with you.
David Miller.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain six email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF, MOTORCYCLE and CLIPS.
|
