Announcement

Collapse

Deeper Waters Forum Guidelines

Notice – The ministries featured in this section of TheologyWeb are guests of this site and in some cases not bargaining for the rough and tumble world of debate forums, though sometimes they are. Additionally, this area is frequented and highlighted for guests who also very often are not acclimated to debate fora. As such, the rules of conduct here will be more strict than in the general forum. This will be something within the discretion of the Moderators and the Ministry Representative, but we simply ask that you conduct yourselves in a manner considerate of the fact that these ministries are our invited guests. You can always feel free to start a related thread in general forum without such extra restrictions. Thank you.

Deeper Waters is founded on the belief that the Christian community has long been in the shallow end of Christianity while there are treasures of the deep waiting to be discovered. Too many in the shallow end are not prepared when they go out beyond those waters and are quickly devoured by sharks. We wish to aid Christians to equip them to navigate the deeper waters of the ocean of truth and come up with treasure in the end.

We also wish to give special aid to those often neglected, that is, the disabled community. This is especially so since our founders are both on the autism spectrum and have a special desire to reach those on that spectrum. While they are a special emphasis, we seek to help others with any disability realize that God can use them and that they are as the Psalmist says, fearfully and wonderfully made.

General TheologyWeb forum rules: here.
See more
See less

Innerancy.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • tabibito saying "The things you are posting are not errors" maybe true in this post. However, an irrefutable error is found in the contradiction between 2 Chronicles 22:2 and 2 Kings 8:26. According to 2 Kings 8:26, "Ahaziah was 22 years old when he began to reign" whereas in 2 Chronicles 22:2 (KJV & RSV), "Ahaziah was age 42 when when he began to reign".
    Last edited by Same Hakeem; 05-11-2019, 04:43 AM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Same Hakeem View Post
      tabibito saying "The things you are posting are not errors" maybe true in this post. However, an irrefutable error is found in the contradiction between 2 Chronicles 22:2 and 2 Kings 8:26. According to 2 Kings 8:26, "Ahaziah was 22 years old when he began to reign" whereas in 2 Chronicles 22:2 (KJV & RSV), "Ahaziah was age 42 when when he began to reign".
      So far I can't see any way to contradict your claim: I will be interested to see what others might provide.
      1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
      .
      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
      Scripture before Tradition:
      but that won't prevent others from
      taking it upon themselves to deprive you
      of the right to call yourself Christian.

      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

      Comment


      • Let’s see if Same knows how Hebrews wrote numbers.

        Comment


        • MT reads 42 years at 2 Chr 22:2 - but that looks like a scribal correction to reconcile the records.
          In the Hebrew texts that I have available, the numbers are written as words, not as numerals
          1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
          .
          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
          Scripture before Tradition:
          but that won't prevent others from
          taking it upon themselves to deprive you
          of the right to call yourself Christian.

          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
            Let’s see if Same knows how Hebrews wrote numbers.
            They wrote numbers in the form of words. Please refer to the following link of the Hebrew-English of 2 Chronicles 22:2.

            https://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_chronicles/22-2.htm

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Same Old Stupid Hakeem View Post
              They wrote numbers in the form of words. Please refer to the following link of the Hebrew-English of 2 Chronicles 22:2.

              https://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_chronicles/22-2.htm
              No, they did not write them that way, not originally. They originally wrote them as hash marks. Moron.

              Comment


              • If im not mistaken they also rounded their numbers as well.

                Comment


                • SOURCE chronologist Dr. Floyd Jones expands on Gill’s fifth explanation in Chronology of the Old Testament in much more detail.2 This is a respectable position and is one of the two possibilities put forth by most scholars.

                  Dr. Jones makes the case that 42 should remain in 2 Chronicles 22:2. He points out that Ahaziah’s age was indeed 22 as 2 Kings 8:26 says. However, he interprets 2 Chronicles 22:2 as the beginning of the kingly reign of his family line (starting with Omri, then his son Ahab, and then Ahab’s daughter Athaliah who was Ahaziah’s wife).

                  Dr. Jones points out that the numbers given in the Hebrew text are not the numerals 42 and 22 but are written out as “two and forty” and “two and twenty,” which would seem to make a copyist mistake less likely. Hence, he reinterprets the verse instead of appealing to a copyist mistake.
                  ...
                  Many fail to realize that several ancient texts have 22 (or simply 20) instead of 42 as listed in the Masoretic Text (MT) in 2 Chronicles 22:2. The Syriac version (common to Eastern churches) and Arabic version each have 22. The Septuagint (LXX) has 20. In fact, the version used by the Antioch church in New Testament times was obtained by Archbishop Ussher at great cost and it had 22.4 These early translations were obviously drawing from another Hebrew text, different from what we know today as the Masoretic or standard Hebrew text used for most translations in modern times.


                  So - no numerals in evidence, and conflicting records in the available texts - with the MT texts, used for English translations, being clearly in error.
                  1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                  .
                  ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                  Scripture before Tradition:
                  but that won't prevent others from
                  taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                  of the right to call yourself Christian.

                  ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                    SOURCE chronologist Dr. Floyd Jones expands on Gill’s fifth explanation in Chronology of the Old Testament in much more detail.2 This is a respectable position and is one of the two possibilities put forth by most scholars.

                    Dr. Jones makes the case that 42 should remain in 2 Chronicles 22:2. He points out that Ahaziah’s age was indeed 22 as 2 Kings 8:26 says. However, he interprets 2 Chronicles 22:2 as the beginning of the kingly reign of his family line (starting with Omri, then his son Ahab, and then Ahab’s daughter Athaliah who was Ahaziah’s wife).

                    Dr. Jones points out that the numbers given in the Hebrew text are not the numerals 42 and 22 but are written out as “two and forty” and “two and twenty,” which would seem to make a copyist mistake less likely. Hence, he reinterprets the verse instead of appealing to a copyist mistake.
                    ...
                    Many fail to realize that several ancient texts have 22 (or simply 20) instead of 42 as listed in the Masoretic Text (MT) in 2 Chronicles 22:2. The Syriac version (common to Eastern churches) and Arabic version each have 22. The Septuagint (LXX) has 20. In fact, the version used by the Antioch church in New Testament times was obtained by Archbishop Ussher at great cost and it had 22.4 These early translations were obviously drawing from another Hebrew text, different from what we know today as the Masoretic or standard Hebrew text used for most translations in modern times.


                    So - no numerals in evidence, and conflicting records in the available texts - with the MT texts, used for English translations, being clearly in error.
                    To say that the above contradiction is due to a typing error is just an assumption because (i) the original manuscripts are not available to us to verify and (ii) not two copies of the available manuscripts are same.
                    Last edited by Same Hakeem; 05-15-2019, 01:59 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Same Hakeem View Post
                      To say that the above contradiction is due to a typing error is just an assumption because (i) the original manuscripts are not available to us to verify and (ii) not two copies of the available manuscripts are same.
                      I did not say there was a copyist error.
                      The copy used for English translation is in error.
                      Some old manuscripts show 22 years for both references.
                      1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                      .
                      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                      Scripture before Tradition:
                      but that won't prevent others from
                      taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                      of the right to call yourself Christian.

                      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                        I did not say there was a copyist error.
                        The copy used for English translation is in error.
                        Some old manuscripts show 22 years for both references.
                        Thanks

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Same Old IdiotHakeem View Post
                          To say that the above contradiction is due to a typing error is just an assumption because (i) the original manuscripts are not available to us to verify and (ii) not two copies of the available manuscripts are same.
                          Good night you are stupid. Professional textual critics never would make such an idiotic statement. They would look at factors like what sorts of things are frequently miscopied, how a copyist error would occur, and the context of the narrative. Morons like you just run their mouths in ignorance.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Same Hakeem View Post
                            They wrote numbers in the form of words. Please refer to the following link of the Hebrew-English of 2 Chronicles 22:2.

                            https://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_chronicles/22-2.htm
                            Bzzzz.

                            Wrong answer but thank you for playing our game!

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by jpholding View Post
                              Good night you are stupid. Professional textual critics never would make such an idiotic statement. They would look at factors like what sorts of things are frequently miscopied, how a copyist error would occur, and the context of the narrative. Morons like you just run their mouths in ignorance.
                              Your statement above is due to the fact that the original manuscripts are lost.

                              My response to your it-is-a-copyist-error argument is how can you be sure that these original manuscripts were without errors when no one has ever seen them and in light of the contradictions and conflicts?
                              Last edited by Same Hakeem; 05-17-2019, 06:39 PM.

                              Comment


                              • 1 John 4:7 says "God is love" and "God is not unjust" in Hebrews 6:10, however, Deut 20:16-17 says "However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you " as well as " Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’”

                                We all agree that God is love and just. But we cannot believe that killings of infants and all that breathes are attributed to God's order as per the above verses.
                                Last edited by Same Hakeem; 05-17-2019, 07:08 PM.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-15-2024, 10:19 PM
                                14 responses
                                74 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-13-2024, 10:13 PM
                                6 responses
                                60 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-12-2024, 09:36 PM
                                1 response
                                23 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-11-2024, 10:19 PM
                                0 responses
                                22 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-08-2024, 11:59 AM
                                3 responses
                                43 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Working...
                                X