Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Please explain this clear Bible error.
The Revenge of Reason
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 63 (79745)
01-21-2004 8:39 AM


Per 1 KNG 16:6,8 Baasha dies and his son Ela begins his reign over Israel, this was in the 26th year of king Asa of Judah’s reign. However per 2 CHR 16:1 In the 36th year of Asa's reign, Baasha attacks Judah Ten years after his death?

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Abshalom, posted 01-21-2004 10:16 AM The Revenge of Reason has not replied
 Message 3 by Amlodhi, posted 01-21-2004 12:10 PM The Revenge of Reason has not replied
 Message 4 by :æ:, posted 01-21-2004 12:55 PM The Revenge of Reason has not replied
 Message 5 by mark24, posted 01-21-2004 6:49 PM The Revenge of Reason has not replied
 Message 16 by Terry, posted 03-16-2004 10:16 PM The Revenge of Reason has not replied

  
Abshalom
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 63 (79765)
01-21-2004 10:16 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by The Revenge of Reason
01-21-2004 8:39 AM


A or B?
Revenge:
Either you've discovered another example of biblical errancy, or more evidence of resurrection.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by The Revenge of Reason, posted 01-21-2004 8:39 AM The Revenge of Reason has not replied

  
Amlodhi
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 63 (79806)
01-21-2004 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by The Revenge of Reason
01-21-2004 8:39 AM


quote:
Originally posted by The Revenge of Reason
Please explain this clear bible error.
You've already provided the explanation. The Chronicles account cannot be reconciled with the account in Kings. The information contained in the Tel Dan stela can be understood to support the Kings account.
The answer then is simple: II Chr. 16:1 is wrong.
Namaste'
Amlodhi

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by The Revenge of Reason, posted 01-21-2004 8:39 AM The Revenge of Reason has not replied

  
:æ: 
Suspended Member (Idle past 7184 days)
Posts: 423
Joined: 07-23-2003


Message 4 of 63 (79820)
01-21-2004 12:55 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by The Revenge of Reason
01-21-2004 8:39 AM


Obviously it was a different man named Baasha attacking Judah in the Chronicles.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by The Revenge of Reason, posted 01-21-2004 8:39 AM The Revenge of Reason has not replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 5 of 63 (79888)
01-21-2004 6:49 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by The Revenge of Reason
01-21-2004 8:39 AM


More than one Baasha? My names Mark, & there's lots of me!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by The Revenge of Reason, posted 01-21-2004 8:39 AM The Revenge of Reason has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by truthlover, posted 01-22-2004 9:13 AM mark24 has replied

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 4059 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 6 of 63 (80023)
01-22-2004 9:13 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by mark24
01-21-2004 6:49 PM


More than one Baasha? My names Mark, & there's lots of me!
Kings says Omni was king during the 36th year of Asa's reign, not a Baasha II. Omni was replaced by Ahab in the 38th year of Asa. 2 Chr 16 says Baasha, king of Israel, attacked Judah in Asa's 36th year.
We have a situation here, Captain. I can't hold her! She's breaking up! Aaarghh... :-D

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by mark24, posted 01-21-2004 6:49 PM mark24 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by truthlover, posted 01-22-2004 9:19 AM truthlover has not replied
 Message 8 by mark24, posted 01-22-2004 10:23 AM truthlover has replied

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 4059 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 7 of 63 (80025)
01-22-2004 9:19 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by truthlover
01-22-2004 9:13 AM


Wait, wait!
Oh, gosh, this is obvious. I can't believe a fan of the Lord of the Rings like myself could possibly have missed it.
Baasha was dead in the 36th year of Asa, but he had been a murderer in his life. So, in order to be able to rest in peace, Omni, the current king, summoned Baasha to perform a heroic deed and build a fortress in Judah. Once that was accomplished, Baasha was able to rest in peace.
I saw that in Return of the King. This is not a contradiction! It's a ghost story! :-D

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by truthlover, posted 01-22-2004 9:13 AM truthlover has not replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 8 of 63 (80036)
01-22-2004 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by truthlover
01-22-2004 9:13 AM


Hi Truthlover,
But do we really know that it was referring to any king called Baasha as opposed to some local warlord?
Mark

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by truthlover, posted 01-22-2004 9:13 AM truthlover has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by truthlover, posted 01-22-2004 10:58 AM mark24 has replied

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 4059 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 9 of 63 (80045)
01-22-2004 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by mark24
01-22-2004 10:23 AM


Yeah, I'm afraid that 2 Chr 16 specifically says Baasha, King of Israel, and 1 Kings, whether it says it or not, is giving the lineage of the Kings of Israel.
Now, there may be arguments about whether the kings of Israel were just local warlords, but that's irrelevant. For the purposes of Kings and Chronicles, the "king of Israel" reference in Chronicles is clearly a reference to the same king Baasha as mentioned in Kings.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by mark24, posted 01-22-2004 10:23 AM mark24 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by mark24, posted 01-22-2004 3:02 PM truthlover has not replied

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 5195 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 10 of 63 (80099)
01-22-2004 3:02 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by truthlover
01-22-2004 10:58 AM


Fair enough!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by truthlover, posted 01-22-2004 10:58 AM truthlover has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by roboto85, posted 01-29-2004 12:32 AM mark24 has not replied

  
roboto85
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 63 (81424)
01-29-2004 12:32 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by mark24
01-22-2004 3:02 PM


none
[This message has been edited by roboto85, 01-29-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by mark24, posted 01-22-2004 3:02 PM mark24 has not replied

  
cloud_strife
Inactive Member


Message 12 of 63 (81572)
01-29-2004 10:12 PM


I posted the same question on Christianity.com, here was the reply:
"Many scholars say that in the twentieth year of Asa's reign, the tribes of Benjamin and Judah separated from Israel, and the author of 1 Kings is counting from the separation, while the author of 2 Chronicles is counting from the beginning of Asa's reign.
Not a contradiction."

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by The Revenge of Reason, posted 01-30-2004 8:11 AM cloud_strife has not replied

  
The Revenge of Reason
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 63 (81628)
01-30-2004 8:11 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by cloud_strife
01-29-2004 10:12 PM


Any Proof?
How did they come to this conclusion? Did they provide any sort of reasoning or proof? Could you provide it here?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by cloud_strife, posted 01-29-2004 10:12 PM cloud_strife has not replied

  
cloud_strife
Inactive Member


Message 14 of 63 (81822)
01-31-2004 2:24 PM


Christians are wierd man.
I posted that there, and then they entirely changed the subject about how secularists try to point out biblical errors, and they are wrong. They didn't even address the question. So, I asked again, and I'm waitin on it. I'll get back to you.

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by Amlodhi, posted 01-31-2004 3:28 PM cloud_strife has not replied

  
Amlodhi
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 63 (81834)
01-31-2004 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by cloud_strife
01-31-2004 2:24 PM


quote:
Originally posted by cloud_strife
Many scholars say that in the twentieth year of Asa's reign, the tribes of Benjamin and Judah separated from Israel, and the author of 1 Kings is counting from the separation, while the author of 2 Chronicles is counting from the beginning of Asa's reign.
I would also like to see more information on this, because it doesn't appear to be correct as quoted. I think that whoever originally posted this is confusing something that he has read somewhere else.
First off, the split began with the reigns of Rehoboam (Judah) and Jeroboam I (Israel) c. 931 b.c.
.....Judah..................................Israel................
Rehoboam 931-914....................Jeroboam I 931-909
Abijam 914-911.........................Nadab 909-908.....
Asa 911-870.............................Baasha 908-885....
Jehoshaphat 870-846.................Elah 885-884......
Second, your quote says that I Kings is counting from a (supposed) separation in Asa's 20th year. Counting what from the separation? Unless, I have missed something, I Kings gives no regnal date for Baasha's attack on Judah. I Kg. 15:16 & 32 simply say that, ". . . there was war between Asa and Baasha king of Israel all their days".
Now, Kings can't be counting the dates of Baasha's reign from this supposed split in Asa's 20th year. A quick crunch of the numbers shows this to be untenable. For instance, I Kg. 15:33, "In the 3rd year of Asa. . began Baasha to reign." According to your quote, this would be the 3rd year counting from Asa's 20th year, which would mean that Baasha didn't begin to reign until Asa's 23rd year; just doesn't work. And worse, I Kg. 16:8, "In the 26th year of Asa. . began Elah to reign". If Kings is counting from the 20th year of Asa, then this would mean that Elah began to reign in the 46th year of Asa. And yet, Asa only reigned for 41 years; again, just doesn't work.
And further, it can't be said that the Chronicles are counting from a split in Asa's 20th year either. Since the Chronicles state that Baasha attacked Judah in Asa's 36th year, this would mean the 56th years of Asa's reign; obviously, this is even worse.
What I suspect, then, is that the person who answered your question on the other board actually meant to indicate that Kings and/or the Chronicles are counting these regnal dates from the actual split in 931 b.c.
Thus, Chronicles 16:1, stating that, "In the 36th year of Asa, Baasha . . came up against Judah", would be during Asa's reign but in the 36th year after the actual split in 931 b.c. Since, as shown above, Asa began his reign 20yrs after the separation (and I suspect this is where the 20 yr. figure in the quote was misunderstood), the 36th year after the split, in the reign of Asa, would be the 16th year of Asa's personal reign, or c. 895 b.c. Since the numbers can then be made to mesh using 931 b.c. as the count start, it is said that no contradiction exists.
However, there are problems with this harmonization. One problem is that later in the same chapter (16) in verse 12, the years of Asa's reign are given in a context that cannot be reconciled to a count start from 931 b.c. II Chr. 16:12, "And was diseased, Asa, in the 39th year of his reign. If a count start from 931 b.c. is intended here, it would mean that Asa was diseased in his 19th year (with 22 yrs. yet to reign) and this is untenable. Yet, even though it argues for two different methods of calculation in the same chapter, the fact that verse 12 specifies "his" reign could be taken to specify his "personal" reign in this instance.
But then, another more serious difficulty arises in the chapter immediately preceding, i.e. II Chr. 15. This chapter talks about Asa removing all the places of idol worship from Judah and, also, from the areas of Ephraim which have come under his control. He is told (in verse 8) that there would be a reward for this work. At the culmination of Asa's efforts, the people held a huge sacrifice and entered into a covenant with YHWH "with all their hearts and souls". This took place in the 3rd month of the 15th year of Asa's reign (vs. 10). Here again, this can't be counting from 931 b.c. because, obviously, Asa wouldn't have even been reigning yet at this time.
Because of these efforts by Asa, verse 15 says that "YHWH gave rest to them all around". Verse 19 makes the further statement, "And there was no war until the 35th year of the reign of Asa".
But here, this 35th year of Asa must also be counted from 931 b.c. or Baasha would already be dead (for 9 yrs.) and wouldn't, of course, to able to attack Judah. If, though, this 35th year is counted from 931 as it must be, then it would be the 15th year of Asa's personal reign. Yet it makes no sense for verse 10 to say that they made this covenant with YHWH in the 3rd month of the 15th year, then (vs. 15) "and YHWH gave rest to them all around, when verse 19 says there was war in Asa's 15th year.
Given the vagaries of counting 1st regnal years and depending on which particular month of the year Asa actually succeeded to the throne, it might be just possible to squeak Baasha's attack on Judah into a time period a few months after Asa's cleansing of Judah and the renewal of the covenant with YHWH. Even giving this benefit of the doubt, however, it would be hard to consider that a few short months would qualify as the "rest from war" that Asa was promised in return for his efforts. If Chronicles did intend the 35th year to be the 35th year of Asa's personal reign, that would allow a 20 year period in which Judah was at rest from war which would seem more rational.
Thus, on reconsideration, the two accounts could conceivably be reconciled, but it would require some contortions and rationalizations.
Namaste'
Amlodhi
[This message has been edited by Amlodhi, 01-31-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by cloud_strife, posted 01-31-2004 2:24 PM cloud_strife has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by PecosGeorge, posted 04-22-2004 5:49 PM Amlodhi has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024