In one it appears that Achan is the son of Carmi, because it says "son of Carmi." In the others, it seems he is the son of Zehra, because it says "the son of Zehra."
I know that many believe the bible is inerrant and infallible. Therefore it must be some sort of misinterpretation.
Is this scripture "out of context" or is it "not meant to be taken literally"? I've included a link to various versions of the bible so I don't think it's a "mistranslation" or that "son" actually meant something else. I think it must be a "misinterpretation" as this has always been a go-to answer. By stating that it's a misinterpretation, no one is obligated to give evidence of the right answer, or how to go about obviating misinterpretation in the first place.
Joshua 7:1, Joshua 7:24; Joshua 22:20
http://bible.cc/joshua/7-1.htm
http://bible.cc/joshua/7-24.htm
2006-12-13 03:36:31 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I have read the Bible in 5 different languages and there are many differences in each. Humans make mistakes and mistakes are found in the Bible. Those that say that every word of the Bible is 100% God's words are mistaken. Their ignorance doesn't make the Bible false, or not something of great value. Instead of picking the Bible apart, word for word, perhaps people should try to live by its message.
2006-12-13 03:40:06 · answer #1 · answered by AT 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Carmi is Achan's father. Zehra was an earlier ancestor, of the lineage of Judah. In Biblical times, a person was often referred to in relation to one of their earlier ancestors.
This is the case in many passages of Scripture.
In similar context, Jesus was referred to as "son of David".
(see Matthew 9:27)
the inerrancy remains intact.
2006-12-13 03:50:42 · answer #2 · answered by mikerow992003 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
But the children of Israel committed a trespass concerning the devoted thing; for Achan, the son of Carmi, the son of Zabdi, the son of Zerah, of the tribe of Judah, took of the devoted thing; and the anger of the LORD was kindled against the children of Israel
Son of Carmi (who is the son of Zabdi, who is the son of Zerah) Think father, grandfather, great-grandfather
2006-12-13 03:44:53 · answer #3 · answered by sister steph 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The answer to the question is that Achan was a son to all! The Bible gives us family lines in describing people...in America I would say son of my father, grandfather, and great-grandfather! Here in scripture we see that he is described as son of Father and Grandfather. Later in scripture he is characterized by perhaps his great-grandfather...this is so people would know what part of what tribe Achan was from! Knowing family lines was a whole lot bigger than what we do today! In our traditions we go by only our last name! So I hope this clears up things!
2006-12-13 03:51:46 · answer #4 · answered by fredyouthguy 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your question is not clear.
Are you asking why in one place it says "son of Carmi" and in another verse it may skip "Zemri" and go to "Zerah"?
Achan is the son of all three. He is the son of Carmi and the (grand) son of Zemri, and the (great grand) son of Zerah. He is also the son of "Adam". Generational skipping in genealogies is common. It is not error.
The purpose for saying "the son of" is to connect Acahn to his tribe or clan. Either name given in these verses satisfy that.
2006-12-13 03:52:00 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Also says in joshua 7.1 The clan of zerah so i suppose that should explain things also if you have anymore problems undrstanding the bible maybe you could pray that God would give you understanding.
2006-12-13 04:06:03 · answer #6 · answered by demoman 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Just read the first two chapters, there you will find two different creation stories that contradict each other on several points. People who take the bible literally don't seem to have read it.
2006-12-13 03:46:38 · answer #7 · answered by sudonym x 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Bible is Truth - it is perfect, it is without error, it is "God breathed" - total inspiration of God - penned by men. The devil would have you think otherwise. God is so good - He gave us His Word - that is all we need.
2006-12-13 03:57:55 · answer #8 · answered by jworks79604 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋