Christians can you answer some of these (not nessecarally all of them.?

Question

Who incited David to count the fighting men of Israel?

(a) God did (2 Samuel 24: 1)

(b) Satan did (I Chronicles 2 1:1)





In that count how many fighting men were found in Israel?

(a) Eight hundred thousand (2 Samuel 24:9)

(b) One million, one hundred thousand (IChronicles 21:5)




How many fighting men were found in Judah?

(a) Five hundred thousand (2 Samuel 24:9)

(b) Four hundred and seventy thousand (I Chronicles 21:5)




God sent his prophet to threaten David with how many years of famine?

(a) Seven (2 Samuel 24:13)

(b) Three (I Chronicles 21:12)




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)




How old was Jehoiachin when he became king of Jerusalem?

(a) Eighteen (2 Kings 24:8)

(b) Eight (2 Chronicles 36:9)

I'm a Christian by the way.

I meant correct the contridictions.

Answer 1

1. Does God incite David to conduct the census of his people (2 Samuel 4:1), or does Satan (1 Chronicles 21:1)?

(Category: misunderstood how God works in history)

This seems an apparent discrepancy unless of course both statements are true. It was towards the end of David's reign, and David was looking back over his brilliant conquests, which had brought the Canaanite, Syrian, and Phoenician kingdoms into a state of vassalage and dependency on Israel. He had an attitude of pride and self-admiration for his achievements, and was thinking more in terms of armaments and troops than in terms of the mercies of God.

The Lord therefore decided that it was time that David be brought to his knees, where he would once again be cast back onto the mercy of God. So he let him go ahead with his census, in order to find out just how much good it would do him, as the only thing this census would accomplish would be to inflate the national ego (intimated in Joab's warning against carrying out the census in 1 Chronicles 21:3). As soon as the numbering was completed, God intended to chasten the nation with a disastrous plague which would bring about an enormous loss of life (in fact the lives of 70,000 Israelites according to 2 Samuel 24:15).

What about Satan? Why would he get himself involved in this affair (according to 1 Chronicles 21:1) if God had already prompted David to commit the folly he had in mind? It seems his reasons were entirely malicious, knowing that a census would displease the Lord (1 Chronicles 21:7-8), and so he also incited David to carry it through.

Yet this is nothing new, for there are a number of other occurrences in the Bible where both the Lord and Satan were involved in soul-searching testings and trials:

In the book of Job, chapters one and two we find a challenge to Satan from God allowing Satan to bring upon Job his calamities. God's purpose was to purify Job's faith, and to strengthen his character by means of discipline through adversity, whereas Satan's purpose was purely malicious, wishing Job as much harm as possible so that he would recant his faith in his God.
Similarly both God and Satan are involved in the sufferings of persecuted Christians according to 1 Peter 4:19 and 5:8. God's purpose is to strengthen their faith and to enable them to share in the sufferings of Christ in this life, that they may rejoice with Him in the glories of heaven to come (1 Peter 4:13-14), whereas Satan's purpose is to 'devour' them (1 Peter 5:8), or rather to draw them into self-pity and bitterness, and down to his level.
Both God and Satan allowed Jesus the three temptations during his ministry on earth. God's purpose for these temptations was for him to triumph completely over the very tempter who had lured the first Adam to his fall, whereas Satan's purpose was to deflect the saviour from his messianic mission.
In the case of Peter's three denials of Jesus in the court of the high priest, it was Jesus himself who points out the purposes of both parties involvement when he says in Luke 22:31-32, "Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift you as wheat. But I have prayed for you Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers."
And finally the crucifixion itself bears out yet another example where both God and Satan are involved. Satan exposed his purpose when he had the heart of Judas filled with treachery and hate (John 13:27), causing him to betray Jesus. The Lord's reasoning behind the crucifixion, however, was that Jesus, the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world should give his life as a ransom for many, so that once again sinful man could relish in the relationship lost at the very beginning, in the garden of Eden, and thereby enter into a relationship which is now eternal.
Thus we have five other examples where both the Lord and Satan were involved together though with entirely different motives. Satan's motive in all these examples, including the census by David was driven by malicious intent, while the Lord in all these cases showed an entirely different motive. His was a benevolent motive with a view to eventual victory, while simultaneously increasing the usefulness of the person tested. In every case Satan's success was limited and transient; while in the end God's purpose was well served furthering His cause substantially.

(Archer 1982:186-188)

3. 2 Samuel 24:9 gives the round figure Of 500,000 fighting men in Judah, which was 30,000 more than the corresponding item in 1 Chronicles 21:5.

(Category: misunderstood the historical context)

Observe that 1 Chronicles 21:6 clearly states that Joab did not complete the numbering, as he had not yet taken a census of the tribe of Benjamin, nor that of Levi's either, due to the fact that David came under conviction about completing the census at all. Thus the different numbers indicate the inclusion or exclusion of particular unspecified groups in the nation. We find another reference to this in 1 Chronicles 27:23-24 where it states that David did not include those twenty years old and younger, and that since Joab did not finish the census the number was not recorded in King David's Chronicle.

The procedure for conducting the census had been to start with the trans-Jordanian tribes (2 Samuel 24:5) and then shift to the northern most tribe of Dan and work southward towards Jerusalem (verse 7). The numbering of Benjamin, therefore, would have come last. Hence Benjamin would not be included with the total for Israel or of that for Judah, either. In the case of 2 Samuel 24, the figure for Judah included the already known figure of 30,000 troops mustered by Benjamin. Hence the total of 500,000 included the Benjamite contingent.

Observe that after the division of the United Kingdom into the North and the South following the death of Solomon in 930 BC, most of the Benjamites remained loyal to the dynasty of David and constituted (along with Simeon to the south) the kingdom of Judah. Hence it was reasonable to include Benjamin with Judah and Simeon in the sub-total figure of 500,000, even though Joab may not have itemized it in the first report he gave to David (1 Chronicles 21:5). Therefore the completed grand total of fighting forces available to David for military service was 1,600,000 (1,100,000 of Israel, 470,000 of Judah-Simeon, and 30,000 of Benjamin).

(Archer 1982:188-189 and Light of Life II 1992:189)

The other answers and the rest of the 101 can be found at the site below.

Answer 2

You have discovered that the Bible is not always translated correctly. I could show you many other passages that seem to contradict each other. The record that we have has suffered many translations and as a result, not all the passages adhere. It is necessary to read the Bible with a prayer for inspiration to understand the truth it contains. Without the spirit to guide you, it is very possible to become confused about Biblical passages.
As for the numerical discrepancies above, they are for the most part insignificant to the gospel principles being taught. As for the first passage, God does not entice people to do wrong. So if the numbering of the people was wrong, then it was Satan that enticed him to do it.
Please pray for inspiration to know the truth when you read the scriptures and you will find much more knowledge than you ever thought possible.

Answer 3

The gist of it as I understand it:

The Bible is not the 'Inerrant Word of God'. It was never meant to be the inerrant word of God. The Inerrant Word of God is now with the Father in heaven.

What you are seeing in those verses as I know them, is what man does. They alter. They are incapable of being right for very long. Hence, the copies they made were deviated from. I'm sure that there are times when the count was off because the counter was influenced by other knowledge about others that were included in the count. But the fact is, those numbers do not agree. It has nothing to do with what I think about Jesus Christ and the trust that I can have in Him to do what He said He would do.

Answer 4

Here's my answer, in the form of a hypothetical question:

If twelve people witness a car wreck on the interstate, and police take statements from all of them, how many differing versions will they get?
TWELVE! They may not always be completely different, but some of the details will be. It all depends on where you were, what you were doing, etc.

Same holds true with Biblical accounts of things. Everyone saw or heard something slightly different.

Read the four gospels. All accounts of the same events, all slightly different. Because they were given by four different people. Each looked at it from a different angle. One as a doctor, one as an emotional wreck, etc.

Everyone sees things or hears things in their own way.

That's the best answer I can give. Hope it helps a bit.

Answer 5

The man above me has a better explained answer than I had so use his.

The fourth and fifth questions aren't true...

and neither is the last one, what kind of Bible are u reading?

Answer 6

Let's see, you asked the questions and you provided the answers. What's left?

HTH

Charles

Answer 7

How about "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you"?

To quote an answer you gave me, and I quote:


"SHUT UP!!!!!"

Namaste

Peace and Love

Answer 8

These are old questions that are commonly used to try to point to contradictions in the Bible. Here are explanations.

Concerning the census.

For many Bible readers, the parallel accounts that describe David’s numbering of Israel (found in 2 Samuel 24 and 1 Chronicles 21) pose a serious problem. “Why does 2 Samuel 24:1 state that God ‘moved’ David against Israel, while 1 Chronicles 21:1 says that it was Satan who ‘stood up against Israel, and moved David to number Israel’ ”? Can both passages be right, or is this a contradiction?

The Hebrew verb wayyaset, translated “moved” (NKJV) or “incited (NASV), is identical in both passages. God and Satan’s actions are described using the same word. The difference lies with the sense in which the word is used: Satan incited (or tempted—cf. 1 Thessalonians 3:5) David more directly, while God is spoken of as having incited David because He allowed such temptation to take place. The Hebrews often used active verbs to express “not the doing of the thing, but the permission of the thing which the agent is said to do” (Bullinger, 2898, p. 823, emp. in orig.). Throughout the Bible, God’s allowance of something to take place often is described by the sacred writers as having been done by the Lord.

------------------------------------------------------
Concerning the number of fighting men.

Many alleged discrepancies in the Bible deal with numerical values being different from one book to the next. Several plausible ways exist to show that these differing numbers are not really discrepancies at all. It could be the case that the different authors were counting different groups of people or rounding off their numbers to different places.

One such alleged discrepancy that involves differing numerical values is found between 1 Chronicles 21:5 and 2 Samuel 24:9.

1 Chronicles 21:5 (ASV): “Then Joab gave the sum of the number of the people to David. All Israel had one million one hundred thousand men who drew the sword, and Judah had four hundred and seventy thousand men who drew the sword.”

2 Samuel 24:9 (ASV): “Then Joab gave the sum of the number of the people to the king. And there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men who drew the sword, and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand men.”

Obviously, the numbers given for the men of Israel differ by 300,000, while the numbers for the men of Judah differ by 30,000. Are there any possible solutions to this alleged discrepancy? The truth of the matter is that there are several possible solutions. Let us deal first with the differing number of the men of Israel.

The first possible solution is based upon a closer reading of the text. When the two verses are compared, 1 Chronicles 21:5 says that “All Israel had one million one hundred thousand men who drew the sword” (emp. added). But 2 Samuel says, “And there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men who drew the sword” (emp. added). It could be that the author of 2 Samuel was indicating the number of “seasoned veterans” or “valiant” men, while the author of 1 Chronicles was numbering any man who drew the sword, not just the valiant ones. Gleason Archer concluded:

A possible solution may be found along these lines. So far as Israel (i.e., the tribes north of Judah) is concerned, the 1 Chronicles figure includes all the available men of fighting age, whether battle seasoned or not. But from 2 Samuel 24 we learn that Joab’s report gave a subtotal of “mighty men” (‘ish hayil), i.e., battle-seasoned troops, consisting of 800,000 veterans. But in addition there may have been 300,000 more men of military age who served in the reserves but had not yet been involved in field combat. These two contingents would make up a total of 1,100,000 men—as 1 Chronicles reports them, with employing the term ‘ish hayil (1982, pp. 188-189).

Remember that the only thing required to prove that a discrepancy does not exist is to provide a single possible solution (see Lyons, 2004). Archer’s explanation reveals quite clearly one possible solution. However, it is by no means the only one. Eric Vestrum lists another quite reasonable solution to the problem.

There is another possibility that will be reasonable after examination. The reader should re-read 1 Chr 27. Notice here that there are 12 divisions of 24,000 men each, giving a total of 288,000 men. It is possible that the Chronicler counts these men whereas the author of 2 Sam does not. Notice that the 800,000 men in 2 Sam were included in a census, as David wanted to know how many men there were for fighting. Yet, as the numbers of divisions were apparently fixed at 24,000 per division, one would presumably not need to take a census of groups whose sizes are intrinsically defined by a priori fixed numbers. It is not requiring too much to state that it is reasonably possible that the author of 2 Sam did not include these 288,000 while the (different) author of 1 Chr did. With two different authors writing apart from each other at non-identical times, it is not at all specious to assert a reasonable plausibility to a different mode of reckoning in reporting the census (Vestrum).

-----------------------------------------------------
Concerning the age of the Kings

In 2 Kings 8:26, we read that Ahaziah, the sixth king of Judah, was twenty-two years old when he began his reign. However, in the book of 2 Chronicles, the Bible indicates that he was forty-two years old when he became king (22:2). Furthermore, in 2 Kings 24:8 we read where Jehoiachin succeeded his father as the nineteenth king of Judah at the age of eighteen, yet 2 Chronicles 36:9 informs us that he was “eight years old when he became king.” How is it that both of these kings are said to have begun their respective reigns at different times in their lives. Was Ahaziah twenty-two or forty-two when he became king? And was Jehoiachin merely eight years old when he began his rule over Judah, or was he eighteen as 2 Kings 24:8 indicates? How do we know which numbers are correct? And more important, how does the believer, who regards the Bible as the inerrant Word of God, explain these differences?

Fortunately, there is enough additional information in the biblical text to prove the correct age of both men when they began their particular reigns over Judah. (Ahaziah ruled Judah around 841 B.C., and Jehoiachin almost 250 years later in 598 B.C.) Earlier, in 2 Kings 8:17, the author mentions that Ahaziah’s father (Jehoram) was 32 when he became king, and died eight years later at the age of 40 (2 Chronicles 21:5, 20). Obviously, Ahaziah could not have been 42 at the time of his father’s death at age 40, since that would make the son (Ahaziah) two years older than his father (Jehoram). Thus, the correct reading of Ahaziah’s age is “twenty-two,” not “forty-two.” There also is little doubt that Jehoiachin began his reign at eighteen, not eight years of age. This conclusion is established by Ezekiel 19:5-9, where Jehoiachin appears as going up and down among the lions, catching the prey, devouring men, and knowing the widows of the men he devoured and the cities he wasted. As Keil and Delitzsch observed when commenting on this passage: “The knowing of widows cannot apply to a boy of eight, but might well be said of a young man of eighteen” (1996). Furthermore, it is doubtful that an eight-year-old child would be described as one having done “evil in the sight of the Lord” (2 Kings 24:9).

Even though it is possible to know the ages of Ahaziah and Jehoiachin when they began their respective reigns in Judah, the ages of these two kings in Chronicles are incorrect. Are these legitimate mistakes? Are we to conclude, based upon these two verses in 2 Chronicles, that the Bible is not from God? What shall we say to such questions?

The simple answer to these queries is that a copyist, not an inspired writer, made these mistakes. In the case of Ahaziah, a copyist simply wrote twenty instead of forty, and in Jehoiachin’s situation (2 Chronicles 36:9), the scribe just omitted a ten, which made Jehoiachin eight instead of eighteen. This does not mean the Bible had errors in the original manuscripts, but it does indicate that minor scribal errors have slipped into some copies of the Bible. [If you have ever seen the Hebrew alphabet, you will notice that the Hebrew letters (which were used for numbers) could be confused quite easily.] Supporting this answer to the “number problems” in Chronicles are various ancient manuscripts such as the Syriac, the Arabic, at least one Hebrew manuscript, and a few of the Septuagint manuscripts—all of which contain the correct ages for these kings in 2 Chronicles (22 and 18 rather than 42 and 8). Based upon this evidence, and from the fact that the ages of Ahaziah and Jehoiachin given in the Massoretic text of Chronicles are incorrect, the translators of the NIV decided to translate 2 Chronicles 22:2 and 36:9 as “twenty-two” and “eighteen” rather than the way most other English versions of the Bible read (“forty-two” and “eight”).

Although history records that copyists were meticulously honest in handling the text of the Bible, they, like all humans, made mistakes from time to time. Yet, even though technical mistakes in copying the text were made by these scribes of old, three important facts remain: (1) accurate communication still is possible; (2) many times one can find the correct reading by investigating ancient manuscripts such as those listed above; and (3) errors in copies of the Bible do not mean that those errors were in the original manuscripts written by inspired men.

Answer 9

No! No! You're taking that out of context! Rabble rabble rabble!