petra1000

I am a born again christian who loves the Lord and I am taking bible classes online
I am a born again christian who loves the Lord and I am taking bible classes online

Genesis 15:16—Did the Exodus occur in the fourth generation or in the sixth?

Problem: Here the Bible speaks of the Exodus as being in the “fourth generation” from the time of Jacob’s descent to Egypt. However, according to the genealogical tables in 1 Chronicles 2:1–9 (and Matt. 1:3–4) it was really the sixth generation (2:1–11), namely, Judah, Perez, Hezron, Ram, Amminadab, and Nashon.

Solution: The word “generation” in Genesis 15:16 is defined in that very passage as 100 years, since “the fourth generation” (v. 16) is used to refer to “four hundred years” (v. 13). So Genesis 15 is referring to the amount of time and 1 Chronicles is speaking of the number of people involved in the same period of tim

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty

Genesis 14:18–20—Who was Melchizedek?

Problem: There is some debate over the nature of Melchizedek. Was he a historical person, a super-normal being, or just a mythical figure?

Solution: Based on Hebrews 7, some have interpreted Melchizedek as being an angel or even an appearance of Christ. This is not likely since the author of Hebrews was using Melchizedek to be a type of Christ. In Genesis, Melchizedek is presented in an ordinary, historical manner. He meets and speaks with Abraham in an ordinary manner. There is no reason, archaeological or otherwise, to question the historical character of Melchizedek.

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty

Genesis 14—Is the account of Abraham’s defeat of the Mesopotamian kings historically reliable?

Problem: Genesis presents this battle as factually true. But, according to the Documentary Hypothesis of biblical criticism, this story is a later addition and totally fictitious.

Solution: We possess very little information about this period apart from Genesis itself. As a result, while we do not have direct archaeological confirmation, there is no good reason to doubt the event. Such doubt usually stems from an anti-biblical bias.

Furthermore, there is indirect support for the validity of this account. Noted archaeologist W.F. Albright has observed that, “In spite of our failure hitherto to fix the historical horizon of chapter 14, we may be certain that its contents are very ancient. There are several words and expressions found nowhere else in the Bible and are now known to belong to the second millennium [b.c.]. The names of the towns in Transjordania are also known to be very ancient” (Alleman and Flack, Old Testament Commentary, Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1954, 14). In light of this, there is no good reason to doubt the authenticity of the biblical account of Abraham’s battle with these Mesopotamian kings.

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty

Genesis 12:10–20; 20:1–18—Why did God let Abraham prosper by lying?

Problem: We are told in the Bible not to lie (Ex. 20:16), but, when Abraham lied about Sarah, his wealth was increased.

Solution: First, Abraham’s increase in wealth should not be viewed as a divine reward for his lie. Pharaoh’s gifts to him were understandable. Pharaoh may have felt obligated to pay amends for the wicked constraint that his corrupt society put on strangers who visited his land.

Furthermore, Pharaoh may have felt he had to make amends to Abraham for unwittingly taking his wife into his palace. Adultery was strictly forbidden by the Egyptian religion.

What is more, Abraham paid for his sin. The years of trouble that followed may have been a direct result of his lack of faith in God’s protecting power.

Finally, although some people are portrayed as men of God, they are still fallible and responsible for their own sin (e.g., David and Bathsheba, 2 Sam. 12). God blessed them in spite of, not because of, their sins.

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty

Genesis 11:32—Was Abraham 75 years old when he left Haran, or was he 135 years old?

Problem: Genesis 11:26 states, “Now Terah lived seventy years, and begot Abram, Nahor, and Haran.” In Acts 7:4 Stephen states that Abraham did not leave Haran until after Terah, his father, died. Genesis 11:32 says that Terah died at 205 years of age. If Abraham was born when Terah was 70, and did not leave for Canaan until Terah died at 205, that would make Abraham 135 years old when he left Haran to travel to Canaan. However, Genesis 12:4 states, “And Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran.” How old was Abraham when he left Haran? Was he 75 or was he 135?

Solution: Abraham was 75 years old when he left Haran. Although it was customary to list the names of sons from the oldest to the youngest, this practice was not always followed. Genesis 11:26 does not say that Terah was 70 years old when Abraham was born. Rather it states that Terah lived for 70 years before he had any sons, then he had three sons, Abraham, Nahor, and Haran. Haran was probably the oldest son of Terah, indicated by the fact that he was the first to die (Gen. 11:28). Nahor was probably the middle son, and Abraham was the youngest. Abraham was listed first because he was the most prominent of Terah’s sons. Since Abraham was 75 when he left Haran, this would mean that he was born when Terah was 130 years old.

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty

Genesis 11:28—How could Abraham’s family be from Ur of the Chaldees when elsewhere it says his ancestors came from Haran?

Problem: There is an apparent conflict as to where Abraham is really from. Genesis 11:28 says Abraham came from Ur of the Chaldees (in southern Iraq), but Genesis 29:4 claims he is from Haran (in northern Iraq).

Solution: This conflict is easily resolved. Abraham’s family originated in Ur, but later migrated to Haran when God called him (Gen. 11:31–12:1). It is not unusual that Abraham would look back to Haran, where he had lived until he was 75 years old, as his homeland. Also, he quite naturally refers to the children of his two older brothers as part of his family.

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty

Genesis 11:5—How can God “come down” from heaven when He is already here (and everywhere)?

Problem: God is omnipresent, that is, everywhere at the same time (Ps. 139:7–10). But this text declares that God “came down” to see the city that men had built. But if He is already here, then how can He “come down” here?

Solution: God “came down” as a theophany, which is a special localized manifestation of the presence of God. These theophanies often appeared in the OT. Once God appeared to Abraham as a man (Gen. 18:2). God also came down to speak to Moses (Ex. 3), Joshua (Josh. 5:13–15), and Gideon (Jud. 6) in a similar manner.

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty

Genesis 10:5 (cf. 20, 31)—Why does this verse indicate that humankind had many languages when Genesis 11:1 says there was only one?

Problem: Genesis 10:5, 20, 31 seem to suggest many dialects, which is an apparent conflict with Genesis 11:1 that clearly states, “the whole earth had one language and one speech.”

Solution: These texts speak of two different times. Earlier, while maintaining their tribal distinctions, the descendants of Ham, Shem, and Japheth all spoke the same language. Later, at the tower of Babel (Gen. 11), God punished their rebellious attempt by confusing their speech. As a result, tribes could no longer understand one another, though possibly the subtribes and clans were allowed a mutually understandable language so they could still understand one another.

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty

Genesis 9:3—Did God ordain the eating of meat or only plants?

Problem: When God created Adam, He commanded him to eat only “every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth … to you it shall be for food” (Gen. 1:29). But meat was not given by God to eat. However, when Noah came out of the Ark, he was told, “Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs” (Gen. 9:3). But this seems to contradict God’s earlier command not to eat meat.

Solution: This is a good example of progressive revelation where earlier commands are superseded by later ones. In matters that do not involve the change of any intrinsic moral standard (based on the nature of God), God is free to change the commands to His creatures to serve His overall purposes in the progress of redemption. For example, parents at one time will allow small children to eat with their fingers, only to instruct them a little later to eat their potatoes with a spoon. Then, a few years later, the same parent reprimands her older child, “Don’t eat your potatoes with your spoon; use your fork!” There is no contradiction here at all. It is a simple matter of progressive revelation adapted to the circumstances and all geared to the ultimate goal. God works in a similar way.

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty

GENESIS 8:22—If seedtime and harvest were never to be interrupted, then why were there famines?

Problem: God promised Noah: “While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest … shall not cease.” However, there are many famines recorded, even in Bible times, when there has been no harvest (cf. Gen. 26:1; 41:54).

Solution: “Cease” (shabath) means to come to an end, to be eliminated, to desist completely. This passage only promises that the seasons will not cease, not the crops. It refers to “seedtime” and harvesttime, not necessarily to the actual planting and harvesting of a crop. And the seasons have never stopped completely since this promise was made to Noah. Further, this general promise was not intended as a guarantee that there would be no temporary interruptions. It was only a statement about the permanent cycles of the year until the end of time.

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty

Genesis 8:21—Did God change His mind about never destroying the world again?

Problem: According to this verse, after the flood, God promised, “Nor will I again destroy every living thing.” Yet Peter foretells the day in which “the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up” (2 Peter 3:10).

Solution: After the flood, God only promised never again to destroy the world in the same way “as I have done” (Gen. 8:21), namely by water. The rainbow is a perpetual symbol of this promise. The second time God destroys the world it will be by fire, not by water. It will “be burned up” (2 Peter 3:10). Even so, God will not then destroy all living things. Humans will be saved in their resurrected and imperishable physical bodies (1 Cor. 15:42).

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty

Genesis 8:1—Did God temporarily forget Noah?

Problem: The fact that the text says that “God remembered Noah” seems to imply that He temporarily forgot him. Yet the Bible declares that God knows all things (Ps. 139:2–4; Jer. 17:10; Heb. 4:13) and that He never forgets His saints (Isa. 49:15). How then could He temporarily forget Noah?

Solution: In His omniscience, God was always aware of Noah being in the ark. However, after Noah was left in the ark for over a year, as if he were forgotten, God gave a token of His remembrance and brought Noah and his family out of it. But, God had never forgotten Noah, since it was He that warned Noah in the very beginning in order to save him and the human race (cf. Gen. 6:8–13). We often use a similar expression when we “remember” someone on their birthday, even though we had never forgotten they existed.

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty

Genesis 7:24—Did the flood rains last forty days or one hundred fifty days?

Problem: Genesis 7:24 (and 8:3) speak of the flood waters lasting for 150 days. But, other verses say it was only 40 days (Gen. 7:4, 12, 17). Which is correct?

Solution: These numbers refer to different things. Forty days refers to how long “the rain fell” (7:12, niv), and 150 days speaks of how long the flood “waters prevailed” (cf. 7:24).

At the end of the 150 days “the waters decreased” (8:3). After this it was not until the fifth month after the rain began that the ark rested on Mt. Ararat (8:4). Then about eleven months after the rain began, the waters dried up (7:11; 8:13). And exactly one year and ten days after the flood began, Noah and his family emerged on dry ground (7:11; 8:14).

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty

Genesis 6:14—How could a wooden ark survive such a violent flood?

Problem: The ark was only made of wood and carried a heavy load of cargo. But, a world-wide flood produces violent waters that would have broken it in pieces (cf. Gen. 7:4, 11).

Solution: First, the ark was made of a strong and flexible material (gopherwood) that “gives” without breaking. Second, the heavy load was an advantage that gave the ark stability. Third, naval architects inform us that a long box-shaped, floating box-car, such as the ark was, is a very stable craft in turbulent waters. Indeed, modern ocean liners follow the same basic dimensions or proportions of Noah’s ark.

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty

Genesis 6:14 How could Noah’s ark hold hundreds of thousands of species?

Problem: The Bible says Noah’s ark was only 45 feet high, 75 feet wide, and 450 feet long (Gen. 6:15, niv). Noah was told to take two of every kind of unclean animal and seven of every kind of clean animal (6:19; 7:2). But scientists inform us that there are between one half a billion to over a billion species of animals.

Solution: First, the modern concept of “species” is not the same as a “kind” in the Bible. There are probably only several hundred different “kinds” of land animals that would have to be taken into the ark. The sea animals stayed in the sea, and many species could have survived in egg form. Second, the ark was not small; it was a huge structure—the size of a modern ocean liner. Furthermore, it had three stories (6:16) which tripled its space to a total of over 1.5 million cubic feet!

Third, Noah could have taken younger or smaller varieties of some larger animals. Given all these factors, there was plenty of room for all the animals, food for the trip, and the eight humans aboard.

Posted by petra1000 in Bible Difficulty