Age of King Jehoiachin - Bible Contradiction - Arrow of Guided One - Rev 0

If you want my materials, you can find it in the link below.

In this video of Arrow of Guided One, we delve into one of the Bible's most well-known contradictions found in 2 Kings 24:8 and 2 Chronicles 36:9. According to 2 Chronicles, Jehoiachin was 8 years old when he became king, while 2 Kings says he was 18 years old. Additionally, there's a discrepancy in the duration of his reign – was it 3 months and 10 days, or simply 3 months?

Join us as we explore how this contradiction arose and why modern translations like the NIV have changed the number to 18, using older manuscripts than the KJV, which relied on Textus Receptus. We also discuss how copyist errors affect the claim of biblical inerrancy, especially with texts dating back 1500 years after the original events.

What does this mean for the belief in the Bible's divine inspiration and preservation? Let’s break it down together and consider how these contradictions challenge the idea of biblical inerrancy.

Make sure to like, share, and subscribe to Arrow of Guided One for more insightful discussions on Christianity, religious texts, and faith.

Tags: #BibleContradictions #Jehoiachin #BiblicalInconsistencies #KJVvsNIV #ReligiousStudy #IslamicPerspective #ChristianityExplored #ArrowOfGuidedOne

[kenjohn]

that is one of the most easily refuted "contradictions" in the Bible

[richardkloosman]

This is called the synoptic problem with Kings and Chronicles.The Jewish writers knew about this and still did not change it. That was the reverence for their scriptures. An obvious copyist error. Inerrancy does not lie in a copy, only in the original. You have a couple presumptions going on and one is that we do not know about this discrepancy. Ever asked yourself why they did not just fix this? If this was fiction, you fix, but it is not and you do not know which is right, you keep the tension until further light in the future can be shone on it.

[FX]

This is wrong, he's arguing in bad faith as a self-admitted non-Christian to justify his sinful lifestyle. The NIV and other false translations do not use older manuscripts, even older manuscripts than the one's they cherry pick from continue to be discovered backing up the masoretic text. This is not a contradiction, it's two books written by two separate authors using two intentionally different definitions of kingship. What "Bible contradiction" scammers love to do is cherry pick verses out of context intentionally obfuscating other key verses in the same chapter that clarify the supposed "contradiction".

In this case, you conveniently left out the verse immediately before the cited verse in 2 Chronicles 36 : 9.
2 Chronicles 36 : 8 KJV - "Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and his abominations which he did, and that which was found in him, behold, they are written in the book of the kings of Israel and Judah: and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead."

Here the author (widely believes to be Ezra) is citing the literal "book of the kings" (2 Kings 24 in this case) to make a point about Jehoiachin. The author is adding additional detail to the story, not disregarding or contradicting the original story about Jehoiachin. Just like English, there's very distinct difference in the Hebrew numbers including an entire letter. That's not a cheap copyist's error, that's an intentionally different word recorded.

2 Chronicles - Number "eight" - שְׁמוֹנֶה
2 Kings - Number "eighteen" - שְׁמֹנֶה


It's widely believed Jeremiah wrote the book of the kings (originally written as a single book). The chronicler reveals that Jehoiakim was eight years when he the crown was passed to him, or in other words, when his reign technically began, but he did not reign directly in his own authority until he was 18. The chronicler is adding detail the story that wasn't previously recorded: To convey that Jehoiakim didn't just up and receive the crown at 18 and manage to anger the Lord in 3 months, but that he had 10 years to learn how to be a king and the chronicler also provides more detail in the length of his rule: 3 months *and* ten days. Note in the same chapter in 2 Chronicles 36 Zedekiah who ruled from the age of 21 was also wicked, but he ruled for 11 years. It's classic example of one Bible author revealing more truth about a past event later on in history, which there are countless examples of throughout Scripture. They aren't contradicting their forebears; they are adding onto the foundation of Scripture.

[richardkloosman]

Just by the way, the Textus receptus has nothing to do with the Old Testament. That is the new testament in Greek. The Old testament reference should be the Masoretic and Septuagint texts. I do not think that you actually know your stuff. Give us some corrupted verses please?