"Contradictions" Answered Here

WittenbergDoors · Not So Newbie Joined: 18 Oct 2002 Posts: 6

I would point out that the phrase 40 days and 40 nights often means.."unspecified time".

Another area of "contradiction" is the number of horses or men in one book, lets say the book of Kings vs the book of Chronicles.

Often one number describes the army proper while the larger number in a later book describes all men who can be called on for battle.

The same applies to horses. The first amount often refers to horses in standing army, vs all horses that can be called on to defend the kingdom.

Sara Jansky · Posted: Sun Nov 17, 2002 12:09 pm Post subject: "Contradictions" Answered Here

Well, well, look who finally decided to show up. Its Magnum PI. I have been away for quite some time and thought I would check in. Is there anything that you actually do agree with Magnum? I doubt you would admit to it. I waited and waited for you to respond to me but.......nothing. I think you were lying when you told me you were actually interested in what I had to say.

Sara Jansky · Posted: Sun Nov 17, 2002 12:18 pm Post subject: "Contradictions" Answered Here

quote:
Originally posted by Magnum PI:
Wrong. Concubine means [b]Mistress, a woman who is not married and has a station below that of wife.

Concubine does not = wife. BIG difference!

The contradiction stands!

[This message has been edited by Magnum PI (edited 10-18-2002).][/B]

Contradiction does not stand. Concubine also means "secondary wife". Why don't you look up the meaning for the word.

And if you knew the Bible you would know that his first wife's name was Sarai (later changed to Sarah and Abraham’s name used to be Abram). Contradiction is non-existent.

Also:

concubine
in the Bible denotes a female conjugally united to a man, but in a relation
inferior to that of a wife. Among the early Jews, from various causes, the
difference between a wife and a concubine was less marked than it would be
amongst us. The concubine was a wife of secondary rank. There are various laws
recorded providing for their protection (Ex. 21:7; Deut. 21:10-14), and setting
limits to the relation they sustained to the household to which they belonged
(Gen. 21:14; 25:6). They had no authority in the family, nor could they share
in the household government. The immediate cause of concubinage might be
gathered from the conjugal histories of Abraham and Jacob (Gen. 16;30). But in
process of time the custom of concubinage degenerated, and laws were made to
restrain and regulate it (Ex. 21:7-9). Christianity has restored the sacred
institution of marriage to its original character, and concubinage is ranked
with the sins of fornication and adultery (Matt. 19:5-9; 1 Cor. 7:2).

This was taken from http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=concubine.

[This message has been edited by Sara Jansky (edited 11-17-2002).]

Sara Jansky · Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2002 2:09 pm Post subject: "Contradictions" Answered Here

Magnum you still around. You seem to only care about speaking to someone when you think that you can win, that seems to be your sole purpose in life, being right all the time.

What do you think about all of these answers I have given you? Have they made you think that maybe, just maybe there really aren't any contradictions in the Bible like you thought?

Magnum PI · Posted: Thu Nov 28, 2002 6:11 pm Post subject: "Contradictions" Answered Here

quote:
Originally posted by Sara Jansky:
Magnum you still around. You seem to only care about speaking to someone when you think that you can win, that seems to be your sole purpose in life, being right all the time.

What do you think about all of these answers I have given you? Have they made you think that maybe, just maybe there really aren't any contradictions in the Bible like you thought?

You're still wrong. I forgot about this thread as changeup is more active then you are. I will reply tomorrow morning. Time to eat turkey dinner.

Until then...

MPI

Sara Jansky · Posted: Sat Nov 30, 2002 8:01 pm Post subject: "Contradictions" Answered Here

Yeah, I don't really have very much time to post, but you don't respond very fast so I don't worry about it too much.

Magnum PI · Posted: Thu Dec 12, 2002 9:41 pm Post subject: "Contradictions" Answered Here

quote:
Originally posted by Sara Jansky:
Contradiction does not stand.

It most certainly does stand! You are still wrong Sara.

This is exactly what you said:

quote
Quote:

Just like these two verses say, she was Abraham’s wife.

And I replied simply that concubine does not equal wife, it means a mistress!

Main Entry: con·cu·bine
Pronunciation: 'kä[ng]-kyu-"bIn, 'kän-
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin concubina, from com- + cubare to lie
Date: 14th century
: a woman with whom a man cohabits without being married: as a : one having a recognized social status in a household below that of a wife b : MISTRESS 4a

Genesis 25:1 - Then again Abraham took a wife, and her name was Keturah.

1 Chronicles 1:32 - Now the sons of Keturah, Abraham's concubine: she bare Zimran, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and Ishbak, and Shuah. And the sons of Jokshan; Sheba, and Dedan.

Plain and simple, concubine does not equal wife Sara! The contradiction STANDS!

quote
Quote:

Concubine also means "secondary wife".

NO! It does not! See above definition!

quote
Quote:

Why don't you look up the meaning for the word.

I did! Obviously YOU DID NOT!

quote:
concubine
in the Bible denotes a female conjugally united to a man, but in a relation
inferior to that of a wife.

Hence, the defintion aforementioned by webster! Concubine does not equal wife!

Quoted by you: "Christianity has restored the sacred institution of marriage to its original character, and concubinage is ranked with the sins of fornication and adultery (Matt. 19:5-9; 1 Cor. 7:2)."

Hence, concubine is NOT a wife but a MISTRESS! Thus, the adulterous affair!

I say again, the contradiction STANDS!

MPI

[This message has been edited by Magnum PI (edited 12-13-2002).]

stuey · Posted: Sat Feb 01, 2003 9:45 pm Post subject: "Contradictions" Answered Here

quote:
Originally posted by Magnum PI:
Hence, the defintion aforementioned by webster! Concubine does not equal wife!

Yes it does indeed mean secondary wife. I'll put it in bold if that helps:

quote
Quote:

concubine in the Bible denotes a female conjugally united to a man, but in a relation inferior to that of a wife. Among the early Jews, from various causes, the difference between a wife and a concubine was less marked than it would be amongst us. The concubine was a wife of secondary rank.

Or perhaps we should once again post the link to the definition of concubine that Sara gave.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=concubine

Of course concubine means MISTRESS in certain cultures, but in others (Chinese, Jewish, among others) it had the meaning of secondary wife.

[This message has been edited by stuey (edited 02-02-2003).]

Magnum PI · Posted: Sun Feb 02, 2003 9:25 pm Post subject: "Contradictions" Answered Here

In accordance with religious doctrine/scripture (quoted above in Sara's own posting and repeated in mine), concubinage is a station below that of (an actual) wife (i.e., mistress) and is a sin (i.e., adultery).

Furthermore, the era to which the definition applies is in ancient Biblical times not today! And in those ancient times the 'other' was not united by ceremony or otherwise. They were just 'accepted' as a common law part of the equation since back then 'men ruled.' Women didn't have a say in life since their status was always ranked below that of the male figure(s) in the family structure. Even the bastard children of this mistress were not even considered heirs or otherwise. Either way you look at it, she and her offspring were the bottom of the barrel and completely unequal to that of the actual wife.

Apologetict defintions aside, the contradiction stands.

MPI

[This message has been edited by Magnum PI (edited 02-02-2003).]

Jim S · Little Guppy Joined: 21 Nov 2002 Posts: 30

In Biblical times, a "concubine" was basically a secondary wife. Under normal circumstance, a man's sons by a concubine/secondary wife would not share in the inheritance, except for modest gifts perhaps. Thus Abraham's Keturah is a typical concubine/secondary wife, in that her sons received no significant portion of the inheritance, which rather went all to Isaac.

But if a man's wife gave the man her maidservant to bear sons on behalf of the wife, then such sons might well be considered to be rightful heirs to the man's inheritance. Jacob's four children by his two concubines got their full shares under those circumstances. And that is precisely why the story of Sarah and Abraham exiling Hagar and Ishmael into the desert with grossly inadequate provisions has such a bite. It does not seem a proper thing for Patriarch #1 to have done.

And why does Genesis go out of its way to emphasize that Abraham could so easily sire sons by women other than Sarah?