Total Posts:6|Showing Posts:1-6
Jump to topic:

Contradiction regarding the high priest...

Mr.Infidel
Posts: 300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2011 7:01:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
...at the time David ate the shew bread.

1) And he said to them, 'Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need of food? He entered the house of God, when Abiathar was high priest, and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and he gave some to his companions.' (NRSV) Mark 2:25-26:

2) Then David came to Nob to Ahimelech the priest. And Ahimelech came to meet David trembling and said to him, "Why are you alone, and no one with you?" (ESV) 1 Samuel 21:1

The question is: which one was it? I would like an answer.
Please donate to the following ENDANGERED SPECIES!
Preciousness of life.
Family structure.
Family values. 

Disarm a liberal. Vote for values.

Opinions of this signature are those of G-d's and any of His affiliates.
Crede
Posts: 455
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2011 7:36:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The apparent inaccuracy is resolved once it is realized that Abiathar and Ahimelech were names of both father and son. This can be seen by a comparison of the following passages:
1 Samuel 14:3 - "And Ahiah, {mg. called Ahimelech} the son of Ahitub . . . "
1 Samuel 22:20 - "And one of the sons of Ahimelech the son of Ahitub, named Abiathar, escaped, and fled after David."
2 Samuel 8:17 - "And Zadok the son of Ahitub, and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar, were the priests . . . "
1 Chronicles 18:16; 24:6 - same as 2 Samuel 8:17.

copy / paste from http://www.wrestedscriptures.com...
Mr.Infidel
Posts: 300
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2011 8:04:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/9/2011 7:36:15 PM, Crede wrote:
The apparent inaccuracy is resolved once it is realized that Abiathar and Ahimelech were names of both father and son. This can be seen by a comparison of the following passages:
1 Samuel 14:3 - "And Ahiah, {mg. called Ahimelech} the son of Ahitub . . . "
1 Samuel 22:20 - "And one of the sons of Ahimelech the son of Ahitub, named Abiathar, escaped, and fled after David."
2 Samuel 8:17 - "And Zadok the son of Ahitub, and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar, were the priests . . . "
1 Chronicles 18:16; 24:6 - same as 2 Samuel 8:17.

copy / paste from http://www.wrestedscriptures.com...

I'm aware of their father-son relationship, but they were not the high priests at the same time. That's like saying George bush 1 and 2 were president at 9/11. Just wouldn't work.
Please donate to the following ENDANGERED SPECIES!
Preciousness of life.
Family structure.
Family values. 

Disarm a liberal. Vote for values.

Opinions of this signature are those of G-d's and any of His affiliates.
Crede
Posts: 455
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2011 8:05:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
before I go research it it looks like they call the son just priest and his dad high priest. I don't see the contradiction.
logicrules
Posts: 1,721
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2011 7:02:30 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/9/2011 7:01:11 PM, Mr.Infidel wrote:
...at the time David ate the shew bread.

1) And he said to them, 'Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need of food? He entered the house of God, when Abiathar was high priest, and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and he gave some to his companions.' (NRSV) Mark 2:25-26:

2) Then David came to Nob to Ahimelech the priest. And Ahimelech came to meet David trembling and said to him, "Why are you alone, and no one with you?" (ESV) 1 Samuel 21:1

The question is: which one was it? I would like an answer.

First, you cite different translations and ask for an explanation. Not sure where to start.
Second, you seem to think the bible is a book of historical fact, when it is a collection of stories of faith, ancient, with errors inserted over centuries.
Thus was it billy or billybob becomes irrelevant to those for whom the text was written. (Historical Criticism, Jerome Biblical Commentary, Cambridge Commentary, etc.)
JustCallMeTarzan
Posts: 1,922
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2011 8:21:31 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I'm not sure where people get the idea that there is no contradiction here. The text, as it stands is very clearly contradictory. The real question is whether there is a legitimate explanation... It seems there are a few possibilities:

1) Scribe's error.
2) Whoever wrote Mark got their history wrong.
3) David visited both father and son separately.

There is, too, of course the question of whether they were alone, or if there were other people with them. The Bible is in fact contradictory on this point - it matters little WHO they visited when the question is about how many people visited.

IMO what is most likely is that the author of Mark simply got it wrong. It's no surprise, given some of the other errors in the Gospels where they reference the Old Testament.

The account might not be contradictory per se (by way of mistake), but it is certainly an error.