PROVING DAN IS IN REV 7:6 AND THE INCORRUPTIBILITY OF SCRIPTURES

Muslims, in order to preserve credibility, haLA to resort in falsifying the bible so to make Islam apparently untarnished, so through it, would propel the delusion that a murderous religion is the true and god-approved way of life, prescribed for mankind. There is no other way than to downtrod the bible by accusing it as altered by man-made distortion and corruption which they cannot prove by any evidence of actual manuscript alteration. They only do it by allegedly biblical contradiction, through out-of-context and deliberate self-interpretation of its texts.

The only way to destroy this presumptive scheme of desperately  protecting islam, is by terminal means of proving that, in reality, there is no biblical corruption, as interpretation through utilization of a more comprehensive context and indisputable logical concept applied to these alleged contradiction.

THEREFORE, IF I CAN PROVE NO BIBLICAL CORRUPTION, BY LOGICAL MEANS, INEVITABLY IS THE DOWNFALL OF THAT CONCEPT OF ISLAM AS TRUE RELIGION! MAKING IT, BY ESSENCE, A DEMONIC INSTITUTION!

let’s begin…

I want to emphasize though, biblical corruption, is not evidence of false faith or false religion, as it is not the primary, giver of understanding but god, through his guidance we could sort out from the possible corrupted texts the truth from error, which through this divine guidance the words of God are preserved so as god promised:

Psalms 12:6-7

[6]The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

[7]Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Through the holy spirit we could discern the truth, from any possible error as it say,

1 Corinthians 2:9-10

[9]But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

[10]But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

Thereby, we could discern errors from truth if ever the bible has corruption.

1 John 4:6

[6]We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the principle of truth, and the principle of error.

Therefore, possible biblical corruption don’t indicate false religion!

But that is, on a crucial note, when trying to justify the apparently scribal errors and allegedly bible contradiction, and one of these is REV 7:6 wherein Manasseh was used instead of Dan. Nevertheless, in a realistic point of view,  it is a fact that god guaranteed of true scriptures, he called his “sepher” that is, “sepher” (writing) being a compilation of many writings gathered and canonized, in essence, incorruptible and infallible thus nullifying any idea of scribal errors,or to say it least, biblical corruption, as it say,

Isaiah 34:16

[16]Seek ye out of the “sepher” (writing) of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall “adar” (to miss or fail)  none shall want her “reuth” (additional one) : for my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them.

The sepher of the lord is not the bible but the scriptures, which sepher, we must read, such that, contextually it is infallible, as I will prove later. If it is, why does it have alleged scribal errors such as in rev 7:6?

Yes, it has but not in all manuscripts, such as the bohairic translation therefore it is not actually a deadend whereas we could say, that there is hope against scribal corruption.

Here is…

Could anyone say, this bohairic manuscript particularly, rev7:6 where it has dan than manasseh, not the correct scripture?

Though, a translation, but which biblical ruling, rejects the authenticity of it in terms of truthfulness if so that, god includes it in his “sepher”?

EVEN THE TEXTUS RECEPTUS OF KING JAMES HAS INCORPORATION OF LATIN VULGATE WHICH IS A TRANSLATION.

What hinders us therefore to consider bohairic translation of rev 7:6 as true scripture?

As i said later, god did not standardized any specific biblical manuscripts as correct scripture, bec truth cannot be gleaned from mere textual scholarship or textual criticism but necessarily, the essential intervention and guidance of the holy spirit whereby, the true church, guided by it, is the authority to say which is contextually the correct scripture from not as the church is the ground of truth.

What god has guaranteed was the presence of his one collective “sepher” (writing) as an infallible sola scriptura against any additional religious text, as a set of gathered manuscripts, as implied,

Isaiah 34:16

[16]Seek ye out of the “sepher” (writing) of the LORD, and read: no one of these shall “adar” (to miss or fail)  none shall want her “reuth” (additional one) : for my mouth it hath commanded, and his spirit it hath gathered them.

We do not know which among contradictory gathered manuscripts is the one collective “sepher” of god, to pinpoint a type of manuscripts as these were categorized in text-types, and say, this is the correct scripture. Through the guidance of the holy spirit, we know that correct scriptures were scattered in every bible, thus we apply selective method of sorting out truth from these, whereby, this selective “sorting out”method permits us to consider a bohairic translation, specifically rev 7:6 as correct scripture.

Regarding alleged biblical contradictions:
For the sake of study purposes, let’s see if these alleged contradiction is logically, unexplainable such that its a logical dead-end, if not, then, it nullifies any certainty of error, making the claim of corruption as mere hypothesis.
Here goes….

ALLEGED BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS: source:here (excerpt would be indicated as “excerpt”)
1. Does God incite David to conduct the census of his people (2 Samuel 24:1), or does Satan (1 Chronicles 21:1)?

Answer:
Both! God used Satan to incite David to do the action. It was god’s way to use evil for a purpose to happen, such as,

1 Kings 22:22-23
[22]And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so.
[23]Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil concerning thee.


Psalms 78:49
[49]He cast upon them the fierceness of his anger, wrath, and indignation, and trouble, by sending evil angels among them.


Romans 9:17
[17]For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

By this reality, of god using evil entities for his purpose, it certainly applies to how both god and satan, were responsible for david’s census. God likewise used Satan! It was not a conspiracy bec god dont conspire with evil. 

2 Corinthians 6:14

[14]Be ye not equally yoked together with unbelievers: for what partnership hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

It means, god cannot have a compact or conspiracy of the same intent with satan. His part is only as a permissive authority, whereas through satans freewill, god based his next action, either, by permitting it or not. In this case he permitted it, as the course of his anger towards israel.

Matthew 10:29

[29]Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father (permission).

Job 2:6

[6]And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, he is in thine hand; but save his life.

As you can see, god’s role is as the supreme authority as permittor whether things should happen or not, and being incapable of having equal intent with Satan as they cannot be partners, implies, that god only permitted satan to act his own way whereby god grabbed as opportunity to animate his anger towards israel. Satan was still liable for his intents, as it was his personal will!


2. 2 Samuel 24:9 gives the total population for Israel as 800,000, whereas 1 Chronicles 21:5 says it was 1,100,000.

2 Samuel 24:9

[9]And Joab gave up the sum of the number of the people unto the king: and there were in Israel eight hundred thousand chayil (might/strength/force) men that drew the sword; and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand men.

1 Chronicles 21:5

[5]And Joab gave the sum of the number of the people unto David. And all they of Israel were a thousand thousand and an hundred thousand “iysh” (male person) that drew sword: and Judah was four hundred threescore and ten thousand men that drew sword.

1 Chronicles 27:1,23-24

[1]Now the children of Israel after their number, to wit, the chief fathers and captains of thousands and hundreds, and their officers that served the king in any matter of the courses, which came in and went out month by month throughout all the months of the year, of every course were twenty and four thousand.

[23]But David took not the number of them from twenty years old and under: because the LORD had said he would increase Israel like to the stars of the heavens.

ANSWER:

Clearly, the two accounts were of two different nature, one specific the other in general terms. Specifically, the 800, ooo in the first account were mighty men of war who were above twenty years old  whereas, the second account speaks, in general terms, that is inclusive of the soldiers from 20 yrs old and below who were excluded in the initial counting. It implies, two set of counting, as implied,

Samuel 24:10

[10]And David’s heart smote him “achar” (again) that he had numbered the people. And David said unto the LORD, I have sinned greatly in that I have done: 

What wrong did David do? 

He counted through joab against god’s will as he excluded combatants from 20years and below in the initial counting which apparently an error he seemed to realize thus settled for a second counting producing 1,100,000 unlike the first which is, 800,000. 

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.

First account:

2 Samuel 24:9

[9]And Joab gave up the sum of the number of the people unto the king: and there were in Israel eight hundred thousand chayil (might/strength/force) men that drew the sword; and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand men.

2 Samuel 24:10

[10]And David’s heart smote him “achar” (again) that he had numbered the people. And David said unto the LORD, I have sinned greatly in that I have done: and now, I beseech thee, O LORD, take away the iniquity of thy servant; for I have done very foolishly.

Second account:

1 Chronicles 21:5-6


[5]And Joab gave the sum of the number of the people unto David. And all they of Israel were a thousand thousand and an hundred thousand men that drew sword: and Judah was four hundred threescore and ten thousand men that drew sword.

[6]But Levi and Benjamin counted he not among them: for the king’s word was abominable to Joab.


ANSWER:

The second account was an incomplete statistic as Levi and Benjamin were excluded in the counting, thus the limited result of 470,000 whereas, after david counted again as implied in the first account after he has included levi and benjamin, he realized, it was 500,000, whereby he was penitent to what he perceived as blunder which bec of it, he thought god punished them!

Samuel 24:10

[10]And David’s heart smote him “achar” (again) that he had numbered the people. And David said unto the LORD, I have sinned greatly in that I have done: 

That was the impression of David, he sinned as he assumed, by his personal discretion how to count israel wherein, he excluded others. God did not consider it his sin, as it say,

1 Kings 15:5

[5]Because David did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, and turned not aside from any thing that he commanded him all the days of his life, save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite.

Thus when god punished Israel with pestilence, obviously, it was bec of this blunder.

1 Chronicles 21:6-7

[6]But Levi and Benjamin counted he not among them: for the king’s word was abominable to Joab.

[7]And God was displeased with this thing; therefore he smote Israel.

But the transgression was not imputed on David bec as god said, in 1King 15:5 David did the right thing, thus, the consequence of that error, simply was imputed on israel bec of joab whereby it, it say, 

Jeremiah 31:29

[29]In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.

4. 2 Samuel 24:13 mentions that there will be seven years of famine whereas 1 Chronicles 21:12 mentions only three.

2 Samuel 24:13

[13]So Gad came to David, and told him, and said unto him, Shall seven years of famine come unto thee in thy land? or wilt thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue thee? or that there be three days’ pestilence in thy land? now advise, and see what answer I shall return to him that sent me.

1 Chronicles 21:12

[12]Either three years’ famine; or three months to be destroyed before thy foes, while that the sword of thine enemies overtaketh thee; or else three days the sword of the LORD, even the pestilence, in the land, and the angel of the LORD destroying throughout all the coasts of Israel. Now therefore advise thyself what word I shall bring again to him that sent me.

ANSWER:

Obviously, it was two different recommendation of penalty. Initially, 7years was the first option, later, there was a change of option, a change of mind thus as final, 3years of famine, as option, was the abrogation as implied by the two set of counting as it say,

Samuel 24:10

[10]And David’s heart smote him “achar” (again) that he had numbered the people. And David said unto the LORD, I have sinned greatly in that I have done: 

5. Was Ahaziah 22 (2 Kings 8:26) or 42 (2 Chronicles 22:2) when he began to rule over Jerusalem?

Excerpt:

Fortunately there is enough additional information in the Biblical text to show that the correct number is 22. Earlier in 2 Kings 8:17 the author mentions that Ahaziah’s father Joram ben Ahab was 32 when he became King, and he died eight years later, at the age of 40. Therefore Ahaziah could not have been 42 at the time of his father’s death at age 40! Such scribal errors do not change Jewish or Christian beliefs in the least.

ANSWER:

NO SCRIBAL ERROR IN THE BIBLE! AS I SHOWN ABOVE!
Regarding the alleged contradiction, logically, it suggests no scribal error. I’ll put clarificatory caption in parenthesis, as emphatic explanation, after the original texts.

ORIGINAL KJV:

2 Kings 8:26-27

[26]Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother’s name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel.

[27]And he walked in the way of the house of Ahab, and did evil in the sight of the LORD, as did the house of Ahab: for he was the son in law of the house of Ahab.

2 Chronicles 22:2-4

[2]Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother’s name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri.

[3]He also walked in the ways of the house of Ahab: for his mother was his counsellor to do wickedly.

[4]Wherefore he did evil in the sight of the LORD like the house of Ahab: for they were his counsellors after the death of his father to his destruction.

CONTEXTUAL MEANING WITH THE AID OF CAPTIONS:

Kings 8:26-27

[26]Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign (initially, in good faith) ; and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. And his mother’s name was Athaliah, the daughter of Omri king of Israel.

[27]And he walked in the way of the house of Ahab, and did evil in the sight of the LORD (when he was 42) as did the house of Ahab: for he was the son in law of the house of Ahab.

2 Chronicles 22:2-4

[2]Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign (in evil) and he reigned one year in Jerusalem. His mother’s name also was Athaliah the daughter of Omri.

[3]He also walked in the ways of the house of Ahab (at that age of 42): for his mother was his counsellor to do wickedly.

[4]Wherefore he did evil in the sight of the LORD like the house of Ahab: for they were his counsellors after the death of his father to his destruction

As you can see from the illustration, ahaziah initially reigned at age 22 but begin to reign in evil at age 42. Matter of fact, ahaziah was not evil throughout his reign, at some point, he was good, and worshipper of god as implied,

2 Kings 12:18

[18]And Jehoash king of Judah took all the hallowed things that Jehoshaphat, and Jehoram, and Ahaziah, his fathers, kings of Judah, had dedicated, and his own hallowed things, and all the gold that was found in the treasures of the house of the LORD, and in the king’s house, and sent it to Hazael king of Syria: and he went away from Jerusalem.

Implying, he became evil at age 42, whereas at 22, he was a believer!

6. Was Jehoiachin 18 years old (2 Kings 24:8) or 8 years old (2 Chronicles 36:9) when he became king of Jerusalem?


An excerpt:


This is their presumption: scribal error to justify it, but then, it is just in the context of “more likely”, contextually, it could be interpreted as an intact writing as I’ll show below. Ill put caption in parenthesis to emphasize the correct meaning.

2 Kings 24:8-9

[8]Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign (in evil) and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother’s name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.

[9]And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD (at that age)  according to all that his father had done.

2 Chronicles 36:9-10

[9]Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign (initially) and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD (when he turned 18).

Could an 8years old be king?

Yes!

Isaiah 3:4

And I will give children to be their princes, and babes shall rule over them.


7. Did king Jehoiachin rule over Jerusalem for three months (2 Kings 24:8), or for three months and ten days (2 Chronicles 36:9)?

Excerpt:

Here again, as we found in challenge number 2 and 4, the author of the Chronicles has been more specific with his numbering, whereas the author of Kings is simply rounding off the number of months, assuming that the additional ten days is not significant enough to mention.

ANSWER:

2 Kings 24:8-11

[8]Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother’s name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.

[9]And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that his father had done.

[10]At that time the servants of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up against Jerusalem, and the city was besieged.

[11]And Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came against the city, and his servants did besiege it.

2 Chronicles 36:9-10

[9]Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.

[10]And when the year was expired, king Nebuchadnezzar sent, and brought him to Babylon, with the goodly vessels of the house of the LORD, and made Zedekiah his brother king over Judah and Jerusalem.

Logically, jehoiachin 3months rule was the time babylon came and besieged jerusalem which after, 3months and 10 days incumbency, he was taken as captive to babylon!

🌐

Lastly, I could go on and on, but then, its just futile if its purpose is to corroborate true religion by infallibility of the bible which, as aforementioned above, i have stated that, possible corruption doesn’t indicate false religion. The only thing that falsifies religion is when you falsify the “sepher” of god!

The purpose of this blog though, is to at least show the irregularity of the claim that there is biblical corruption, when in fact, there is none.

WHAT GUARANTEE THE INCORRUPTIBILITY OF THE BIBLE?

Firstly, partial proof above shows the alleged contradiction as untrue.

Secondly, god did not standardized any single book as the correct bible, but instead, suggested, to use all bible through selective method of sorting out valid texts from all available bible. Read here: CLICK ME!

Thirdly, there was no random corruption in the bible as it should have manifestation in other parts such as in any biblical science and prophecies yet it has none. It is unthinkable how they could have been spared. Read here: CLICK ME!

🌐

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “PROVING DAN IS IN REV 7:6 AND THE INCORRUPTIBILITY OF SCRIPTURES

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s