Today’s post will tackle another question that the Skeptic Annotated Bible asked: “Who were Saul’s sons?”
Here are the two answers which the skeptic believes shows a Bible contradiction:
Jonathan, Ishui, and Melchishua
Now the sons of Saul were Jonathan and Ishvi and Malchi-shua; and the names of his two daughters were these: the name of the firstborn Merab and the name of the younger Michal. (1 Samuel 14:49)
Jonathan, and Malchishua, and Abinadab, and Eshbaal.
Ner became the father of Kish, and Kish became the father of Saul, and Saul became the father of Jonathan, Malchi-shua, Abinadab and Eshbaal. (1 Chronicles 8:33, 9:39)
(Note: Scriptural quotation comes from the New American Standard Bible)
Here’s a closer look at whether or not there is a contradiction:
- When dealing with skeptics’ claim of Bible contradictions it seems one can never be reminded enough of what exactly is a contradiction. A contradiction occurs when two or more claims conflict with one another so that they cannot simultaneously be true in the same sense and at the same time.
- The first answer to the question of who were Saul’s sons were “Jonathan, Ishui, and Melchishua” based upon 1 Samuel 14:49. There are two ways for there to be a contradiction with the first answer. The first way is a denial of the first answer: “Saul’s sons were not Jonathan, Ishui, and Melchishua.” The second way to contradicts the first answer is if one adds the word “only” to either one of the sons mentioned in the first answer such as “Jonathan was the only son of Saul,” or “Ishui was the only son of Saul,” or “Melchishua was the only son of Saul.” But the second answer from 1 Chronicles 8:33, 9:39 are neither of these two propositions. Thus we don’t have a contradiction.
- The same can be said about the second answer to the question. Again the second answer to the question of who were Saul’s sons were “Jonathan, and Malchishua, and Abinadab, and Eshbaal.” There are two ways for there to be a contradiction with this claim. The first way is a denial of the second answer. It would be stated as the following: “Saul’s sons were not Jonathan, and Malchishua, and Abinadab, and Eshbaal” The second way to contradicts with the second answer would be if one adds the word “only” to either one of the sons mentioned such as “Jonathan was the only son of Saul,” “Melchishua was the only son of Saul,” “Abinadab was the only son of Saul or “Eshbaal was the only son of Saul.” But the first answer from 1 Samuel 14:49 are neither of these two propositions. Thus we don’t have a contradiction between the first answer and the second answer.
- Let us note the similarities and differences between 1 Samuel 14:49 and 1 Chronicles 8:33, and 1 Chronicles 9:39. All three verses stated Jonathan and Malchishua as sons of Saul. On the one hand Ishui was only mentioned in 1 Samuel 14:49. Abinadab and Eshbaal were mentioned in 1 Chronicles 8:33, and 1 Chronicles 9:39 but not in 1 Samuel 14:49. But just because some names were not mentioned in the other verses does not mean we have a contradiction. In fact the information in all three verses are compatible and fit together as “puzzle pieces” with each giving unique further information.
Thanks for another analysis of an alleged contradiction. I really enjoy these.
You’re welcome Tom! I do spend a lot of time on them even shorter posts like this one as I start with the verse in the original language, look at the context and think about them. I’m glad others do enjoy these as it is encouraging to know.
I’m a 1+1=2 guy when it comes to apologetics so I appreciate the guys who can divide and multiply with the atheist intellectuals.
[…] via Bible Contradiction? Who were Saul’s sons? — The Domain for Truth […]
[…] Who were Saul’s sons? […]
[…] Who were Saul’s sons? […]
[…] Who were Saul’s sons? […]
[…] Who were Saul’s sons? […]
This is the summary of why this isn’t a contradiction: “There are two ways for there to be a contradiction with this claim. The first way is a denial of the second answer. It would be stated as the following: “Saul’s sons were not Jonathan, and Malchishua, and Abinadab, and Eshbaal” The second way to contradicts with the second answer would be if one adds the word “only” to either one of the sons mentioned such as “Jonathan was the only son of Saul,” “Melchishua was the only son of Saul,” “Abinadab was the only son of Saul or “Eshbaal was the only son of Saul.” But the first answer from 1 Samuel 14:49 are neither of these two propositions. Thus we don’t have a contradiction between the first answer and the second answer.”
[…] Who were Saul’s sons? […]
Good job with this
All three verses are compatible. No contradiction. Love how you said they are “puzzle pieces” each giving unique further information.
I don’t get this atheist. If God isn’t real then it really doesn’t matter if the Bible has contradictions. There should be nothing to worry about
This guy is letting Satan use him for sure. He is rebelling hard
What a refreshing logical post
This isn’t the atheist brightest moment…
CUcks western secularists: these compatible verses are stated to be incompatible but nontraditional marriage are declared compatible!
I have been looking through your blogs for weeks and noticed there’s not really any atheists in the comments and their silence is quite telling
Bible denial-er need to follow the logic
The skeptics are quite binary thinkers when it doesn’t necessitate.
I laughed but you are right
Hey glad you enjoyed a laugh
Since many secularist hates family we are not surprised that they can’t imagine having more or less kids at different times. They can go back to putting cats and dogs on strollers, sickos.
No chill but true lol
There are many errors like this in the list of alleged Bible contradictions from the skeptics. Their perspectives cannot be called truth. The Skeptic Annotated Bible is not a reliable guide on the Bible.
The Skeptic Annotated Bible is pretty lame
Their lists of contradictions is based upon subjective opinions and nothing more
The skeptics are the worst spin doctors