Bible Contradiction? Who was Korah’s father?

 

For today’s post we will tackle the question the Skeptic Annotated Bible asked: Who was Korah’s father?

Here are the two answers which the skeptic believes indicate a Bible contradiction:

Esau was Korah’s father.

“And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these are the sons of Esau, which were born unto him in the land of Canaan.” (Genesis 36:5)

“These were the sons of Esau’s wife Oholibamah, the daughter of Anah and the [e]granddaughter of Zibeon: she bore to Esau, Jeush and Jalam and Korah..” (Genesis 36:14)

“These are the sons of Esau’s wife Oholibamah: chief Jeush, chief Jalam, chief Korah. These are the chiefs [i]descended from Esau’s wife Oholibamah, the daughter of Anah.” (Genesis 36:18)

“The sons of Esau were Eliphaz, Reuel, Jeush, Jalam and Korah.” (1 Chronicles 1:35)

Eliphaz was Korah’s father.

“These are the chiefs of the sons of Esau. The sons of Eliphaz, the firstborn of Esau, are chief Teman, chief Omar, chief Zepho, chief Kenaz, 16 chief Korah, chief Gatam, chief Amalek. These are the chiefs descended from Eliphaz in the land of Edom; these are the sons of Adah.” (Genesis 36:15-16)

(All Scriptural quotation comes from the New American Standard Bible)

 

Here’s a closer look at whether or not there is a contradiction:

 

1. 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.  To put it another way, a Bible contradiction exists when there are claims within the Bible that are mutually exclusive in the same sense and at the same time.
2. One should be skeptical of whether this is a Bible contradiction given the Skeptic Annotated Bible’s track record of inaccurately handling the Bible.  See the many examples of their error which we have responded to in this post: Collection of Posts Responding to Bible Contradictions.  Of course that does not take away the need to respond to this claim of a contradiction, which is what the remainder of this post will do.  But this observation should caution us to slow down and look more closely at the passages cited by the Skeptic Annotated Bible to see if they interpreted the passages properly to support their conclusion that it is a Bible contradiction.
3. The skeptic tries to pit four verses (Genesis 36:5, Genesis 36:14, Genesis 36:18 and 1 Chronicles 1:35) which affirm the claim “Esau was Korah’s father” against Genesis 36:15-16 which affirm the claim “Eliphaz was Korah’s father.”  We should also ask what is the relationship between Esau and Eliphaz.  Eliphas is the son of Esau since Genesis 36:15-16 states “These are the chiefs of the sons of Esau. The sons of Eliphaz, the firstborn of Esau, are chief Teman, chief Omar, chief Zepho, chief Kenaz, 16 chief Korah.”  That is, Esau is actually the father of Eliphaz.
5. If Esau was the father of Eliphaz who then is the father of Korah there is not a contradiction here in light of the use of Hebrew term for son that is used to say Korah was both the son of Esau and the son of Eliphaz.  The Hebrew root word for “son” in all five verses above is בֵּן.  The range of meaning for בֵּן include “son” but it can also be translate in English as “grandson.”
   1. We see this in Genesis 31:55 where Laban kisses his grandchildren though it uses the Hebrew word בֵּן.  The Hebrew word for son allows for its use to include grandson.
   2. We have also seen instance of this Hebrew word meaning “grandson” in the Old Testament in our previous post “Who Was Achan’s father?“
   3. Another example of the Hebrew word  בֵּן meaning “grandson can be seen in our previous post “Who was Laban’s father?“
   4. Yet another example of the Hebrew word  בֵּן meaning “grandson” can be seen in our previous post “Was Zechariah Iddo’s son or grandson?“
   5. Finally one more example of the Hebrew word  בֵּן meaning “grandson” can be seen in our post “Was Jehu the son or grandson of Nimshi?“
6. Thus there is no contradiction here if we understand that the Hebrew word בֵּן can mean both “son” and “grandson.”
7. Some might object that the possible range of meaning for  בֵּן meaning “son” and “grandson” is illegitimate since there’s two possible meaning of the term when one should have one meaning.  But that’s a terrible objection.  Terms can have more than one meaning in many languages and not just with Hebrew.  For instance consider the lexical range of meaning for the English word Whoppers and the Word “Left”.
8. We shouldn’t miss that worldviews are at play even with the skeptic’s objection to Christianity.  The worldview of the author of the Skeptic Annotated Bible actually doesn’t even allow for such a thing as the law of non-contradiction to be meaningful and intelligible.  In other words for him to try to disprove the Bible by pointing out that there’s a Bible contradiction doesn’t even make sense within his own worldview.  Check out our post “Skeptic Annotated Bible Author’s Self-Defeating Worldview.”