Bible Contradiction? Was Mahli the son of Levi?

For today’s post we will tackle the question the Skeptic Annotated Bible asked: Was Mahli the son of Levi?

Here are the two answers which the skeptic believes indicate a Bible contradiction (along with the wording by the skeptics of  additional thoughts):

Yes, Mahli was Levi’s son.

“According to the good hand of our God upon us they brought us a man of insight of the sons of Mahli, the son of Levi, the son of Israel, namely Sherebiah, and his sons and brothers, 18 men” (Ezra 8:18)

No.

Mahli was not the son of Levi.

“The sons of Levi: Gershon, Kohath, and Merari..” (Genesis 46:11, 1 Chronicles 6:1, 6:16)

“David divided them into divisions according to the sons of Levi: Gershon, Kohath, and Merari.” (1 Chronicles 23:6)

“These are the names of the sons of Levi according to their generations: Gershon and Kohath and Merari; and the length of Levi’s life was one hundred and thirty-seven years.” (Exodus 6:16)

He was the son of Merari.

“The sons of Bela were Ard and Naaman: of Ard, the family of the Ardites; of Naaman, the family of the Naamites.” (Numbers 3:20)

“The sons of Bela were Ard and Naaman: of Ard, the family of the Ardites; of Naaman, the family of the Naamites.” (1 Chronicles 6:19, 23:21)

“The sons of Merari, Mahli and Mushi; the sons of Jaaziah, Beno.” (1 Chronicles 24:26)

(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 Ezra 8:18 which affirm “Mahli was Levi’s son” against all the other verses which the skeptic thinks denies “Mahli was Levi’s son.”
4. The skeptic cited Genesis 46:11, 1 Chronicles 6:1, 6:16, 1 Chronicles 23:6 and Exodus 6:16 as proof that “Mahli was not the son of Levi” (his words).  But those passage doesn’t deny that Mahli was the son of Levi.  There’s absence of any mention of Mahli in those verses.  The absence of any mention of Mahli as the son of Levi in those verses doesn’t mean its evidence that Mahli was not the son of Levi.  The skeptic seems to have a problem with remembering that the absence of evidence is not an evidence of absence.
5. The skeptic then cited three verses to assert “He was the son of Merari” (his own words).  These verses cited are Numbers 3:20, 1 Chronicles 6:19, 23:21 and 1 Chronicles 24:26.  Those verses were properly interpreted by the skeptic and does show Mahli was the son of Merari.
6. When Ezra 8:18 stated “Mahli was Levi’s son” it used the Hebrew word בֵּן.  This is important in resolving this alleged Bible contradiction.
7. If Levi is the father of Merari who then is also the father of Mahli then there is not a contradiction here in light of the use of Hebrew term for “son” to say Mahli was the son of Merari and the “son” of Levi.  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. Still yet another example of the Hebrew word  בֵּן meaning “grandson can be seen in our previous post “
   5. Was Zechariah Iddo’s son or grandson?“
   6. Yet one more example of the Hebrew word  בֵּן meaning “grandson” can be seen in our post “Was Jehu the son or grandson of Nimshi?“
   7. And another example: “Who was Korah’s father?“
   8. Finally there’s the example of the Hebrew word  בֵּן meaning “grandson” in our post “Were Naaman and Ard the sons or the grandsons of Benjamin?“
8. Thus there is no contradiction here if we understand that the Hebrew word בֵּן can mean both “son” and “grandson.”
9. 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”.
10. 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.”