Bible Contradiction? How many of Bezai’s offspring returned from Babylon?

For today’s post we will tackle the question the Skeptic Annotated Bible asked: How many of Adin’s offspring returned from Babylon?

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

323

“the sons of Bezai, 323;” (Ezra 2:17)

324

“the sons of Bezai, 324;” (Nehemiah 7:23)

(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 2:17 as affirming the claim “323 of Bezai’s offspring returned from Babylon” against Nehemiah 7:23 as affirming “324 of Bezai’s offspring returned from Babylon.”
4. One must always figure out the context of the verses the skeptic cited.
   1. The book of Ezra was written before the book of Nehemiah.  The purpose of the book of Ezra records God’s fulfillment of bringing back the nation of Israel after 70 years of captivity.  The first six chapters of Ezra record Zerubbael’s leadership in leading the exiles to return to build the alter in Jerusalem.  Chapter 7-10 record how 80 years after Zerubbabel’s first trip Ezra journeyed to Jerusalem with a second group and how God used Ezra to bring about reform (William MacDonald, Believer’s Bible Commentary, 482).
   2. The book of Nehemiah record the third great leader of the Jewish return and restoration to the Promise Land after the Exile.  Nehemiah was originally a cup bearer to the Persian King who thirteen year after Ezra’s expedition he was burden for the conditions of Jerusalem (William MacDonald, Believer’s Bible Commentary, 482).  So God use Nehemiah to restore the city walls of Jerusalem and also other spiritual and moral reforms.
   3. Knowing the background of both books we can see that the time between Ezra 2 and Nehemiah 7 is about a period of 93 years or so.
5. Knowing there is a 93 years period between Ezra 2 and Nehemiah 7 help us to understand the possible reasons for the differences of both chapters’ listing.
   1. First off In Ezra 2:1 it seems to indicate the list is giving an account of those who decided to depart Babylon in order to return to the promise land: “Now these are the people of the province who came up out of the captivity of the exiles whom Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon had carried away to Babylon, and returned to Jerusalem and Judah, each to his city.“
   2. The purpose of listing the first generation’s return to the Jerusalem in Nehemiah 7 seems to be for the reason of organizing a new genealogy in Nehemiah’s day by first basing it upon the template of the first genealogy of the first generation.  Note Nehemiah 7:5: “Then my God put it into my heart to assemble the nobles, the officials and the people to be enrolled by genealogies. Then I found the book of the genealogy of those who came up first in which I found the following record:” The different purposes must be remembered.
   3. Considering that Ezra 2:1 mentioned that the list in Ezra 2 are those who left the captivity in Babylon to return to Jerusalem we must remember that it is situated in a context in which Ezra 1 the people have not arrived yet to Jerusalem while the people arrived in the end of chapter 2 and beginning of chapter 3 of Ezra.  It is reasonable to understand the listing of names and numbers in Ezra refer to those who departed Babylon.  But just because one departed from Babylon for the promise land does not mean everyone would have arrived.  Even with modern military units when we walk on foot hiking somewhere it doesn’t mean 100% of us arrive at our destination especially if there’s some incredible distance to travel; why won’t be surprised with civilians and families traveling that some will not arrive at their final destination for whatever reason?
   4. Thus Nehemiah 7’s listing might be of those who actually did arrive in Jerusalem and the promise land and not just a listing of those who attempted to return back to Jerusalem and the promise land.
   5. Also even upon their arrival to the promise land that doesn’t mean there’s a census done right away; there’s lots to do to settle in and the work of census for a genealogy might be a significant time later when things are more stable.
   6. Also given there’s 93 years between the two listing we can understand the latter listing in Nehemiah 7 might be a count of the population at a given specific time.  Don’t forget population changes up and down for many reasons: death, births, young men coming of age in which they are now counted as adults, etc.
6. Keep in mind the differences between 323 and 324 is only 1.  A large group of hundreds amount of men and their families as they head out of Babylon can easily have 1 more young men come of age and considered adults when they get to the promise Land and have individual journeying and augmenting the group over time.
7. There is no contradiction here.  Seems the skeptic needs to learn of How to Handle Bible Contradictions.
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.”