The Narrow Path Ministries

I am currently teaching through 1 Corinthians and tonight we'll be discussing 10:1-13 as part of a 3 week series on 8:1-11:1 (food sacrificed to idols).
http://knewkingdom.blogspot.com/2009/04 ... hians.html

1 Corinthians 10:8 presents an interesting problem
Paul tells the Corinthians that "we should not commit sexual immorality, as some of them did- and in one day 23,000 of them died"
The problem is that this doesn't match up correctly with the Old Testament text.

I have run across 5 solutions to this problem

1. Paul was speaking from memory and made a mistake
2. Paul was right, but our OT texts are mistaken
3. He's referring to Exodus 32 and adding those killed by the sword (3,000 in Ex. 32:28) with those killed by plague (unknown, 32:35)
4. He's referring to Numbers 25, where 24,000 died. But Numbers is giving the TOTAL and Paul is giving how many died in "one day"
5. He's COMBINING Exodus & Numbers into 1 theme, taking the 3K from Exodus but keeping the 20k from Numbers. This is why no judgment is mentioned for idolatry in 10:7 when judgment is mentioned for the next 3 sins (10:8, 9 & 10). Paul is connecting idolatry and sexual immorality under 1 judgment.

Options 1 & 2 would bother most people's view of inerrancy. Options 3, 4 & 5 involve Paul basically playing with numbers in a way that seems quite odd.

After I observed these 5 ways of treating the issue, I listened to Steve's tape on this passage. He mentioned #4 but concluded that it was 'silly.' He then said Paul was speaking from memory (option 1), but concluded that Paul was undoubtedly right and that our version of Numbers is in error on this point (option 2).

Personally, my view of the reliability of Scripture would survive option 1, which I feel is the simplest solution. I wouldn't be very impressed with option 2 unless we found at least 1 manuscript that read 23,000. I don't think Paul is referring to Exodus 32 here, which eliminates option 3 (Aside from it being somewhat 'silly' as well). I agree with Steve that option 4 is seems somewhat silly. Option 5 seems overly complicated and we don't have any other examples that I know of where Paul plays fast and loose with numbers like this.

What do you all think?

Hi Matt,

There appears to be a very simple answer suggested by Hodge. Paul is referring to Numbers 25. The Rabbis, Philo, and Josephus gave the total as 24,000, Paul 23,000. Both are correct because they rounded off a number that was between the two; nothing depended on the number being precise. The former rounded up, and Paul rounded down.

When you think of it, it makes sense. The number must have been rounded one way or the other; it seems very unlikely that the number totaled precisely either 23,000 or 24,000. And it certainly is not unusual for news reports to round off numbers today, and we think nothing of it. In fact, broadcast newswriters are taught to do so to make the news easier for the listener to grasp.

To me it is a non-issue, the exact figure not being the point.

God bless, Homer

i like that explanation, Homer.

But i tend to agree with Matt that if #1 is correct it doesnt affect the "inerrancy" of scripture.

TK

Thanks Homer & TK

So we're saying there was an oral tradition that included the specific number (let's say 23,497). The author or final editor of Numbers rounded up. Philo and Josephus rounded up. Paul rounded down.

Certainly that is possible

I suppose I was assuming Paul was basing his information on a studied or memorized text (Numbers 25) and not an oral tradition (23,497). Perhaps I am underestimating the role of oral tradition and overestimating the role of the OT text in Paul's thinking.

it raises an interesting issue. if paul "misremembered" a text, i.e he was wrong (gasp) does that really have anything to do with inerrancy? he probably didnt want to take the time to fiddle around with all his scrolls looking for the exact number.

TK

As Steve often points out, Paul showcases and admits a faulty memory while writing Scripture in 1 Corinthians 1:16 "I don't remember"

So, I think any view of inerrancy that won't allow for the presence of a human memory is in error

Agreed about option #1 not really being an issue.

I have my doubts about there being a number from oral tradition that was either rounded up or down. That number in oral tradition would have had to have survived a very long time- and would have had to be remembered for centuries despite the Numbers text reading 24,000.