Read this article at its new location here: https://reformedwiki.com/did-coniah-jechoniah-have-children
Some argue that the Bible is contradictory concerning whether Coniah, or Jechoniah, had children or not. Coniah is a shortened form of Jechoniah. Jeremiah 22:28-30
- 28 Is this man Coniah a despised, broken pot, a vessel no one cares for? Why are he and his children hurled and cast into a land that they do not know? 29 O land, land, land, hear the word of the Lord! 30 Thus says the Lord: “Write this man down as childless, a man who shall not succeed in his days, for none of his offspring shall succeed in sitting on the throne of David and ruling again in Judah.”
- And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoniah was the father of Shealtiel,[a] and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,
The very context of Jeremiah 22:28-30
The passage tells us what it means that Coniah will be counted as "childless"—it means that "none of his offspring" will sit on the throne of David or rule in Judah. Therefore, Jeremiah 22:28-30
If Jeremiah 22:28-30
One key phrase in Jeremiah 22:28-30
There is another passage in Scripture that helps resolve this apparently contradiction. Haggai 2:23
- On that day, declares the Lord of hosts, I will take you, O Zerubbabel my servant, the son of Shealtiel, declares the Lord, and make you like a signet ring, for I have chosen you, declares the Lord of hosts.
Since the curse on Jechoniah was reversed for Zerubbabel, it was therefore also reversed for all the offspring of Jechoniah after Zerubbabel, which includes Jesus.
Some people have trouble accepting possible explanations to alleged contradictions in the Bible, especially ones that they consider a stretch. For example, Dan Barker, president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, says this:
I have received numerous replies from Christians who think that these contradictions are either trivial or easily explained. Yet not a single "explanation" has been convincing.
The fact is that there are plausible explanations for every alleged contradiction in the Bible. That there is a plausible explanation for an alleged contradiction does not mean that it is definitely the correct explanation for the alleged contradiction.
However, as long as a possible explanation has been suggested, then it has been objectively demonstrated that there is no necessary contradiction regarding the Bible verses and passages brought up.
When people like Dan Barker say that they don't find a particular explanation for a contradiction "convincing," then that is merely their opinion. A plausible explanation has been suggested that eliminates the necessary alleged contradiction. They simply don't like it, which is not at all a relevant argument against the explanation.
To read more about solutions to Bible contradictions and difficulties, check out Norman Geisler's The Big Book of Bible Difficulties: Clear and Concise Answers from Genesis to Revelation. While we do not agree with some of Geisler's theology, particularly concerning his view of predestination, this book is still an excellent resource. It is thorough and filled with research.
Another book to check out is Tim Chaffey's Demolishing Supposed Bible Contradictions: Exploring Forty Alleged Contraditions, which also answers many alleged contradictions in the Bible.