- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Scholars say the Gospel of Matthew was targeted towards Jews. But if a Jewish person knows his Bible, Matthew crumbles. This thread will focus on the many mistakes made in Matthew.
The very first mistake made in Matthew is the opening verse:
Mat 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.
Matthew tries to show the lineage of Jesus to prove his claim as the Messiah, but there are several problems.
Jesus is supposed to be born of a virgin, so Joseph had no role in Jesus' birth. The promised Messiah was to be of the seed of David and Solomon, and there was no seed if Joseph was not the father.
While we are still in the genealogy presented by Matthew, we will see the next error Matthew makes. This post uses the Apostles Bible because it uses the Septuagint and makes very good name retention between 'old' and 'new testaments'. I know Christians like to say that the Christian writers used the Septuagint.
Mat 1:1 The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham:
Not only can Jesus not be Messiah because of his virgin birth (no true seed of David), now we see that David was of a cursed bloodline.
——————–
Jer 22:28 Jeconiah is dishonored as a good for nothing vessel; for he is thrown out and cast forth into a land which he knew not.
Jer 22:29 O earth, earth, hear the word of the Lord!
Jer 22:30 Write this man down as childless; for by no means shall his seed ever grow up to sit on the throne of David, or be as a prince yet in Judah.
——————–
We can know this is the same Jeconiah because of this verse that matches with the lineage given in Matthew
——————–
1Ch 3:17 And the sons of Jeconiah were Assir, Shealtiel his son,Neh 12:1 Now these are the priests and the Levites that went up with Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel and Jeshua: Seraiah, Jeremiah, Ezra,
———————
The next error in Matthew's genealogy is his creative manipulation of lineage to make three generational periods of 14 each. 14 is supposed to be symbolic of kingship. Two problems with this – the last set of generations he lists are 13, not 14. The other problem is that he had to leave out some people to come up with 14 in the second section.
——————–
Mat 1:8 Asa begot Jehoshaphat, Jehoshaphat begot Joram, and Joram begot Uzziah.
Mat 1:9 Uzziah begot Jotham, Jotham begot Ahaz, and Ahaz begot Hezekiah.1Ch 3:11 Joram his son, Ahaziah his son, Joash his son,
1Ch 3:12 Amaziah his son, Azariah {Uzziah} his son, Jotham his son,
1Ch 3:13 Ahaz his son, Hezekiah his son, Manasseh his son,Mat 1:11 Josiah begot Jeconiah and his brothers at the time of the captivity in Babylon.
1Ch 3:15 And the sons of Josiah were Johanan the firstborn, the second Jehoiakim, the third Zedekiah, the fourth Shallum.
1Ch 3:16 And the sons of Jehoiakim were Jeconiah his son, and Zedekiah his son.
——————–
Matthew has to skip 4 people in the lineage of David to come up with his second set of 14.That is all for the first post on the multitude of problems with Matthew that will keep informed Jews from believing in Jesus as the Messiah.
Still in the first chapter of Matthew, and we hit yet another snag.
Mat 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
Of course most scholars realize that Is 7:14 was not 'virgin' but young woman. That aside one must also note that only Matthew used this quote to lure Jews. But what was his name? Not Emmanuel, but Jesus. Not only that, notice how Matthew doesn't even get the quote right. Since the Christian bible liked to use the Septuagint, here is how it reads in 2 different translations
——————————-
(Apostles) Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign; behold, a virgin shall conceive in the womb, and shall bring forth a son, and you shall call His name Emmanuel.(LXX-E) Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; behold, a virgin shall conceive in the womb, and shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Emmanuel.
——————————-
Other versions of Is 7:14 say 'she' instead of 'you' or 'thou'. what does Matthew 1:23 say? 'They', which is supported by the majorit of Christian bibles.On to the next problem with Matthew and his poor scholarship. Or is it actually an unconscious revelation that Jesus is not the Messiah? Using the Apostles Bible (it uses the Septuagint for 'old testament').
Mat 2:6 'But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for out of you shall come forth a Ruler who will shepherd My people Israel.' “
Mic 5:2 And you, Bethlehem, house of Ephratha, are few in number to be reckoned among the thousands of Judah; yet out of you shall one come forth to Me, to be a ruler of Israel; and His goings forth were from the beginning, even from eternity.
———————
There are several problems with this but I will only deal with 2 of them for now.The first problem is that Micah 5:2 says 'house of Ephratha', which speaks of a certain clan, not a physical location. Here are some other Christian bible translations of Mic 5:2.
———————
[CJB] But you, Beit-Lechem near Efrat, so small among the clans of Y'hudah, out of you will come forth to me the future ruler of Isra'el, whose origins are far in the past, back in ancient times.[HNV] But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, being small among the clans of Judah, out of you one will come forth to me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting.
[NASB] “But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity.”
————————
It is obvious that Micah is speaking of the coming from the line of David, since he was from the clan of Ephrathah. Yet Matthew and Luke try their darnedest to put Jesus in Bethlehem to be born. This is but another case of trying to fit Jewish scripture into the life of Jesus but making a mess of it.Another problem with the Matthew quote is that he does not couple Ephrathah with Bethlehem. It is specifically Ephrathah that is the clan that is small in Judah. Matthew changes the quote and makes it look like Bethlehem is the key and that the town itself is not small among rulers? Bethlehem has nothing to do with rulers, it is a town.
There are also problems in the rest of Micah because it does not fit the life of Jesus but I said I would onl talk about 2 problems.
Galations 1:6-9
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel – which is really no gospel at all.
Evidently, some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ……let him be eternally condemned!
Although it is true that the Bible speaks of a man named Bethlehem, whose mother was named Ephrathah, it is also true that the Bible speaks of a town named Bethlehem. In fact there were two towns named Bethlehem. One was in Judah, the southern part of the Jewish homeland, and the other was in the north. But, the Bethlehem in Judah was in more ancient times called Ephrathah. So, Micah might have been using the phrase “Bethlehem Ephrathah” as a way to make it clear that he was referring to the town of Bethlehem that used to be known as Ephrathah – in other words, the Bethlehem that is in Judah. –Some website.
And true enough, Jesus remarkably came from that smaller, lesser bethlehem. Remarkable prophecy!
Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 27 2007,14:25) Galations 1:6-9 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel – which is really no gospel at all.
Evidently, some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ……let him be eternally condemned!
Hi,You're right! The promises of Hashem are not gospels they are real promises.
Very nice of you to want to eternally condemn someone though. Is this Christianity in action?
Gen 12:3 I will bless those who bless you, but I will curse anyone who curses you; and by you all the families of the earth will be blessed.”
Quote (david @ Oct. 27 2007,14:35) Although it is true that the Bible speaks of a man named Bethlehem, whose mother was named Ephrathah, it is also true that the Bible speaks of a town named Bethlehem. In fact there were two towns named Bethlehem. One was in Judah, the southern part of the Jewish homeland, and the other was in the north. But, the Bethlehem in Judah was in more ancient times called Ephrathah. So, Micah might have been using the phrase “Bethlehem Ephrathah” as a way to make it clear that he was referring to the town of Bethlehem that used to be known as Ephrathah – in other words, the Bethlehem that is in Judah. –Some website. And true enough, Jesus remarkably came from that smaller, lesser bethlehem. Remarkable prophecy!
Actually, Ruth and Boaz were from Ephrathah. They were the great grandparents of King David. So Matthew still took the quote out of context.Quote (Towshab @ Oct. 27 2007,14:39) Quote (david @ Oct. 27 2007,14:35) Although it is true that the Bible speaks of a man named Bethlehem, whose mother was named Ephrathah, it is also true that the Bible speaks of a town named Bethlehem. In fact there were two towns named Bethlehem. One was in Judah, the southern part of the Jewish homeland, and the other was in the north. But, the Bethlehem in Judah was in more ancient times called Ephrathah. So, Micah might have been using the phrase “Bethlehem Ephrathah” as a way to make it clear that he was referring to the town of Bethlehem that used to be known as Ephrathah – in other words, the Bethlehem that is in Judah. –Some website. And true enough, Jesus remarkably came from that smaller, lesser bethlehem. Remarkable prophecy!
Actually, Ruth and Boaz were from Ephrathah. They were the great grandparents of King David. So Matthew still took the quote out of context.
Forgot to add, Luke says that Jesus' parents were from Nazareth, not Bethlehem. Luke just has them traveling to Bethlehem to be born so he is not literally from Bethlehem. This being the case Matthew was even more incorrect because Jesus did not come from Bethlehem. Thanks for pointing that out. You added to the list of Matthew's errors.Hashem: in Judaism, a substitute word used when referring to God in contexts other than prayers or scriptural readings, because the name for God is considered too holy for such use.
Did those who wrote the Bible consider God's name “too holy” for use?
Are we not told countless times to praise God's name?
Why is it in there (the Hebrew scriptures) close to 7000 times?
Galations 4:8-18, in part
Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. But now that you know God……how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles?
Do you wish to be enslavd by them all over again? You are observing special days and months and sesons and years! I fear for you….
….Those people are zealous to win you over, but for no good. What they want is to alienate you ….so that you may be zealous for them. It is fine to be zealous, provided the purpose is good…..
Quote
Read Ruth 1:2, Ruth 4:11,21-22, and 1 Samuel 7:12.And if they were from there, this is a contradiction how?
Quote (Not3in1 @ Oct. 27 2007,14:49) Galations 4:8-18, in part Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. But now that you know God……how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable principles?
Do you wish to be enslavd by them all over again? You are observing special days and months and sesons and years! I fear for you….
….Those people are zealous to win you over, but for no good. What they want is to alienate you ….so that you may be zealous for them. It is fine to be zealous, provided the purpose is good…..
This one is the best. You are implying that by following YHVH of the Jewish bible, I am turning to other gods. I am not the one worshiping a man. G-d has no form (Deut 4:13) so worshiping a man is giving a form to G-d. That is idol worship.Hi Towshab. Jesus directed worship to his father. I for one do not “worship” Jesus. The word Proskyneo (if I spelt that right) can be translated a number of ways.
Anyway, I'm still not seeing the contradiction.
Quote (david @ Oct. 27 2007,14:52) Quote
Read Ruth 1:2, Ruth 4:11,21-22, and 1 Samuel 7:12.And if they were from there, this is a contradiction how?
The Messiah is to be of the seed of David and Solomon. David was of the clan of Ephrathah. That is the message of Micah 5:2 not that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem. Since Joseph was not Jesus' father, he was not of the seed of David and Solomon.The earlier name of Bethlehem evidently was Ephrath (or, Ephrathah). Jacob buried Rachel “on the way to Ephrath, that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Ge 35:19; 48:7)
GENESIS 35:19
“Thus Rachel died and was buried on the way to Eph́rath, that is to say, Beth́le·hem.”
GENESIS 48:7
“And as for me, when I was coming from Pad́dan, Rachel died alongside me in the land of Cánaan on the way while there was yet a good stretch of land before coming to Eph́rath, so that I buried her there on the way to Eph́rath, that is to say, Beth́le·hem.””
When the Israelites entered Canaan, Bethlehem fell within the territory of Judah, though it is not specifically mentioned in any list of Judean cities nor is there anything to indicate its size or prominence at that time. Since there was another Bethlehem in the territory of Zebulun (Jos 19:10, 15), the town in Judah was usually distinguished by reference to Ephrath, or by calling it “Bethlehem in Judah.”—Jg 17:7-9; 19:1, 2, 18.
When the Israelites entered Canaan, Bethlehem fell within the territory of Judah, though it is not specifically mentioned in any list of Judean cities nor is there anything to indicate its size or prominence at that time. Since there was another Bethlehem in the territory of Zebulun (Jos 19:10, 15), the town in Judah was usually distinguished by reference to Ephrath, or by calling it “Bethlehem in Judah.”—Jg 17:7-9; 19:1, 2, 18.
It does not otherwise seem to have been a prominent town nor did it have a large population—a “village” when Jesus was on earth. (Joh 7:42) Hence the prophet Micah in his Messianic prophecy at Micah 5:2 could refer to Bethlehem Ephrathah as “the one too little to get to be among the thousands of Judah.” Yet his prophecy showed that small Bethlehem would have the singular honor of being the town from which the Messiah would come. The Jewish people understood this prophecy to mean that the Messiah or Christ would be born in and proceed from that town (Joh 7:40-42), a belief also expressed by their chief priests and scribes.—Mt 2:3-6.Quote (david @ Oct. 27 2007,15:13) The earlier name of Bethlehem evidently was Ephrath (or, Ephrathah). Jacob buried Rachel “on the way to Ephrath, that is to say, Bethlehem.” (Ge 35:19; 48:7)
GENESIS 35:19
“Thus Rachel died and was buried on the way to Eph́rath, that is to say, Beth́le·hem.”
GENESIS 48:7
“And as for me, when I was coming from Pad́dan, Rachel died alongside me in the land of Cánaan on the way while there was yet a good stretch of land before coming to Eph́rath, so that I buried her there on the way to Eph́rath, that is to say, Beth́le·hem.””
When the Israelites entered Canaan, Bethlehem fell within the territory of Judah, though it is not specifically mentioned in any list of Judean cities nor is there anything to indicate its size or prominence at that time. Since there was another Bethlehem in the territory of Zebulun (Jos 19:10, 15), the town in Judah was usually distinguished by reference to Ephrath, or by calling it “Bethlehem in Judah.”—Jg 17:7-9; 19:1, 2, 18.
When the Israelites entered Canaan, Bethlehem fell within the territory of Judah, though it is not specifically mentioned in any list of Judean cities nor is there anything to indicate its size or prominence at that time. Since there was another Bethlehem in the territory of Zebulun (Jos 19:10, 15), the town in Judah was usually distinguished by reference to Ephrath, or by calling it “Bethlehem in Judah.”—Jg 17:7-9; 19:1, 2, 18.
It does not otherwise seem to have been a prominent town nor did it have a large population—a “village” when Jesus was on earth. (Joh 7:42) Hence the prophet Micah in his Messianic prophecy at Micah 5:2 could refer to Bethlehem Ephrathah as “the one too little to get to be among the thousands of Judah.” Yet his prophecy showed that small Bethlehem would have the singular honor of being the town from which the Messiah would come. The Jewish people understood this prophecy to mean that the Messiah or Christ would be born in and proceed from that town (Joh 7:40-42), a belief also expressed by their chief priests and scribes.—Mt 2:3-6.
But he did not come from the village of Bethlehem he was born there. According to Luke, Jesus is from Nazareth. If I am born in one city while my family is visiting but my parents reside in another I am not from the city I was born in.Forum,
I will no longer discuss the issues in this thread. I have done something very unwelcome in this community and I no longer wish to continue.
towshab
Come on Towshab, I don't want to see you leave.
If for no other reason than I like the way you have given me a whole new respect
for the biblical knowledge of david.Believers should not fear discourse with non believers if they are truly grounded in their faith.
It should permit them to prove the error in the non believer's thinking.Tim
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
