11 errors by Jesus and friends.

[Poisonshady313]

It appears, however, that she was a daughter of Terah by a different mother from the mother of Abram. The language of 20:12 would indeed admit of her being Abram's niece, but the fact that there was but 10 years' difference between his age and hers (Genesis 17:17) renders this hypothesis less probable. Marriage with half-sisters seems to have been not uncommon in antiquity (even in the Old Testament compare 2 Samuel 13:13).

Sarah, Sarai - International Standard Bible Encyclopedia

So are you saying Genesis is wrong?


Hint: Iscah is Sarah.

If a 10 year old (Abraham) has a sibling old enough to have children (Nahor), the child of this sibling (Sarah) would grow up to be ten years younger than her uncle (Abraham).

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Etz Hayim, which follows the translation found in the JPS, Artscroll, and Plaut, comments:

26. 70 years Terah begets children when he is about twice the age of all his predecessors in the line of Shem. This detail inserts into the narrative the motif of protracted childlessness, a condition that will be a major factor in the lives of his descendants, the patriarchs of Israel.​

 

[Berachiah Ben Yisrael]

I didn't. I quoted from the Artscroll Stone Edition Tanach.

That’s cool. In my own opinion one is as the other. Just another translation of somebody.

Circular logic. Using your conclusion to support your conclusion. You cannot assert that Acts is correct in order to prove that Acts is correct.

I really do not see the problem with the way I used Acts because it shows it in a positive light mathematically and scripturally when all you have to trip on is a single word, "had".

Maybe better said, "You've been HAD!!!!!".

Any Jewish source will show that Abraham was born when Terah was 70... and you can't call them biased because they weren't written that way for the sake of disputing this verse in acts.

Not bias. Not if they were written prior to Acts being published. I just rather believe they just didn't know what the hell they were talking about. Really what proof do they have? Were they there? There are so many other errors that are in the Tanach alone and we want to trash Luke for what he stated in Acts as to Abram not leaving Haran until Terah his daddy died. To me this is such trivial BS but hey, whatever blows your skirt up man.

But I do have to wonder. I wonder what the earliest source we have is in the Hebrew and wonder if it has the Hebrew word "Had" in that verse? Even so I know just from reading other parts of the Tanach there are those instances that shows if one was to have something happen first then it is usually mentioned first and then the second thing occurs. So were it states that Terah "had" lived 70 years (then the all impressive comma), he begat 3 sons shows that he first lived to be 70 and then started having these sons. I mean really why wouldn’t it have rather stated it this way that “Terah begat 3 sons by the time he “had” ( I just “had” to add “had”) lived 70 years.” Its all because that he “had” already lived 70 years before having any kiddies.

You know we can all sit here and go round and round with this and you will probably continue to argue what’s not there to no avail. I suggest you bring all these sources that you have and post them. I would, however, ask that you please only post those that have at least some shred of evidence to its claims other than it just being from some jew. Yah didn’t just make jews logical and able to discern that which is put in front of them. Let me see what you got as to the proof that Abram sired 3 boys prior to him turning 70 and what further proof in what order. Was it Abram, Nahor and then Haran or Haran, Nahor and then Abram, etc. etc. etc. :areyoucra

 

[Berachiah Ben Yisrael]

checking the context and the chronology of the verse does harmonize with "after" he was 70 years of age

Well I know it and you know it and most of everybody i know knows it but you know some people just don't know it.

 

[Berachiah Ben Yisrael]

So are you saying Genesis is wrong?


Hint: Iscah is Sarah.

If a 10 year old (Abraham) has a sibling old enough to have children (Nahor), the child of this sibling (Sarah) would grow up to be ten years younger than her uncle (Abraham).

Well if she is then you are as well.

Gen 20:12 Besides, she is indeed my sister, the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife.

How can we say niece from this text?

And what proof is there that this Yiscah is the same as Sarah? Thats funny. they use both names in the same verse. Yiscah is only ever used once through out the entire Tanach and this verse is it and some say this name is the same as Sarah. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL............ROFLMAO x 9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
.00

 

[Poisonshady313]

Well if she is then you are as well.

Gen 20:12 Besides, she is indeed my sister, the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife.

How can we say niece from this text?

And what proof is there that this Yiscah is the same as Sarah? Thats funny. they use both names in the same verse. Yiscah is only ever used once through out the entire Tanach and this verse is it and some say this name is the same as Sarah. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL............ROFLMAO x 9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999
.00

Do you know how many names Moses' father in law goes by? Quite a few. Would you seriously try to tell me that all those names are really different people?


Walk into any synagogue, and ask the wisest man there who Iscah is. He will tell you she is Sarah.

 

[starlite]

So are you saying Genesis is wrong?
Hint: Iscah is Sarah.

No...the Genesis account is not wrong. I was citing the link. And Sarah is Abraham's half-sister because they had different mothers but the same father.

(Ha′ran).

Son of Terah and brother of Abram (Abraham) and Nahor. Haran fathered Lot and two daughters, Iscah and Milcah; the latter married her uncle Nahor. Haran died before Terah and Abram left Ur of the Chaldeans.—Ge 11:26-31.

 

[starlite]

Do you know how many names Moses' father in law goes by? Quite a few. Would you seriously try to tell me that all those names are really different people? Walk into any synagogue, and ask the wisest man there who Iscah is. He will tell you she is Sarah.

This was sent to me in an email......Yes I am aware of some of those I would consider misunderstanding and are misguided. I believe that Yitro was in fact Moshe’ brother in law. How do I come to this conclusion? Well lets look at another mistake of mistaken identity……….

Num 10:29 And Moses said unto Hobab, the son of Raguel the Midianite, Moses' father in law, We are journeying unto the place of which the LORD said, I will give it you: come thou with us, and we will do thee good: for the LORD hath spoken good concerning Israel.

But then it states …………….

Jdg 4:11 Now Heber the Kenite, which was of the children of Hobab the father in law of Moses, had severed himself from the Kenites, and pitched his tent unto the plain of Zaanaim, which is by Kedesh.
Now if Hobab is the son of Raguel (Reuel) which was the father in law of Moshe then Hobab would be one of Moshe’s brother in law.

I think the words used in the English for the Hebrew word for father in law means the same as mother in law and son in law. It could just mean a “in law”. That would keep the names correct within context. Reuel would be the Father of Zepporah and then Jethro would be one of her brothers along with Hobab.

 

[danny vee]

It might matter to some people. If Jesus was supposed to be perfect, God, etc... then there is no excuse whatsoever for being wrong about ANYTHING.... even if the writings weren't fully canonized.

There are some people who believe that even though Matthew, Luke, Mark, and John were just men, that they were inspired and guided by the Holy Spirit and thus their writings are infallible.

Some people rely on Paul, using him to say "See Jews... Paul was a pharisee... and he said this, this, and this"... but if Paul makes the mistakes that a somewhat educated 13 year old Jewish boy could pick up on.... something doesn't quite add up.

Of course some don't care... they chalk up any errors as scribal errors... to be expected from the words of men. (but of course, if they're prone to error that way, who knows what else they might have screwed up?)

It certainly does make you wonder. The Torah was written approx 3300 years ago. The gospels were written less than 2000 years ago... and something tells me the writers of the gospels didn't do it in a day and forget about it... they had the text in front of them... they probably (or at least should have) had whatever available scripture right in front of them.... and they could have taken the care to proof read themselves, and make sure when they quoted a passage or retold a detail about a story, that they got it right.

Someone fell asleep on the job.

Or they were sincerely hoping nobody would notice.

I've been told that a lot of what was written was intended for non-Jewish audiences anyway.... so they wouldn't be expected to know any better.

Jesus didn't write the Gospels. Humans did. So if you're trying to disprove who Jesus is then its not working. Humans make errors. I don't think all of the Hebrew Bible is word for word correct either. And these errors that you put in some of your 11 things like 24 000 being killed in the plague instead of 23 000 as said by Paul. It doesn't matter. What Paul said as a whole matters.

 

[IF_u_knew]

It is interesting to think that some people believe that Jesus was a Rabbi who astounded the Pharisees, given his tendency to be wrong about scripture.

The same goes for Paul who is claimed to be a Pharisee who learned with Gamaliel.

I do thoroughly agree that there is MUCH that should be raising red flags in the heads of people who claim the NT is representative of a New Covenant; that Jesus is G.d in the flesh (scary thought considering, no?); and that Paul was not Hellenistic in views. I also believe there is much on the surface level of the Tanakh as well that should make people question. In all honesty, I could sit and pick out what appears to be contradictions and fallacies in the Tanakh; for instance in Isaiah, G.d sitting upon the circle of the earth.. many say this is wrong because the earth is not truly a circle.. but it is wrong in that many can only see the words written and they can not comprehend G.d's wisdom which far exceeds the wisdom of man, thus the deep Understanding of this Truth can not be grasped (for it is the Wisdom of G.d and not wisdom of man).

My view of the NT and the surface writings of the Tanakh is based in Deuteronomy 27-30. It is either the blessing or the curse and depending on if you obey G.d or accept what you are told by man. Jeremiah 33 beautifully speaks to what it is G.d is doing (yes, doing... because the creation is ongoing). I am now, here recently, convinced that one MUST eventually look at the NT and filter it through the Tanakh to understand that it *was* indeed inspired by G.d; and of course, when they do, much will be discarded and what does not need to be discarded really is better expounded upon behind the words of the Tanakh.

It is good to make people question; but it is also just as good to question ourselves about what it is that we are buying in to and more importantly *why* it is that we are buying into it. :yes:

 

[starlite]

Or the LXX Vorlage with the Proto-Masoretic, or the Proto-Masoretic with the Samaritan, or ...

So how big was Goliath?

Goliath towered to the extraordinary height of six cubits and a span (2.9 m; 9.5 ft). His copper coat of mail weighed 5,000 shekels (57 kg; 126 lb) and the iron blade of his spear weighed 600 shekels (6.8 kg; 15 lb). (1Sa 17:4, 5, 7) Goliath was one of the Rephaim; he may have been a mercenary soldier with the Philistine army.—1Ch 20:5, 8

 

[starlite]

8.
Numbers 25:9
And those that died by the plague were 24,000.

Paul (a man who claimed to be a Pharisee) wrote -

I Corinthians 10:8
We must not indulge in fornication as some of them did, and 23,000 fell in a single day.

Here's a view that hasn't been addressed:

There are several factors that may account for the difference in the figures given in these two verses. The simplest one could be that the actual number is somewhere between 23,000 and 24,000, thus allowing it to be rounded off in either direction.

Consider another possibility. The apostle Paul cited the account of the Israelites at ****tim as a warning example to Christians in ancient Corinth, a city notorious for its licentious way of life. He wrote: “Neither let us practice fornication, as some of them committed fornication, only to fall, twenty-three thousand of them in one day.” Singling out those who were put to death by Jehovah because they committed fornication, Paul gave the number as 23,000.—1 Corinthians 10:8.

Numbers chapter 25, however, tells us that “Israel attached itself to the Baal of Peor; and the anger of Jehovah began to blaze against Israel.” Then, Jehovah commanded Moses to execute “all the head ones of the people.” Moses, in turn, ordered the judges to carry out that command. Finally, when Phinehas acted quickly to put to death the Israelite who brought a Midianite woman into the camp, “the scourge was halted.” The account ends with the statement: “Those who died from the scourge amounted to twenty-four thousand.”—Numbers 25:1-9.

The figure given in Numbers evidently included “the head ones of the people” executed by the judges and those executed directly by Jehovah. There might well have been a thousand of those head ones who died at the hands of the judges, bringing the number to 24,000. Whether these head ones, or ringleaders, committed fornication, participated in the festivities, or gave consent to those who did, they were guilty of having “an attachment with the Baal of Peor.”

 

[starlite]

11.
Genesis 47:31
And he [Jacob] said: "Swear to me." And he [Joseph] swore to him. Then Israel [Jacob] bowed himself upon the head of his bed.

Let's see what Jesus' follower says.

Hebrews 11:21
By faith Jacob, when dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, bowing in worship over the head of his staff.

Joseph bowed upon the head of his bed, not his staff.

“The couch.” Heb., ham·mit·tah′; LXX, “And Israel worshiped over (leaning upon) the top of his staff.” “Staff” or “rod” (Heb., mat·teh′, as in 38:25) and “bed” or “couch” (Heb., mit·tah′, as in 48:2) have identical consonants, and without the vowel points they can be read one way or the other.

 

[my opinion]

I would not be so smug. I believe that picking up sticks on a Saturday- according to your faith- receives the penalty of death. Are you serious?

 

[Poisonshady313]

“The couch.” Heb., ham·mit·tah′; LXX, “And Israel worshiped over (leaning upon) the top of his staff.” “Staff” or “rod” (Heb., mat·teh′, as in 38:25) and “bed” or “couch” (Heb., mit·tah′, as in 48:2) have identical consonants, and without the vowel points they can be read one way or the other.

Congratulations. This so far is the only legitimate response that successfully takes one of the items off of the list.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Goliath towered to the extraordinary height of six cubits and a span (2.9 m; 9.5 ft). His copper coat of mail weighed 5,000 shekels (57 kg; 126 lb) and the iron blade of his spear weighed 600 shekels (6.8 kg; 15 lb). (1Sa 17:4, 5, 7) Goliath was one of the Rephaim; he may have been a mercenary soldier with the Philistine army.—1Ch 20:5, 8

Oh my -- the sad and silly certainty of those who do not know what they do not know ...

Goliath's height

There are significant differences between the Masoretic (Hebrew), Septuagint (Greek), and Dead Sea Scrolls versions of 1 Samuel 17.[3] One of the most interesting of these relates to Goliath's height: 4QSam(a), the Dead Sea Scrolls text of Samuel, gives the height of Goliath as "four cubits and a span," (approximately 200 cm or about six feet seven inches), and this is what the 4th century AD Septuagint manuscripts and the 1st century AD historian Josephus also record. Later Septuagint manuscripts and the oldest Masoretic texts (Aleppo Codex, 10th century AD) read "six cubits and a span," which would make him about 290 cm or nine feet six inches tall.[4]

- source

Sometimes starlight proves less than illuminating ...

 

[Kathryn]

1.
Matthew 23:35
...that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the Sanctuary and the altar.

It is strange that Jesus could not tell the difference between one Zechariah and another.

Zechariah the son of Barachiah was not murdered.
Zechariah the son of Jehoiada was.

Just because Zechariah the son of Jehoiada was murdered, does NOT mean that Zechariah the son of Barachiah was NOT murdered also (This Zechariah was the prophet Zechariah, and prophets generally are not very popular).

2.
Mark 2:25--26
And he [Jesus] said to them: "Have you never read what David did, when he was in need and was hungry, he and those who were with him; how he entered the House of G-d, when Abiathar was high priest,..."

I Samuel 21:2
Then David came to Nob, to Ahimelech the priest, and Ahimelech came to meet David trembling, and said to him: "Why are you alone, and no man with you?"

Ahimelech was high priest at that time. Only after his death (I Samuel 22:18) did his son, Abiathar, succeed him:

I Samuel 30:7
And David said to Abiathar the priest, the son of Ahimelech....

Both these dudes were priests during the reign of David. David met with each of them, and on more than one occasion most likely.

Luke 2:4--5
And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be enrolled with Mary, his betrothed wife who was with child.

Jerusalem, not Bethlehem, is called the "city of David."

David was annointed king of Israel by Samuel, IN BETHLEHEM. Bethlehem is only a few miles south of Jerusalem. David's ancestors were from there. David ruled from Jerusalem. Bethlehem is basically a suburb of Jerusalem. Both towns have been called the city of David interchangeably.

Acts 7:15--16
And Jacob went down into Egypt, and he died, he and our fathers, and they were carried over to Shechem and laid in the tomb that Abraham had bought for the sum of money from the sons of Hamor of Shechem.

Only Joseph was buried in Shechem, and Jacob bought the plot, not Abraham.

Jacob was buried in the plot Abraham had bought IN HEBRON.

Which Joseph are you talking about? The OT Joseph was embalmed in the Egyptian style and Joseph was buried in Egypt. There is no mention in the bible of the death or burial of Joseph - Jesus' stepfather.

This NT passage is a quote of Stephen's - and he is running through a very quick synopsis of OT lineage - the grammar can be hard to follow in some of these when you translate from Hebrew to Greek when there is a long list of names and places. "...our fathers (were) carried over to Shechem and laid in the tomb..."

Genesis 46:27
And the sons of Joseph, who were born to him in Egypt, were two souls; all the souls of the house of Jacob that came into Egypt were seventy.


Acts 7:14
And Joseph sent and called to him Jacob his father and his kindred; seventy--five souls.

Joseph CALLED for the 75 souls - then they had to make the trip TO Egypt. It is certainly possible that Joseph invited 75 and only 70 ended up in Egypt. It could be a very perilous trip.

8.
Numbers 25:9
And those that died by the plague were 24,000.

Paul (a man who claimed to be a Pharisee) wrote -

I Corinthians 10:8
We must not indulge in fornication as some of them did, and 23,000 fell in a single day.

So...assuming this is the same event we're talking about here - what's the conflict? 23,000 died in one day and another 1000 died of the same plague in the following days - quite possible.

Exodus 24:6-8
And Moses took half the blood and put it in basins; and half the blood he sprinkled on the altar. Then he took the Book of the Covenant and read in the hearing of the people; and they said: "All that the L-rd has spoken we will do and obey." And Moses took the blood and sprinkled it upon the people, and said: "Behold, the blood of the covenant that the L-rd has made with you in accordance with all these words."

Let us see what Jesus' follower has to say...

Hebrews 9:19-20
For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled on both the book itself and all the people, saying: "This is the blood of the covenant which G-d commanded you."

The Book of the Covenant was not sprinkled with blood.

Your logic is flawed here. There was great oral tradition in Judaism and throughout the development of the NT canon as well. Just because a small detail is left out of ONE account and included in another doesn't mean that either account is all inclusive. Following your reasoning, you could say, "See - they didn't use hyssop in that passage from Exodus, so that means it wasn't used." Not good logic.

11.
Genesis 47:31
And he [Jacob] said: "Swear to me." And he [Joseph] swore to him. Then Israel [Jacob] bowed himself upon the head of his bed.

Let's see what Jesus' follower says.

Hebrews 11:21
By faith Jacob, when dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, bowing in worship over the head of his staff.

Joseph bowed upon the head of his bed, not his staff.

Wow, let's see...COULD IT BE that perhaps Jacob carried that staff around everywhere wtih him? A staff in the OT was a sign of authority, which Jacob certainly had. Whatcha wanna bet that staff was propped up right there by Jacob? Wouldn't you think it entirely possible that he was holding his staff (his sign of authority) as he blessed each of the sons of Joseph?

 

[starlite]

Oh my -- the sad and silly certainty of those who do not know what they do not know ...Sometimes starlight proves less than illuminating ...

Goliath's height

There are significant differences between the Masoretic (Hebrew), Septuagint (Greek), and Dead Sea Scrolls versions of 1 Samuel 17.[3] One of the most interesting of these relates to Goliath's height: 4QSam(a), the Dead Sea Scrolls text of Samuel, gives the height of Goliath as "four cubits and a span," (approximately 200 cm or about six feet seven inches), and this is what the 4th century AD Septuagint manuscripts and the 1st century AD historian Josephus also record. Later Septuagint manuscripts and the oldest Masoretic texts (Aleppo Codex, 10th century AD) read "six cubits and a span," which would make him about 290 cm or nine feet six inches tall.[4]

This is from your source....seems pretty close to what I said or am I missing something?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Goliath's height

There are significant differences between the Masoretic (Hebrew), Septuagint (Greek), and Dead Sea Scrolls versions of 1 Samuel 17.[3] One of the most interesting of these relates to Goliath's height: 4QSam(a), the Dead Sea Scrolls text of Samuel, gives the height of Goliath as "four cubits and a span," (approximately 200 cm or about six feet seven inches), and this is what the 4th century AD Septuagint manuscripts and the 1st century AD historian Josephus also record. Later Septuagint manuscripts and the oldest Masoretic texts (Aleppo Codex, 10th century AD) read "six cubits and a span," which would make him about 290 cm or nine feet six inches tall.[4]

This is from your source....seems pretty close to what I said or am I missing something?

Apparently - like close to 75% of the paragraph.

On what grounds do you pedantically elevate later renditions to the status of truth while rejecting earlier ones?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

1.
Matthew 23:35
...that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah the son of Barachiah, whom you murdered between the Sanctuary and the altar.

It is strange that Jesus could not tell the difference between one Zechariah and another.

Zechariah the son of Barachiah was not murdered.
Zechariah the son of Jehoiada was.

Just because Zechariah the son of Jehoiada was murdered, does NOT mean that Zechariah the son of Barachiah was NOT murdered also (This Zechariah was the prophet Zechariah, and prophets generally are not very popular).

Hope springs eternal ... :biglaugh: