Scripture. What is considered Scripture?

2

2003cobra

New member
WatchmanOnTheWall said:
Matthew 1:17
Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah.

Including Abraham and David I counted 14 generations.

Including David and King Josiah (one the Kings of the time of the exile) I counted 14 generations.

Including King Jeconiah (the other king involved in the exile) to Jesus I counted 14 generation.

That's how it's done. The key is in the wording regarding the exile:

Matthew 1
11 and Josiah the father of Jeconiah and his brothers at the time of the exile to Babylon. 12 After the exile to Babylon.

Matthews is Joseph's genealogy and Luke's is Mary's.

I don't see any error there myself. However I have found parts of the NT that were added in at later times that shouldn't be there.
Click to expand...

Watchman, there is another source: 1 Chronicles.

It shows 18 generations from David to the deportation.

I will repost the detailed description of the error for you:


Matthew wrote that there were 14 generations from David to the deportation. He listed the generations. He skips three generations, putting Uzziah in the place of Ahaziah, Joash, Amaziah, and Azariah.

So either Matthew has an error in counting the generations or 1 Chronicles 3 has an error in listing the generations.

Matthew 1 And David was the father of Solomon by the wife of Uriah, 7 and Solomon the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asaph, and Asaph the father of Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat the father of Joram, and Joram the father of Uzziah, 9and Uzziah the father of Jotham, and Jotham the father of Ahaz, and Ahaz the father of Hezekiah...So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David to the deportation to Babylon, fourteen generations; and from the deportation to Babylon to the Messiah, fourteen generations.

1 Chronicles 3 The descendants of Solomon: Rehoboam, Abijah his son, Asa his son, Jehoshaphat his son, 11 Joram his son, Ahaziah his son, Joash his son, 12 Amaziah his son, Azariah his son, Jotham his son, 13 Ahaz his son, Hezekiah his son,


1 Chronicles 3.....Matthew
Solomon............ Solomom
Rehoboam...........Rehoboam
Abijah.............Abijah
Asa................Asaph
Jehoshaphat........Jehoshaphat
Joram..............Joram
Ahaziah............missing from Matthew
Joash..............missing from Matthew
Missing from 1 Chronicles......Uzziah
Amaziah............missing from Matthew
Azariah............missing from Matthew
Jotham.............Jotham
Ahaz...............Ahaz
Hezekiah...........Hezekiah

Minor differences in the names aren’t errors. Claiming there were 14 generations when there were 17 generations is an error. Actually, Matthew also skips Jehoiakim, so his miscount is off by 4. But I don’t want to pile on right now.

This is another error which disproves the man-made doctrine of inerrancy. It is an insignificant and minor error from the perspective of the validity and credibility of scriptures. It is another proof that the doctrine of inerrancy is false.


As for Luke’s genealogy being that of Mary, you do know that Luke contradicts you, don’t you?

Look at Luke again. It clearly leads to Joseph, not Mary.

Luke 3: Jesus was about thirty years old when he began his work. He was the son (as was thought) of Joseph son of Heli, 24 son of Matthat, son of Levi, son of Melchi, son of Jannai, son of Joseph, 25 son of...
 
WatchmanOnTheWall

WatchmanOnTheWall

Well-known member
2003cobra said:
Watchman, there is another source: 1 Chronicles.

It shows 18 generations from David to the deportation.

I will repost the detailed description of the error for you:


Matthew wrote that there were 14 generations from David to the deportation. He listed the generations. He skips three generations, putting Uzziah in the place of Ahaziah, Joash, Amaziah, and Azariah.

So either Matthew has an error in counting the generations or 1 Chronicles 3 has an error in listing the generations.

Matthew 1 And David was the father of Solomon by the wife of Uriah, 7 and Solomon the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asaph, and Asaph the father of Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat the father of Joram, and Joram the father of Uzziah, 9and Uzziah the father of Jotham, and Jotham the father of Ahaz, and Ahaz the father of Hezekiah...So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David to the deportation to Babylon, fourteen generations; and from the deportation to Babylon to the Messiah, fourteen generations.

1 Chronicles 3 The descendants of Solomon: Rehoboam, Abijah his son, Asa his son, Jehoshaphat his son, 11 Joram his son, Ahaziah his son, Joash his son, 12 Amaziah his son, Azariah his son, Jotham his son, 13 Ahaz his son, Hezekiah his son,


1 Chronicles 3.....Matthew
Solomon............ Solomom
Rehoboam...........Rehoboam
Abijah.............Abijah
Asa................Asaph
Jehoshaphat........Jehoshaphat
Joram..............Joram
Ahaziah............missing from Matthew
Joash..............missing from Matthew
Missing from 1 Chronicles......Uzziah
Amaziah............missing from Matthew
Azariah............missing from Matthew
Jotham.............Jotham
Ahaz...............Ahaz
Hezekiah...........Hezekiah

Minor differences in the names aren’t errors. Claiming there were 14 generations when there were 17 generations is an error. Actually, Matthew also skips Jehoiakim, so his miscount is off by 4. But I don’t want to pile on right now.

This is another error which disproves the man-made doctrine of inerrancy. It is an insignificant and minor error from the perspective of the validity and credibility of scriptures. It is another proof that the doctrine of inerrancy is false.


As for Luke’s genealogy being that of Mary, you do know that Luke contradicts you, don’t you?

Look at Luke again. It clearly leads to Joseph, not Mary.

Luke 3: Jesus was about thirty years old when he began his work. He was the son (as was thought) of Joseph son of Heli, 24 son of Matthat, son of Levi, son of Melchi, son of Jannai, son of Joseph, 25 son of...
Click to expand...

I see so you were talking about that genealogy thing. That too is easily explained. First to clarify there are 3 extra names in Chronicles making 17 in all up to Josiah (counted in the first 14 generations). Jehoiakim (the 4th extra one you mentioned) is not in the lineage of Jesus and can be ignored. This discrepancy is because Matthew was using the Greek Septuagint LXX which frequently differs from the Hebrew Masoretic text. See verses 3:11-12 & 15:

http://qbible.com/brenton-septuagint/1-chronicles/3.html

As for Luke's genealogy, Heli was Joseph's father (in-law). The original Greek says Joseph was as a legalised son of Heli:

enomizeto
G3543
was-LAWizED
was-legalized

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/luk3.pdf
 
Last edited:
2

2003cobra

New member
What you wrote isn’t true, Watchman.

1) The LXX and the MT both have 18 generations from David to the deportation.
See:
https://isthatinthebible.wordpress.com/2014/07/19/whats-the-deal-with-matthews-genealogy/

On Luke’s genealogy, your link didn’t work for me but every translation disagrees with you. We don’t have the original Greek. The existing Greek disagrees with you.

https://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/greek/nas/huios.html

You seem to have not reviewed this thoroughly. It is easy to look things up quickly and find people willing to lie to protect their false doctrines. Study more deeply.

You propose that all the translations are wrong:
American Standard Version
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (ASV) And Jesus himself, when he began [to teach], was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the [son] of Heli,

The Bible in Basic English
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (BBE) And Jesus at this time was about thirty years old, being the son (as it seemed) of Joseph, the son of Heli,

Common English Bible
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (CEB) Jesus was about 30 years old when he began his ministry. People supposed that he was the son of Joseph son of Heli

Common English Bible w/ Apocrypha
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (CEBA) Jesus was about 30 years old when he began his ministry. People supposed that he was the son of Joseph son of Heli

The Complete Jewish Bible
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (CJB) Yeshua was about thirty years old when he began his public ministry. It was supposed that he was a son of Yosef who was of Eli,

Holman Christian Standard Bible
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (CSB) As He began [His ministry], Jesus was about 30 years old and was thought to be the son of Joseph, [son] of Heli,

The Darby Translation
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (DBY) And Jesus himself was beginning to be about thirty years old; being as was supposed son of Joseph; of Eli,

English Standard Version
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (ESV) Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli,

Good News Translation
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (GNT) When Jesus began his work, he was about thirty years old. He was the son, so people thought, of Joseph, who was the son of Heli,

Good News Translation w/ Apocrypha
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (GNTA) When Jesus began his work, he was about thirty years old. He was the son, so people thought, of Joseph, who was the son of Heli,

GOD'S WORD Translation
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (GW) Jesus was about 30 years old when he began [his ministry]. Jesus, so people thought, was the son of Joseph, son of Eli,

Hebrew Names Version
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (HNV) Yeshua himself, when he began to teach, was about thirty years old, being the son (as was supposed) of Yosef, the son of Eli,

Jubilee Bible 2000
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (JUB) And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, who was <em>the son</em> of Heli,

King James Version
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (KJV) And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

King James Version w/ Apocrypha
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (KJVA) And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed ) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

Lexham English Bible
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (LEB) And Jesus, [when he] began [his ministry], was himself about thirty years [old], being the son (as it was believed) of Joseph the [son] of Eli,

The Message Bible
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (MSG) When Jesus entered public life he was about thirty years old, the son (in public perception) of Joseph, who was - son of Heli,

New American Standard Bible
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (NAS) When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Eli,

New Century Version
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (NCV) When Jesus began his ministry, he was about thirty years old. People thought that Jesus was Joseph's son. Joseph was the sonn of Heli.

New International Reader's Version
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (NIRV) Jesus was about 30 years old when he began his special work for God and others. It was thought that he was the son of Joseph. Joseph was the son of Heli.

New International Version
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (NIV) Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli,

New King James Version
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (NKJV) Now Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, the son of Heli,

New Living Translation
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (NLT) Jesus was about thirty years old when he began his public ministry. Jesus was known as the son of Joseph. Joseph was the son of Heli.

New Revised Standard
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (NRS) Jesus was about thirty years old when he began his work. He was the son (as was thought) of Joseph son of Heli,

New Revised Standard w/ Apocrypha
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (NRSA) Jesus was about thirty years old when he began his work. He was the son (as was thought) of Joseph son of Heli,

Orthodox Jewish Bible
Chapter Parallel
Lukas 3:23 (OJB) And Yehoshua himself was about shaloshim shanah, at the beginning of his avodas kodesh ministry, being the ben (as it was being thought of Yosef) ben Eli,

Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (RHE) And Jesus himself was beginning about the age of thirty years: being (as it was supposed) the son of Joseph, who was of Heli, who was of Mathat,

Revised Standard Version
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (RSV) Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli,

Revised Standard Version w/ Apocrypha
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (RSVA) Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli,

SBL Greek New Testament
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (SBLG) Καὶ αὐτὸς ἦν Ἰησοῦς ἀρχόμενος ὡσεὶ ἐτῶν τριάκοντα, ὢν υἱός, ὡς ἐνομίζετο, Ἰωσὴφ τοῦ Ἠλὶ

Third Millennium Bible
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (TMB) And Jesus Himself had become about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, who was the son of Heli,

Third Millennium Bible w/ Apocrypha
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (TMBA) And Jesus Himself had become about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, who was the son of Heli,

Tyndale
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (TYN) And Iesus him silfe was about thirty yere of age when he begane beinge as men supposed the sonne of Ioseph. which Ioseph was the sonne of Heli

The Webster Bible
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (WBT) And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, who was [the son] of Heli,

World English Bible
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (WEB) Jesus himself, when he began to teach, was about thirty years old, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli,

Weymouth New Testament
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (WNT) And He--Jesus--when He began His ministry, was about thirty years old. He was the son (it was supposed) of Joseph, son of Heli,

Wycliffe
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (WYC) And Jesus himself was beginning as of thirty years, that he was guessed the son of Joseph, which was of Heli,


Which Greek text do you think says “legalized” or “son in law?”
 
2

2003cobra

New member
Lon said:
Fingers-in-ears will never be able to hear or acquiesce. It is like he's read everything, retained nadda :plain:
Click to expand...

Not fingers in ears: eyes on the text.

The text clearly says Joseph was the son of Heli.

You claim to honor the scriptures, yet that claim is hollow. You deny what the scriptures say.

New Revised Standard

Luke 3:23 (NRS) Jesus was about thirty years old when he began his work. He was the son (as was thought) of Joseph son of Heli

You dishonor and deny the scriptures by rewriting them in the graven image of your false doctrine of inerrancy.

Lon’s Revised NonStandard

Luke 3:23 (LRN) Jesus was about thirty years old when he began his work. He was the son (as was thought) of Joseph, husband of Mary, daughter of Heli

What gives you the right to reword the text to match your tradition?
 
S

SabathMoon

BANNED
Banned
2003cobra said:
Not fingers in ears: eyes on the text.

The text clearly says Joseph was the son of Heli.

You claim to honor the scriptures, yet that claim is hollow. You deny what the scriptures say.

New Revised Standard

Luke 3:23 (NRS) Jesus was about thirty years old when he began his work. He was the son (as was thought) of Joseph son of Heli

You dishonor and deny the scriptures by rewriting them in the graven image of your false doctrine of inerrancy.

Lon’s Revised NonStandard

Luke 3:23 (LRN) Jesus was about thirty years old when he began his work. He was the son (as was thought) of Joseph, husband of Mary, daughter of Heli
Click to expand...
The Greek words something like of eli which means my god. i.e. Luke's god. Joseph is supposedly the father of Jesus. Daughters aren't even mentioned, but the husbands of daughters are. Nice try guys?!
 
D

daqq

Well-known member
SabathMoon said:
The Greek words something like of eli which means my god. i.e. Luke's god. Joseph is supposedly the father of Jesus. Daughters aren't even mentioned, but the husbands of daughters are. Nice try guys?!
Click to expand...

By putting the two genealogies together Yakob is Heli.
(Yet another instance of the Nomen Sacrum Ι̅H, (Ιακωβ Ηλι)).
 
S

SabathMoon

BANNED
Banned
daqq said:
By putting the two genealogies together Yakob is Heli.
(Yet another instance of the Nomen Sacrum Ι̅H, (Ιακωβ Ηλι)).
Click to expand...

HELLO, one is the geneology of husbands to wives and the other is a patrilineage of fathers of fathers. YOU CAN'T COMBINE THEM.
 
D

daqq

Well-known member
SabathMoon said:
HELLO, one is the geneology of husbands to wives and the other is a patrilineage of fathers of fathers. YOU CAN'T COMBINE THEM.
Click to expand...

Lol, I just did, moreover Elisheba, ("Elisabeth"), the sister of Nahshon the prince of tribe Yhudah is the mother of the Kohanim: all the sons of Aaron.
 
Zenn

Zenn

New member
Jacob,

It would seem the post I made two days ago just appeared now (for some reason), so I thought to give it a bump.
(Just in case.)

Thanks,
Zenn
Zenn said:
Jacob said:
2003cobra,

The doctrine of Biblical inerrancy is that there are no errors in the original manuscripts. I believe that this has to do with when the original document was penned.

Shalom.

Jacob
Click to expand...
Greetings, Jacob. (My apologies that I am late to the game.)

If what you say is true, though, then the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy is utterly worthless in that Nobody has these "original manuscripts". They don't exist, and so any "inerrancy" just cannot be attributed to what we have available today. Of which of the scriptures, then, can one say "This is inerrant" if such Inerrancy relies upon something that does not exist?

And yet there are many who having been told "The Bible is the Inerrant Word of God" turn their backs on the gospel (and rightly so) once the truth is discovered that the Bible is Not "Inerrant". There are mistakes, and there is irrefutable evidence of manuscript alteration.

I think this is the concern that Cobra is addressing. That we are to have faith in God, and not holy writ. That we are to have a direct relationship with God, and not vicariously through a book.

frohe Weihnachten,
Zenn

PS: At some point I do have a couple of questions for you, but alas time is pressing.

PPS: And in the interest of full disclosure, Cobra and I are acquaintances, and I am sure one day he will be brought to the light ;^)

4210666025_78ed3bd907_o.gif
Click to expand...
 
WatchmanOnTheWall

WatchmanOnTheWall

Well-known member
What you wrote isn’t true, Watchman.

1) The LXX and the MT both have 18 generations from David to the deportation.
See:
https://isthatinthebible.wordpress.c...ews-genealogy/

On Luke’s genealogy, your link didn’t work for me but every translation disagrees with you. We don’t have the original Greek. The existing Greek disagrees with you.

https://www.biblestudytools.com/lexi...nas/huios.html

You seem to have not reviewed this thoroughly. It is easy to look things up quickly and find people willing to lie to protect their false doctrines. Study more deeply.

You propose that all the translations are wrong:
American Standard Version
Chapter Parallel
Luke 3:23 (ASV) And Jesus himself, when he began [to teach], was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the [son] of Heli,
Click to expand...


You know I was so tired last night I did get confused and can see that this morning. My fault I know I'm not the best when tired.

Yes they are missing, perhaps they were not part of the lineage? After Queen Athaliah usurped the throne Joash (the boy) was allowed to reign. As far as I know I thought he was part of the lineage of Jesus but I'm not sure? Do you know? I'm still tired after last night and dare not do anymore research till I've woken up fully.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lon
WatchmanOnTheWall

WatchmanOnTheWall

Well-known member
2003cobra said:
Oh, Watchman, I see your error now concerning Luke.

Look here again:
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/luk3.pdf

The legalized word refers to the relationship between Jesus and Joseph. Joseph is the son of Heli, no legalized modifier.
Click to expand...

Matthew 3:23
kai autos ho iEsous wsei etwn triakonta arcomenos wn ws hOs Adv enomizeto huios iwshf tou hli

AND He WAS THE JESUS AS IF about OF YEARS thirty beginnING On BEING AS was legalized SON of Joseph OF THE Heli

http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineI...NTpdf/luk3.pdf

Now you mention it yes it would make more sense that way round. Again I wonder what's going on here?

In my defence I have never thought the NT was without faults but it is the actual account of the Hebrew Messiah's life, made by fallible men.
 
Last edited:
WatchmanOnTheWall

WatchmanOnTheWall

Well-known member
2003cobra said:
Thanks. Watchman.

I appreciate your posts.
Click to expand...

I haven't had time to look into this anomaly more fully but will later this week. I spoke my Greek Christian friend who has read the Bible all his life, he knew nothing about this and I could tell he wasn't going to look at it either. Kinda went over his head.

One thing I can say is that 2 Kings has the three missing kings from Mathew but also Queen Athaliah:

King Jehoram's reign -----------8 years 2 Kings 8:16-17
King Ahaziah's reign -----------1 years 2 Kings 8:26
Queen Athaliah's reign ---------6 years 2 Kings 11:3-4
King Joash / Jehoash's reign --40 years 2 Kings 11:21 & 12:1
King Amaziah's reign ----------29 years 2 Kings 14:1-2
King Uzziah / Azariah's reign -52 years 2 Kings 15:1-2
King Jotham's reign -----------16 years 2 Kings 15:32-33
King Ahaz's reign -------------16 years 2 Kings 16:1-2

But Kings lineage is concerned with length of reigns rather than the lineage of the Messiah.
 
Last edited:
2

2003cobra

New member
Thanks for continuing to look at it.

The genealogy would not necessarily focus on kings and queens. It is a list of fathers and sons, as you implied.

I do think you will find that the only explanation is that Matthew (or 1 Chronicles) has errors. That is why no one but you will even try to address the missing 3 or 4 names and the counting error.
 
Last edited:
2

2003cobra

New member
I have more errors to discuss, but Lon and the other supporters of the false doctrine of inerrancy have given up — unable to explain and eventually not even trying.

I will point out once again that the errors are minor and insignificant to the good news of Jesus Christ. We don’t believe because a perfect book tells us so, because we don’t have a perfect book and were never promised one.

We have multiple, credible witnesses to events of the life of Jesus, to His teachings, and to His resurrection from the dead that proved He was from God.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top