Palin's Crazy Church

Sarah Palin's Churches
Sarah Palin's churches, her key churches, especially the Wasilla Assembly of God which Palin has as governor of Alaska endorsed and been endorsed by ( in PR and advertising this is called "co-branding" ) are in a religious movement that's independent from any Christian denomination and which falls under the umbrella of the New Apostolic Reformation, of "Third Wave". This movement is NOT the same as Pentecostalism of the Asssemblies of God. Indeed, the General Council of the Assemblies of God decried the movement as a heresy in 1949 and in 2000.
Troutfishing's diary :: ::

The New Apostolic Reformation movement rejects separation of church and state and tells believers they have a god-given mandate to take control of the world and drive out evil and demons that control whole geographic areas.
The movement is HIGHLY focused on youth and on raising up a last generation so-called "Joel's Army" that will be given supernatural powers and will cleanse the world of evil.
The movement uses what it terms "strategic level spiritual warfare", which drives out demon powers from geographic areas. These demon-powers get mapped out by the World Prayer Center, in Colorado Springs. The idea is that when when these demon-powers are driven out crime, divorce and other social problems will be greatly reduced or will go away altogether.
Sarah Palin has touted being prayed over, anointed really, by a leader in expelling territorial demons, a Kenyan minister who made his reputation by supposedly expelling the "spirit of witchcraft" from a Nairobi suburb. But the record shows that crime rates have not significantly changed.
***As has been discussed in a recent Salon.com article, Sarah Palin appears to be a long-time political activist in the Christian conservative movement. Beyond that, Palin specifically has chosen to be publicly endorsed before large crowds if people, by pastors from the Wasilla Assembly of God and other Third Wave / New Apostolic Reformation churches that Palin has, of her own free will, chosen to attend.That's why religious doctrines taught at Palin's churches are relevant. GOP Vice Presidential nominee Sarah Palin has--through being publicly endorsed by leaders of those churches, which she herself has chosen to attend (of her own free will)--tacitly endorsed those very pastors and their churches. Thus, by extension, Palin has endorsed the Third Wave / New Apostolic Reformation and its doctrine, because churches Palin goes to and has gone to, especially her 25+ year church, the Wasilla Assembly of God, teach Third Wave / New Apostolic Reformation doctine. Wasilla Assembly of God teaches and promotes books and curricula from Rick Joyner, John Bevere and Francis Frangipane, and Wasilla AoG Master's Commission students have gone both to Morningstar Ministry for a "Prophetic conference" and also to the "LA Dream Center". The Wassila Assembly of God is co-hosting, in October, a "prophetic conference" with Morningstar that will be led by the head of Morningstar's prophecy program, Steve Thompson. Meanwhile, the longtime pastor at Palin's Juneau church, the Juneau Christian Center, is a close associate of the father of the "Holy Laughter" anointing, Rodney Howard-Browne. To mention a few of the many connections between Palin's churches and Third Wave / New Apostolic ReformationIf Palin had chosen to appear onstage and been endorsed by leaders of the National Council of Churches that would be interpreted as her endorsement of beliefs held by those groups. Likewise, if she had been appeared onstage with and been endorsed by leaders of Neo-Nazi or Klan groups the same would apply.

Palin has also supported Jews for Jesus and Messianic Judaism two groups which seek to convert Jews into apostacy. Palin's Assembly of God congregation teaches that Jews will burn in hell for rejecting jesus.

The Diabolically Evil Agenda by Evagenlical Christians Against the State of Israel

The tensions between the United States and Iran reached a new level recently. Following a series of announcements regarding its nuclear program and tests of new weapons systems, Tehran announced on Tuesday that it was purchasing the sophisticated Tor M1 anti-aircraft missile system from Russia. On Friday, the IAEA released its highly anticipated report on the Iranian nuclear program and its failure to meet UN Security Council deadline to stop its uranium enrichment efforts. Secretary of State Condi Rice warned Sunday that it was time for Iran and its President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to stop "playing games."

But while the differences between Washington and Tehran are threatening and growing, there are eerie similarities between presidents Bush and Ahmadinejad and their respective fundamentalist followers. For each, the strikingly analogous views regarding religious prophecy, second comings and the end of times for their respective Christian and Shiite eschatologies may be pushing Ahmadinejad and Bush inexorably towards war.

A recent piece by Matthias Kuntzel in the New Republic ("Ahmadinejad's Demons") presents a frightening picture of the Iranian side of the equation. Kuntzel portrays the Ahmadinejad as a "child of the revolution" fostering the cult of martyrdom and mass sacrifice that killed tens of thousands of young Iranians - the Basiji - during the war with Iraq in the 1980's. Just as Ayatollah Khomeini in 1980 called on Iranian children to martyr themselves in battle in the name of Hussein, the third imam and murdered grandson of the Prophet Muhammad, today's Iran of Ahmadinejad and Supreme Leader Ali Khameini have created for a special military unit called "Commando of Voluntary Martyrs." The Martyrs unit now boasts 52,000 members and will soon be in place in every Iranian province.

Central to the ideology of Ahmadinejad and the hard liners in Tehran is the role of the return of the "Twelfth Imam." In Shiite theology, the second coming of this last of the Prophet Muhammad's direct male descendents - the Mahdi - signals the imminent deliverance of the world from evil. As Kuntzel describes:

At the end of this line, there is the "Twelfth Imam," who is named Muhammad. Some call him the Mahdi (the "divinely guided one"), though others say imam Zaman (from sahib-e zaman: "the ruler of time"). He was born in 869, the only son of the eleventh Imam. In 874, he disappeared without a trace, thereby bringing Muhammad's lineage to a close. In Shia mythology, however, the Twelfth Imam survived. The Shia believe that he merely withdrew from public view when he was five and that he will sooner or later emerge from his "occultation" in order to liberate the world from evil.
The killing of Hussein and the return of the Twelfth Imam are essential components of the language - and propaganda - of Ahmadinejad's Iran. He lauded what former Iranian President Hashemi Rafsanjani deemed the "worthwhile" death of martyrdom, "Is there an art that is more beautiful, more divine, more eternal than the art of the martyr's death?" President Ahmadinejad last November declared, "The most important task of our Revolution is to prepare the way for the return of the Twelfth Imam." His government has even funded a research institute to study and if possible hasten the coming of "imam Zaman." And in his September 17, 2005 address to the UN General Assembly, Ahmadinejad implored God for the return of the Mahdi:

"O mighty Lord, I pray to you to hasten the emergence of your last repository, the promised one, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace."
All of which offers disturbing parallels between the Tehran regime and the worldview of President Bush and his fundamentalist followers in the American religious right. From the use of religious imagery and government funding of non-secular initiatives to the meaning of Israel, Armageddon and the second coming of Christ, Bush and the American Taliban see themselves as fulfilling biblical prophecy in the Middle East. In some important ways, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's mirror image may reside in the White House.

The influence and impact of evangelical thinking and language about the End of Times and divine intervention upon the Bush administration is made clear in books like Kevin Phillips' "American Theocracy" and Michael Lind's "Made in Texas." Phillips concludes that George W. Bush is convinced that "God wanted him to be president", a view backed by Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention, who reported, "Among the things he said to us was: I believe that God wants me to be president." As White House official Tim Goeglein once put it, "I think President Bush is God's man at this hour, and I say this with a great sense of humility."

President Bush himself has not publicly claimed to have a divine mandate. (As Time reported after September 11, however, "privately, Bush even talked of being chosen by the grace of God to lead at that moment.") But Bush is clear in his belief that God's hand is at work in his presidency. Just last week, Bush defended his decision to invade Iraq, declaring:

"I base a lot of my foreign policy decisions on some things that I think are true. One, I believe there's an Almighty. And, secondly, I believe one of the great gifts of the Almighty is the desire in everybody's soul, regardless of what you look like or where you live, to be free."
During a February 2003 National Prayer Breakfast, the President intoned:

"We can be confident in the ways of Providence...Behind all of life and all of history, there's a dedication and purpose, set by the hand of a just and faithful God."
(For more on Bush's use of religious imagery, see "Bush's Religious Language" in The Nation and this commentary by his former speechwriter, Michael Gerson.)

During a March appearance in Cleveland, President Bush brushed aside the question, "Do you believe this, that the war in Iraq and the rise of terrorism are signs of the Apocalypse? And if not, why not?" While Bush may or may not literally believe that Armageddon and the Second Coming of Christ are imminent, his radical right Republican base is another matter altogether. Appearing on CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight in March, Kevin Phillips noted that while Bush can't publicly state that he literally believes in the biblical prophecy of Armageddon in the Book of Revelations, his conservative Christian allies clearly do:

"A survey by "Newsweek" several years back found that 45 percent of American Christians believed in Armageddon, that it was coming. And about the same percentage thought the anti- Christ was already on Earth. Now, if you were to take the religious Christians, and the Republican coalition includes most of the religious Christians, you probably have about 55 percent of the Republican coalition that believes in this."
By "this," Phillips is referring to the end of times struggle in Israel, the conversion or mass death of Jews with the Second Coming of Christ. As Jerry Falwell put it, "scripture is clear on that." (Falwell also told Newsweek's Howard Fineman that he introduced George W. Bush to Tim LaHaye, author of the "Left Behind" series on the Second Coming and the Rapture.) That future, as Rod Dreher described it in the National Review four years ago:

"To Jews who adhere to ancient tradition, whose number include religious Israeli nationalists, the long-awaited Messiah will return to become the king of Israel and high priest of a rebuilt Temple, which can only be on Temple Mount. For Christian fundamentalists, Jesus Christ's return at the height of the battle of Armageddon, in which forces of the Antichrist clash in Israel with a 200 million-man army from the East, will require a Third Temple from which the Lord will begin a millennial reign."
The result for Bush's amen corner is what Fineman described as "Apocalypse Politics." That entails above all unswerving support for Israel. Israel is seen as ordained by God, a view held by 44% of Americans, according to a 2003 Pew Research survey. But the evangelical Christian Zionist movement goes further, seeing in Israel "a fulfillment of the biblical prophecy about the second coming of Jesus," a belief shared by 36% of Americans in the Pew research. For the Republican religious right, Israel must not only be staunchly supported in its conflict with the Palestinians, but that the conflict itself should be welcomed, even accelerated.

Bush's conservative Christian allies back Israel in both word and deed. Billy Graham and Pat Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network offer daily prayers for Israel. For one-time presidential candidate Gary Bauer claimed, "America has an obligation to stand by Israel" because "God has promised that land to the Jewish people." Evangelicals organize pilgrimages and tours of Israel and even provide Jewish settlements in the West Bank with financial support. When the President Bush pressured Ariel Sharon in 2002 to pull back its tanks from towns in the West Bank, the White House received a hundred thousand emails from Falwell's followers and faced the Christian Coalition on Mall in Washington. Bush backed off. As the Village Voice reported in 2004, the Bush White House consulted with rapture Christians before finalizing its policy on Sharon's proposed Gaza withdrawal.

But the friends of Bush are not content to wait for the Second Coming of Christ and with it, the slaughter of the mass of Jews with the conversion of the remaining 144,000. As Falwell put it, the arrival of the End of Times should be prodded, advanced and cajoled:

"The danger, if there is a danger in believing in the imminence of the Lord's return - and I do, is to become a fatalist, that certain things are going to happen regardless and there's nothing we can do about them. That isn't true."
Nowhere is this desire to accelerate biblical prophecy more on display than in the ongoing effort to breed the symbolic "red heifer." Since the early 1990's, fundamentalist Christians in the United States have been trying to help breed the perfect calf that will signal the Second Coming. As the NRO's Dreher described the biblical role of the red heifer:

"The ashes of a flawless red heifer - an extremely rare creature - were required by the ancient Hebrews to purify worshipers who went into the Temple to pray. In modern times, rabbinical law forbids Jews from setting foot on the Temple Mount, thus violating the site where the Holy of Holies dwelled, until and unless they are ritually purified. Without a perfect red heifer to sacrifice, the Third Temple cannot be built, and Moshiach - the Messiah - will not come."
It's no wonder Haaretz columnist David Landau deemed the red heifer "a four-legged bomb" with the potential to "set the entire region on fire."

While some wait for the arrival of the biblically mandated bovine, the apocalyptic theocracies of Washington and Tehran seem on a collision course. As President Bush's supporters view themselves as "Israel's only safety belt," Mahmoud Ahmadinejad calls for Israel to be "wiped off the map." While the mullahs in Tehran look to the return of the Twelfth Imam to deliver them from evil, President Bush's allies await the Second Coming of Christ to usher in a millennium of peace. With their research institutes and breeding programs, the devout on both sides seek to accelerate the End of Times. And as their positions over the Iranian nuclear program harden, Presidents Bush and Ahmadinejad have more in common than they know.

Seventy Weeks in Daniel

The following passages in the Book of Daniel are some of Christian’s favorites to prophecy the coming of Jesus. By using a few mistranslations and misplaced punctuation, they end up with a very clever and amazing attempt to place Jesus in the Hebrew Bible.

These are the quotes from the New Testament:

"Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon the holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation of iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and sixty two weeks; the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troubled times. And after sixty two weeks shall the Messiah be cut off, but not for himself, and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolation’s are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week, and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even unto the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate." Daniel 9:24-27

The Christian interpretation showing all the mathematics follow:

The Artaxerxes of Nehemiah 2:1 rose to power in 465 BCE, and so, according to Nehemiah 2:1, the commandment to restore Jerusalem began 20 years later, i.e., 445 BCE.

Now, since they claim that a Biblical year had 360 days, they multiply 360 by 483 (69 weeks equals 69 periods of seven years--69 X 7 = 483 years). This equals 173,880 days.

To change from Biblical years to our solar years, they divide 173,880 days by 365 1/4; this equals 476 years. Add 476 years to 445 BCE and you will get 31 CE.

Actually, they add a few days, and it ends up around 32 CE, which is just when they claim that Jesus was crucified. Thus, Daniel 9:25, according to the Christians when discussing the Messiah, is referring to Jesus; saying that he will be "cut off” i.e., crucified.

Sounds reasonable, but is it accurate? There are really many difficulties (errors) with this interpretation, which is why Jews were never impressed with it. The first problem is that the Christians mistranslated the main verse (25). The way Christians read it is that after seven weeks and sixty two weeks, the Messiah will come; i.e., after 69 weeks. The obvious question is why didn't Daniel simply write 69 weeks, instead of writing 7 plus 62. The answer is that they mistranslated the verse. If you translate it correctly, that question disappears. Here is the correct translation.

Know and discern that from the going forth of the word to restore and build Jerusalem unto one anointed, a prince, shall be seven weeks; and for sixty two weeks shall it be built again with streets and moats, but in troublesome times. Note the main difference―not that it will take 69 weeks before the Messiah will come, but rather a mere 7 weeks. If you study this in the original Hebrew, this should be quite clear. Thus, the translation by itself answers the above question of why not simply write 69, instead of 7 plus 62.

According to the correct translation, the anointed one will come after 7 weeks; the city will remain built for 62 weeks, and after the 62 weeks, (verse 26) it will be destroyed. The Christian translation cannot explain why Daniel had to mention the first seven weeks, and in fact, it is a mistranslation. Thus, if they show you their version of the Bible, open the
original and show them the difference.

Another major difficulty is that according to the simple, untwisted translation of verse 26, two events were to occur after the 62 weeks—the anointed one would be cut off, and the city and the sanctuary would be destroyed. As you know, Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD, which is 38 years after the death of Jesus―more than five "weeks" off. There is no
acceptable answer for these missing five weeks according to the Christian interpretation.

Another difficulty is that the Jewish year is not really 360 days long. While the months are based on the lunar patterns, the years must coincide with the solar system. Simply study the Jewish calendar. You will see that since the solar year exceeds the lunar year by around 11 days, there will be an extra month added around every three years. Thus 445 BCE plus 483 years (69 X 7) ends up 38 CE, and by then everyone admits that Jesus was already dead.

Another difficulty is that Christians, for lack of a better answer, claim that the 70th week will take place when Jesus returns in his second coming as a king. The problem was caused because Daniel mentioned a total of 70 weeks, and then he specified 7 plus 62, leaving one remaining. The Christians say that the first 69 weeks were consecutive, then there is at least a 1,900 year gap, and sooner or later the 70th week will occur. This is obviously a very forced explanation, born of desperation. Remember, Christian apologetics is a thriving industry.

There is one other important point that should be reviewed. On examining the other books of the Bible, it becomes quite apparent that Daniel is referring to Cyrus, of Persia, and not Jesus. In Jeremiah 25:11-12, the word of God clearly states that the Babylonian exile will last for only 70 years. In Ezra 1: 1, it says that "Now in the first year of Cyrus, king of Persia, that the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus, king of Persia, that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom...saying...Whosoever there is among you of all His people, let him go to Jerusalem, and build the house of the Lord..." In Isaiah 45:1, it says, "Thus saith the Lord to his anointed (messiah/moshiach), to Cyrus..." Thus, Isaiah, in the name of God, calls Cyrus an anointed one, and Ezra discusses how Cyrus fulfilled the prophecy of Jeremiah. Since Daniel lived after Isaiah and Jeremiah, but before the period of Ezra, it is most reasonable and probable to affirm that the anointed one that he referred to in Daniel 9:25 is Cyrus, and not Jesus.

The reason why a Christian would have difficulty understanding this is because the compiler of the King James Bible was shrewd and deceptive. In the original Hebrew, both Daniel 9:25 and Isaiah 45:1 use the exact same word―"moshiach." However, in the Christian version of the Old Testament the word," moshiach," is translated in Isaiah 45:1 as "anointed" whereas in Daniel 9:25, the same Hebrew word is translated as "the Messiah." (the correct translation of "Moshiach" is "an anointed one.") This deceptive translating makes it virtually impossible for the innocent reader who does not know Hebrew to discern the truth.

In addition, the compiler of the Christian Bible did another clever maneuver. The Christian Bible arranges the sequence of the various books of the Bible in a peculiar manner: the Pentateuch, Samuel, Chronicles, then Ezra, and then Esther, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Lamentations, Ezekiel, and then Daniel. (In the Jewish Bible, Ezra follows all of the above.) The reason for placing Ezra in the Christian Bible before Isaiah, and before Psalms, Proverbs, etc., even though Ezra lived long after those books were written is presumably to fool the reader of the Christian Bible. Had the reader read Ezra immediately after Daniel, which is the correct chronological location, the reader would immediately recognize that Ezra 1:1 and Daniel 9:25 refer to Cyrus, and not Jesus

O what a tangled web we weave, When first we practise to deceive! [Sir Walter Scott, Marmion, A Tale of Flodden Field (1855), xvii]

DANIEL AND THE ANOINTED ONE

Hugh Fogelman



FOUR stories come out of Daniel Chapter 9 as told in the Tanakh, the Jewish Bible (which is much different than the King James Version of the Christian Bible:

FIRST ― Daniel was prophesying about the period before the destruction of the Second Temple when he wrote; “Seventy septets have been decreed upon your people and upon your holy city to terminate transgressions (9:24). The Sages say it is a phrase referring to seventy times seven years, or 490 years, referring to the seventy years of exile that passed from the “Destruction of the First Temple” until this vision, and the entire 430-year period of the “Second Temple” (Rashi).

SECOND ― Daniel 9:25-27 reads; “And you should know and comprehend: From the emergence of the word to return and build Jerusalem until an anointed prince will be seven weeks; and for sixty two weeks it will be rebuilt, street and moat, but in troubled times. And after the sixty two weeks an anointed one will be cut off and will be no more, the people of the prince who comes will destroy the city and the Sanctuary, but his end shall come like a flood. Until the end of a war, desolation is decreed! He will strengthen a covenant with the great ones one week; and for half of the week he will abolish the sacrifice and offering, and upon soaring heights will the mute abominations be, until extermination as decreed will pour down upon the abomination.” Please pay particular attention to the semicolon between the 7 weeks and the 62 weeks.

However, in the King James Version of the Hebrew Bible, Daniel 9:25 says:

25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. (NOTICE: there is no semicolon, just a comma – WHY?)

I wonder who tampered with the KJV? The original 1611 edition of the KJV correctly separates the seven weeks from the 62 weeks WITH A SEMICOLON.

The current KJV, however, deceptively compresses these two time periods into one. By revising the KJV and altering the punctuation they completely changed the message of the angel Gabriel’s prophecy. (This is nothing new in Christian writings). By combining “seven weeks” with “62 weeks” into ONE period of 69 weeks, Christian translators advance the idea in the mind of their readers that there is one messiah (anointed ones) spoken, instead of the correct message of TWO. All Jewish kings, priests, judges and anyone who rules were “anointed.”

THIRD ― Isaiah 44:28 & 45:1-3; Ezra 1:1-3 and 11 Chronicles 36:21-23 all tell us how this anointed one is by name ― Cyrus, the messiah, who did indeed start to rebuild the Second Temple. This fact can never be disputed. Until 1885, however, the KJV correctly translated this verse so as to reflect the two anointed ones spoken of by the angel. The first anointed ruler (Cyrus) who arises after “seven weeks” and a second one who is anointed and removed after a subsequent “62 weeks,” or 434 years―the High Priest.

The sages say the “septets” refer to full seven-year periods. The prince of this verse is Cyrus, who gave permission to rebuild Jerusalem and the Temple. He ascended to the throne fifty-two years (seven full septets plus three years) after the exile had begun. From then until the second destruction of Jerusalem was 438 years, or sixty-two septets and four years (Rashi).

FOURTH ― The Talmud and Roman historians say Vitellius, governor of Syria, removed both Pilate and Caiaphas from office in around year 36 CE. Caiaphas was the Jewish High Priest, a Sadducees, the anointed one could have been the one Daniel wrote about, saying, “Then after the sixty-two septets (weeks), the anointed one will be cut off and will exist no longer,”and by him being removed from office, he was indeed “cut off” and his Priesthood “existed no longer.”

The Sages explain that Daniel could also have been talking about “the anointed one” being Agrippa, the last Jewish king, at the end of the Second Temple Era. After his death, the prince of this verse, the Roman Titus, would command the destruction of the Second Temple, which we all know will not be rebuilt until after the War of Gog and Magog, in Messianic times. Daniel 9:26 (Rashi)

FINALLY and most important, Jesus never qualified to be the Jewish messiah according to what the book Christianity holds as being AUTHORITY, the Hebrew Bible. So, whether or not Jesus was the anointed one spoken by Daniel is not important or even the issue. Why not? Because Jesus was NEVER anointed according to Jewish Biblical standards of how a king is anointed, and Jesus never came from the tribe of Judah, and was not from David’s son Solomon, as the prophets claimed from whom the messiah will come. So to Judaism and the Hebrew B ible, this is all irreverent.
Daniel 9:25-27

Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times

And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.’

And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

So, whenever some Christian evangelist claims he can show something from Daniel, ask him why the New Testament KJV translates “moshiach” 37 places in the Jewish bible as "anointed," (that is the proper translation); but in Daniel the KJV does not translate moshiach at all. Instead it transliterates it to messiah, with the “capital M.”

Why does the Christian bible change Daniel’s message from an anointed one to THE MESSIAH (HaMoshiach)? Does Christianity have to change the SOURCE Bible in order for their religion to be true?

Christian "Messianic" Deciet and Lies

Messianic Judaism: A Christian Missionary Movement
Messianic Judaism is a Christian movement that began in the 1970s combining a mixture of Jewish ritual and Christianity. There are a vast and growing numbers of these groups, and they differ in how much Jewish ritual is mixed with conventional Christian belief. One end of the spectrum is represented by Jews For Jesus, who simply target Jews for conversion to Christianity using imitations of Jewish ritual solely as a ruse for attracting the potential Jewish converts. On the other end are those who don't stress the divinity of Jesus, but present him as the "Messiah." They incorporate distorted Jewish ritual on an ongoing basis.
The movement has received criticism from mainstream Christian leaders, for these groups claim to believe in the New Testament and yet gloss over the distinction between the two communities instituted in that work, and for the deceptive tactics used to gain Jewish converts. They are typically very pro-Israel and include an unusually high number of Jewish symbols -- the Magen David, Torah, talleisim, shofars, yarmulkes, mezzuzahs, Shabbat candles, and use of Hebrew and Yiddish language -- to assure prospective converts that they are not renouncing Judaism by accepting Jesus. According to Jewish law and tradition, such an acceptance is indeed a renunciation of Judaism.

Like the Christian Missionary, one of the major roles of the Messianic Jew is to proselytize others. They prey on such vulnerable individuals as the lonely, the elderly, the poor, the emotionally unstable, the naive, or those who are just untutored in Scripture. These unfortunates are lured into accepting missionary doctrines out of emotional need, not intellectual conviction. For even after a superficial reading of the missionaries' textual "proofs" within context, one sees that their doctrines are founded solely upon misquotations and mistranslations of Hebrew Scripture.

The term "completed Jews" is now used by some Messianic Jews and Missionary Christians to describe Jews who have accepted Jesus as their savior. This is offensive because of the implication that a Jew who has not accepted Jesus is not "complete." This term has also recently popped up in Washington, DC during House subcommittee support of President Bush's proposal to channel government money to religious social service programs. Jewish and civil liberties groups note that this testimony clearly documents the President's initiative will result in government-financed proselytizing.

Education: The Best Protection Against Missionary Groups
One of the most significant differences between Judaism and Christianity (or Messianic Judaism) is that the latter rejects the laws that God gave to Moses to teach to the children of Israel. According to the New Testament passage John 3:36: “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath.” Christian theology firmly believes that if you do not believe in Jesus you are going to "burn in Hell." We Are Not Going to Burn in Hell: a Jewish Response to Christianity demonstrates how to refute Messianic Jews and Christian missionaries by using passages from both the Tanach and the New Testament. It is a definitive source to counter every argument Christian missionaries may make to sway a Jew to their theology. The first chapter is available on-line.
It is truly surprising how many people there are who confess a belief in Jesus as the Messiah, without having first obtained an adequate knowledge and understanding of the New Testament, the main source of information about him. When a person is calmly shown the factual mistakes and absurdities that are in the New Testament, and sees where it misinterpreted and mistranslated the Tanach, it awakens the realization that they were misled by people whom they thought were friends.

One should be aware of the fact that Paul, a founding father of the early church, and the most successful missionary that ever lived, confessed to using deception and lies to make converts:

Corinthians 9:20-22: To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews; to those under the law I became as one under the law -- though not being myself under the law -- that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law -- not being without law toward God but under the law of Christ -- that I might win those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak.

Romans 3:7: If through my lies God’s truth abounds to His glory, why am I still being condemned as a sinner?

Philippians 1:18: In every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Jesus is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice.
The veracity of everything that Paul stated and wrote is called into question by the fact that these quotes are found in the books he himself authored. Or, did he?
Jesus of Nazareth: The False Messiah
For almost two thousand years, the Christian Church has taught that Jesus was crucified, died, and was resurrected three days later. This has long been one of the church's foundational beliefs, along with the virgin birth, atonement, and future second coming of Jesus.
In the year 325 CE, Constantine (a non-baptized Pagan) convened the Council of Nicea to settle disputes in the Church. The council changed Jesus from man to God in the flesh, they changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday, and the Passover was changed to Easter. Among the nearly 200 Gospels circulating in the first three hundred years of this era, the Catholic Church canonized only four. Origen, the great Catholic father, confirms this fact: "And not four Gospels, but very many, out of which these we have chosen."

A partial list of the different books considered by the Church for inclusion were a gospel written by Jesus’ own hand; letters and other correspondences written by Jesus; letters written by the "virgin" Mary; Pilate’s official report to the emperor of the trial and crucifixion of Jesus, with Pilate’s confession of faith; the reply to this from Tiberius, and the trial of Pilate; official documents of the Roman Senate about Jesus; Gospels, epistles, acts, by every single one of the twelve apostles; and official documents of church law and government, written in Greek by the apostles. In his book, Answering Christianity's Most Puzzling Questions, Christian apologist Richard Sisson states:


"In fact, after the death of Jesus a whole flood of books that claimed to be inspired appeared.... Disputes over which ones were true were so intense that the debate continued for centuries. Finally in the fourth century a group of church leaders called a council and took a vote. The 66 books that comprised our cherished Bible were declared to be Scripture by a vote of 568 to 563."

Paul and the writers of all four canonical Gospels described the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, as they understood it had happened. There is a acknowledged consensus among academic Christian theologians that:

The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were not written by Jesus' disciples but by a person or persons whose names are unknown.

Neither Paul nor any of the Gospel writers had been an eyewitness to Jesus' ministry or death.

The Gospels record the beliefs and memories of various Christian groups as they had evolved at the time they were written.
Their Hollow Inheritance: A Comprehensive Refutation of Christian Missionaries cites additional discrepancies. Matthew 1:20 and Luke 1:31 describe "angels" appearing to Jesus’ mother and her husband informing them of her forthcoming "immaculate conception" and "virgin birth" to the "Son of God," the "Messiah." When compared with the way Jesus’ family and neighbors treated him, it is absurd to believe that "angels" really visited them:
Mark 3:21: Upon hearing of it, his family went out to seize him, for they said, "He is beside himself."
To offset the startling fact that Jesus’ family thought that he was insane, some New Testament editions replace "they" with "people," although "they" is in the original Greek text.
John 7:5: For even his brothers did not believe in him.

Luke 4:16: And Jesus came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and he went to the synagogue, as his custom was, on the Sabbath day…
There, Jesus hinted to his friends and neighbors that he was the Messiah, however:


Luke 4:28: When they heard this, all in the synagogue were filled with wrath. And they rose up, and put him out of the city, and led him to the brow of the hill on which their city was built, that they might throw him down headlong.
How very strange it is, that during all the years in which Yeshu grew up with them, his brothers, friends, and neighbors did not notice that he was a "divine being." And could it have been that his parents forgot or didn’t tell anyone what they experienced? This stretches one’s imagination.

Origins of the Jesus Mythos
Christianity is based on the unique belief that Jesus was God's Son, born of a virgin, sacrificed for the Salvation of man. In reality, as sacrificed virgin-born Savior Son of God, Jesus was not unique. Not even close. The Jesus mythos simply followed the traditional model of the ancient pagan savior-gods.
At the time of Jesus of Nazareth, as for centuries before, the Mediterranean world roiled with a happy diversity of creeds and rituals. Details varied according to location and culture, but the general outlines of these faiths were astonishingly similar. Roughly speaking the ancients' gods:


Were born on or very near our Christmas Day
Were born of a Virgin-Mother
Were born in a Cave or Underground Chamber
Led a life of toil for Mankind
Were called by the names of Light-bringer, Healer, Mediator, Savior, Deliverer
Were however vanquished by the Powers of Darkness
And descended into Hell or the Underworld
Rose again from the dead, and became the pioneers of mankind to the Heavenly world
Founded Communions of Saints, and Churches into which disciples were received by Baptism
Were commemorated by Eucharistic meals
Krishna was born of the virgin Devaki; the Savior Dionysus was born of the virgin Semele. Buddha too was born of a virgin, as were the Egyptian Horus and Osiris. The old Teutonic goddess Hertha was a virgin impregnated by the heavenly Spirit and bore a son. Scandinavian Frigga was impregnated by the All-Father Odin and bore Balder, the healer and savior of mankind.

Mithras was born in a cave, on December 25th, of a virgin mother. He came from heaven to be born as a man, to redeem men from their sin. He was know as "Savior," "Son of God," "Redeemer," and "Lamb of God." With twelve disciples he traveled far and wide as a teacher and illuminator of men. He was buried in a tomb from which he rose again from the dead -- an event celebrated yearly with much rejoicing. His followers kept the Sabbath holy, holding sacramental feasts in remembrance of Him. The sacred meal of bread and water, or bread and wine, was symbolic of the body and blood of the sacred bull.

The celebration of Christmas on December 25 was originally the pagan birthday of Mithras, the sun god, whose day of the week is still known as "Sunday." The halo of light which is usually shown surrounding the face of Jesus and Christian saints, is another concept taken from the sun god. The theme of temptation by a devil-like creature was also found in pagan mythology. In particular, the story of Jesus's temptation by Satan resembles the temptation of Osiris by the devil-god Set in Egyptian mythology.

The Source of the Original Gospels
Theologians have also observed for many decades that two of the synoptic gospels (Matthew and Luke) have many points of similarity. In fact, the writings have many dozens of phrases and sentences that are identical. This observation led to the theory that both gospels were based largely on an earlier document called "Q" meaning "Quelle," which is German for "source," and is comprised of three distinct documents:
Q1 described Jesus as a Jewish philosopher-teacher, written circa 50 CE.

Q2 viewed Jesus as a Jewish apocalyptic prophet, written circa 60 CE.

Q3 described Jesus as a near-deity who converses directly with God and Satan, written circa 70 CE during a time of great turmoil in Palestine.
The authors of the Gospels of Matthew (circa 80 CE) and Luke (circa 90 CE) wrote their books using text from Q, Mark and their own unique traditions. The author of the Gospel of Thomas also used portions of Q1 and Q2 in his writing, but seems to have been unaware of Q3. This gospel was widely circulated within the early Christian movement but did not make it into the Christian Scriptures.
What is remarkable about Q1 is that the original Christians appeared to be centered totally on concerns about their relationships with God and with other people, and their preparation for the Kingdom of God on earth. Totally absent from their spiritual life are almost all of the factors that we associate with Christianity today. There is absolutely no mention of (in alphabetic order):

adultery
angels
apostles
baptism
church
clergy
confirmation
crucifixion
demons
disciples
divorce
Eucharist
healing
great commission to convert the world
heaven
hell
incarnation
infancy stories
John the Baptist
Last Supper
life after death
Mary and Joseph and the rest of Jesus' family
magi
miracles
Jewish laws concerning behavior
marriage
Messiah
restrictions on sexual behavior
resurrection
roles of men and women
Sabbath
salvation
Satan
second coming
signs of the end of the age
sin
speaking in tongues
temple
tomb
transfiguration
trial of Jesus
trinity
virgin birth

There is no reference to Jesus' death having any redeeming function; in fact, there is no mention of the crucifixion at all. John E. Remsburg's The Christ: A Critical Review and Analysis of the Evidence of His Existence, lists the following writers who lived during the time, or within a century after the time, that Jesus is supposed to have lived:

Josephus
Philo-Judææus
Seneca
Pliny Elder
Arrian
Petronius
Dion Pruseus
Paterculus
Suetonius
Juvenal
Martial
Persius
Plutarch
Pliny Younger
Tacitus
Justus of Tiberius
Apollonius
Quintilian
Lucanus
Epictetus
Hermogones Silius Italicus
Statius
Ptolemy
Appian
Phlegon
Phæædrus
Valerius Maximus
Lucian
Pausanias
Florus Lucius
Quintius Curtius
Aulus Gellius
Dio Chrysostom
Columella
Valerius Flaccus
Damis
Favorinus
Lysias
Pomponius Mela
Appion of Alexandria
Theon of Smyrna

Enough of the writings of the authors named in the foregoing list remains to form a library. Yet in this mass of Jewish and Pagan literature, according to Remsburg, "aside from two forged passages in the works of a Jewish author, and two disputed passages in the works of Roman writers, there is to be found no mention of Jesus Christ." Nor, do any of these authors make note of the Disciples or Apostles -- increasing the embarrassment from the silence of history concerning the foundation of Christianity.


A Jewish Messiah
Judaism, unlike the Christianity, does not believe that the Messiah is Jesus. The noun moshiach (translated as messiah) annotatively means "annointed one;" it does not, however, imply "savior." The notion of an innocent, semi-divine being who will sacrifice himself to save us from the consequences of our own sins is a purely Christian concept that has no basis in Jewish thought or scripture. In Judaic texts, the term messiah was used for all kings, high priests, certain warriors, but never eschatological figures. In the Tanach, moshiach is used 38 times: two patriarchs, six high priests, once for Cyrus, 29 Israelite kings such as Saul and David. Not once is the word moshiach used in reference to the awaited Messiah. Even in the apocalyptic book of Daniel, the only time moshiach is mentioned is in connection to a murdered high priest. The Dead Sea Scrolls, the Pseudepigrapha, and Apocrypha never mention the Messiah.
The man destined to be the Messiah will be a direct descendant of King David (Isaiah 11:1) through the family of Solomon, David's son (1 Chronicles 22:9-l0). He will cause all the world to serve God together (Isaiah 11:2), be wiser than Solomon (Mishnah Torah Repentance 9:2), greater than the patriarchs and prophets (Aggadah Genesis 67), and more honored than kings (Mishnah Sanhedrin 10), for he will reign as king of the world (Pirkei Eliezer).

Amongst the most basic missions that the Messiah will accomplish during his lifetime (Isaiah 42:4) are to:


Oversee the rebuilding of Jerusalem, including the Third Temple, in the event that it has not yet been rebuilt (Michah 4:1 and Ezekiel 40-45)

Gather the Jewish people from all over the world and bring them home to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 11:12; 27:12-13)

Influence every individual of every nation to abandon and be ashamed of their former beliefs (or non-beliefs) and acknowledge and serve only the One True God of Israel (Isaiah 11:9-10; 40:5 and Zephaniah 3:9)

Bring about global peace throughout the world (Isaiah 2:4; 11:5-9 and Michah 4:3-4).
There are over a dozen additional prophecies which the Messiah will also achieve (there is no mention of any “second coming” in the Tanach or the New Testament). In order to avoid identifying the wrong individual as Messiah, the Code of Jewish Law dictates criteria for establishing the Messiah's identity (Mishnah Torah Kings 11:4):


"If a king arises from the House of David who meditates on the Torah, occupies himself with the commandments as did his ancestor King David, observes the commandments of the Written and Oral Law, prevails upon all Israel to walk in the way of the Torah and to follow its direction, and fights the wars of God, it may be assumed that he is the Messiah.

If he does these things and is fully successful, rebuilds the Third Temple on its location, and gathers the exiled Jews, he is beyond doubt the Messiah. But if he is not fully successful, or if he is killed, he is not the Messiah."
Over 1,000 years before the attributed birth of the historical Jesus, it was recorded in the Tanach:

Numbers 23:19: God is not a man, that He should be deceitful, nor the son of man, that He should repent. Would He say and not do, or speak and not confirm?

Psalms 146:3: Do not rely on princes nor in the son of man, for he holds no salvation.
Even the New Testament concurs that Jesus, in fact, is not the Messiah:
Matthew 20:28: Just as the son of man did not come to be served, but to serve.
Counter-Missionary Training
When confronted by a Christian missionary or a member of the Messianic movement, one should remember that the very existence of Jesus, and events surrounding him significant to the Christian mythos, are entirely absent from every historical record. Missionary arguments usually appeal to emotion rather than to reason; they will attempt to make you feel embarrassed about denying the historicity of Jesus. The usual response is something like "Isn't denying the existence of Jesus just as silly as denying the existence of Julius Caesar or denying the Holocaust?" One should then point out that there are ample historical sources confirming the existence of who or whatever else is named, while there exists no corresponding evidence for Jesus.
Christian scholar Rt. Rev. George Arthur Butterick, in The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible, a book written by to prove the validity of the New Testament, states:


"A study of 150 Greek [manuscripts] of the Gospel of Luke has revealed more than 30,000 different readings.... It is safe to say that there is not one sentence in the New Testament in which the [manuscript] is wholly uniform."

There are 304,805 letters (approximately 79,000 words) in the Torah. In the over 3,000 years since Moses received the original Scripture from Mt. Sinai and wrote the 13 copies (twelve of which were distributed among the Tribes), spelling variants have emerged on a total of nine words -- with absolutely no effect on their meaning. The Christian Bible, in comparison, has over 200,000 variants and in 400 instances, the variants change the meaning of the text; 50 of these are of great significance.

When countering Christian Missionaries it is important to always base one's arguments on actual Scripture – the original Hebrew text (public domain applications and software are available if your browser is not Hebrew-enabled). Remember that the English translation of the Tanach (which they call the “Old Testament”) in nearly every Christian Bible is taken from the Septuagint, one of many Greek translations that differed considerably from the Masoretic text. It is this Greek Septuagint, not the original Hebrew, that was the main basis for the Old Latin, Coptic, Ethiopic, Armenian, Georgian, Slavonic, and part of the Arabic translations of the Old Testament.

Even the earliest English translation of the JPS Tanach (Jewish Publication Society) was a slightly modified version of the Old Testament found in the King James Bible, instead of a direct translation of the original Hebrew which accompanied it. Christian Missionaries will almost always use the English translation of the JPS Tanach as a "proof text." Far more accurate English translations of the Masoretic text are found in Koren's The Jerusalem Bible and Artscroll's Stone Edition Tanach.

The Messiah Truth Project sponsors weekly on-line Video Conferences in Counter-Missionary and Torah Education six nights a week on VirtualYeshiva.com. Participation is free, and downloadable handouts are provided. Follow-up questions will be answered through our Discussion Forums; you can participate by linking here. You can also access our ever-growing library of original educational material by clicking one of our four topic areas below:




Counter-Missionary Links and Literature
(Additional links and add your own link here)
Outreach Judaism: A national organization that responds directly and positively to the issues raised by missionaries and cults by exploring Judaism in contradistinction to Christianity. The organization's goal is to generate a lasting connection between Jewish families and Judaism through building immediate awareness of the current Hebrew-Christian movement in the USA, Canada and Israel.
The Task Force on Missionaries and Cults: A counter-missionary and counter-cult organization in North America that provides information and assistance to individuals and communities in the U.S., Europe, and Israel.

Australian Anti-Missionary Web Site: A user-friendly, easy-to-navigate presentation of resources, articles, and links designed to aid the navigator in his pursuit of the truth behind missionary activities.

Messianic Verses in Tanach: Missionaries quote Hebrew Scriptures to support their contention that "Jesus fulfilled 300 prophecies from the Old Testament." Here you can read how these quotes are either mistranslated, taken out of context, or both.

The Real Truth About The Talmud: There are many lies circulating the internet about the Jewish Talmud. These allegations are supported by misquotations from the Talmud, frequently wrong or taken out of context. These are the real truths.

Project Truth: Shmuel ben Avraham provides common words and language used by Missionaries, and how to talk to a Missionary with answers to specific verses and concepts commonly used.

Shomrai HaBrit: Keepers of the Covenant homrai HaBrit-Keepers: An organization dedicated to keeping Jewish people true to the eternal covenant with God. Included are prophecies used by Christian Missionaries and their actual interpretation.

The Anti-Missionary Website: This page is dedicated to the resistance of Christian Missionaries. It calls for an official, public opposition to Christian missionary, are describes ways to protest their goal of world conversion.

What Jews Believe: An excellent site explaining Jewish beliefs concerning life, death, sin, forgiveness, and atonement and their difference from Christian beliefs. It shows how missionaries who often claim to be Jews, hold beliefs that are distinctly Christian.

Counter-Missionary Reference: An index to various "proof texts" used by missionaries and discussions on those verses by various counter missionary websites.

Torah Atlanta: Educating Jews on the issues raised by missionaries and the tactics they use.

The Truth of Judaism: A vast resource of links for Judaic terms, Torah and Chumash, news and media, and Jewish references.

Articles on Missionary Groups and Religion
Why Don't Jews believe in Jesus?: For 2,000 years, Jews have rejected the Christian idea of Jesus as messiah; Rabbi Shraga Simmons explains why.
Jews for Jesus: Rabbi Shraga Simmons describes underhanded tactics used to trick unsuspecting Jews into joining a Christian movement.

Evangelizing The Jews (Part 1): To bring about the Second Coming, fundamentalist Christians believe they must convert the Jews. Having failed in the past, they are now armed with a new arsenal of deceptive techniques, detailed by Rabbi Tovia Singer.

Evangelizing The Jews (Part 2): Jews who are lonely and know the least about Judaism are the most susceptible to Christian missionaries. Rabbi Tovia Singer explains why college kids and the elderly are their prime targets.

Jesus Codes: The Real Story: A recent book being used to proselytize Jews to Christianity claims that hidden messages have been found in the Bible proving that Jesus is the Messiah. Rabbi Daniel Mechanic focuses on misuses and misrepresentations of the Codes phenomenon, especially when they are aimed at proselytizing Jews.

The Jesus Puzzle: Was There No Historical Jesus? This article by Earl Doherty appeared in the Journal of Higher Criticism, published by the Institute for Higher Critical Studies based at Drew University in Madison, New Jersey.


Portable Document Format Downloads
(Get your free Adobe PDF reader here)
Messiah Truth: A Jewish response to the Messianic movement and other missionary groups using passages from both Hebrew Scripture and the New Testament. This four-page printable document contains nearly all of the counter-missionary text from this page. Print, copy and share!
The Problem With Matthew: A Guide For Refuting Missionaries: The purpose of this eBook is to empower Jews to protect themselves against Christian missionaries, whether they call themselves Southern Baptists, Jews for Jesus, or any other organization bent on the assimilation of Jews into the Christian religion. There is also an on-line edition available.

How the King James Version (KJV) Bible Originated: A simplified history documenting the KJV as essentially a handful of late and haphazardly collected minuscule manuscripts supported by no known Greek witness.There is also an on-line edition available.

Judaism 101: An encyclopedia of Judaism, covering Jewish beliefs, people, places, things, language, scripture, holidays, practices and customs. It includes a wide variety of basic, general information about Judaism, written from a traditional perspective in plain English. There is also an on-line edition available.

Judaic Glossary: A concise glossary of Hebrew and Yiddish terms and their meanings.

Messianic Glossary: A 250-page expository glossary of terms used in Christian Messianic teaching (a zip of all fonts used may be downloaded here).

Christianizing of the Heathen – on the point of a sword

Christianizing of the Heathen – on the point of a sword
"That force was often used in the conversion of northern peoples is undeniable, and it was used with a ferocity and violence beyond anything the conquistadors did in the Americas and far beyond anything that happened in modern Africa or Asia ..."– Andrew Walls (The Missionary Movement in Christian History, p72)

Part of Christian mythology relates to the "winning for Christ" of the fierce Germanic tribesmen who purportedly destroyed ancient civilization. In very broad brush terms, we are given a comforting image of the heroic priest, armed only with his Bible and Christian forbearance, who subdues the savage warriors with homilies from the Good Book. (We are, of course, being offered an early-day version of how European colonial "missionaries" saw their own activity).
As if by magic (or rather, miracle, such is the efficacy of the Lord's word) whole tribal confederations and vast tracks of Europe are baptised to Christ. Where the legions of Caesar had failed to vanquish, a humble monk with bell, book and candle triumphs. In a trice, Europe becomes a patchwork of "Christian kingdoms" and history becomes a story of the consolidation of regal power, the mopping up of a few recalcitrant pagans and suppression of the odd heresy.
As ever in the history of Christianity, the truth is far darker and far bloodier.


Gem encrusted Bibles– just the thing for an illiterate king.
CHRIST MAGIC – Not for Reading
Christian literature: precious gems on the cover – nonsense within.The few remaining books had become "sacred objects".Such objects filled the illiterate tribesmen with awe. Special shrines ("cumdachs") were built to house these dazzling artifacts, regarded as having talismanic properties.
"Bede related how scrapings from Irish manuscripts were used to treat snakebites, while popular superstition suggested that the Book of Durrow had the ability to cure sick cattle."– I. Zaczek (Celtic Art and Design, p10)
Why did barbarian chieftains convert?
Barbarian 'aristocracy' was the highest echelon of an 'heroic' social structure. Raids into neighbouring territories were an essential part of the barbarian economy. By acquiring 'prestige goods' – such as slaves, jewelry, gold pieces, fine weapons – the barbarian ruling elite preserved its rule and raised its social status. Success at raiding strengthened the link between a chief and his warriors.
Yet tribal leadership itself was always threatened by the great social mobility of tribal society. At any time, any bold and able warrior could raise his own status and become a new member of the elite or even a chieftain. High Kings (or Great Khans) were effectively the result of an election held by clan or tribal elders in time of emergency. The claims of a barbarian 'king' to legitimacy were fragile and leaderships changed often and violently.
This 'aristocratic vulnerability' became especially acute during the period of migrations in the 3rd to 5th centuries, when tribal territories were ill-defined and ever-changing, tribal alliances continuously made and remade, and warriors of the same tribe fought both for and against the Romans.
In a word, barbarian leadership was neither well-defined nor secure.
Contact with Rome meant influence from a world which was everything barbarian society was not: a stable 'kingdom' that seemingly embraced the whole world and existed 'forever'. Roman society by the 5th century was becoming ever more rigid and hierarchical, with eroding social and geographic mobility and an immense and widening gulf between rich and poor. Rome's urban middle class was being taxed out of existence, freedmen were being confined in indentured labour and hereditary employments and the soldiery was being reduced to a peasant-farmer militia.
By emulation, these characteristics helped to accentuate the growth and the power of a more rigid and stable barbarian aristocracy.
In short, tribal chieftains wanted to rule like Romans:
"Every Goth wishes to be like a Roman, " said Theodoric, "but only the humblest Roman wants to be like a Goth."
So strong was barbarian desire to establish a 'Roman' legitimacy for their new kingdoms that the illiterate Charlemagne, centuries later, styled himself "King of Franks and Lombards and Patrician of the Romans." He was crowned Emperor and Augustus.

Follow My Leader ...
Once a warrior king embraced 'Christianity' – an adoption of form and formality with little or no regard to content – the warrior aristocracy followed its king. Thus, for example, when Clovis accepted Christ as his new god, he compelled 3000 of his retainers to follow him into the baptismal font.
Among the common tribesmen religious allegiance was not an issue of conscience. This was not an age of individual opinion or preference. When the tribal leadership adopted a new god the tribe followed suit. Not to have done so would have been tantamount to rebellion. When Charlemagne insisted on baptism as the sign of submission, he punished with appalling barbarity any resistance, as when, in cold blood, he beheaded, in a single day, 4500 Saxons at Verden, in 782 AD.
Having adopted Christ as their new god, the warrior aristocracies forced the new faith on their peoples.

The Lost World of "Gothica"
(c. 450-550)
Much of Roman civilization was actually restored by the Goths.
Theodoric ruled the Gothic world from a palace at Ravenna, modelled on Diocletian's palace at Spalato. His administrators were Roman; he maintained the senate; he made Roman patricians, like Boethius, consuls. He also checked the expansion of the Franks and brought peace to the west.
His many dynastic links included a marriage to Audofleda, the sister of Clovis, king of Franks. He ruled Spain on behalf of his infant grandson; pacified the Vandals and protected the coasts with a fleet of a thousand vessels. In Rome he presided over games in traditional Roman manner; the dole was still distributed and the aqueducts still flowed.
Theodoric was Arian, but he tolerated all sects of Christianity. He was even called upon to arbitrate between warring popes – Symmachus and Lawrence! In the last year of his life he moved against the Catholics when they attacked Jewish traders and conspired with Constantinople.
After his death in 526, his daughter Amalasuntha ruled the Ostrogothic kingdom as regent. His grand daughter Matasuntha married Germanus, nephew of the Eastern Roman Emperor – but that was after Romano-Gothic Italy had been destroyed by Catholic armies from the east.
Invasion by Justinian and 30 years of warfare (Rome changed hands four times) destroyed urban civilization in Italy and brought whole regions to famine.
"Byzantine rule lasted just 14 years before an invasion of Lombards under Alboin swept it away. Instead of a powerful and virile Gothic state that might have fought off the barbarians, Italy had no resistance to offer. Rome became a backwater, and the victories of Justinian a disaster for the Christians of the West."
– Geoffrey Regan (Decisive Battles, p40)


Theodoric's Mausoleum, Ravenna.Built in 526 by his daughter Amalasuntha.
Worthy of the age of Augustus or Hadrian, the 30' central 'chapel' is crowned by a single piece of granite weighing 450 tons. Under the Goths, Roman intellect had not yet disappeared.
"The professors of grammar, rhetoric and jurisprudence were maintained in their privileges and pensions by the liberality of the Goths."– Gibbon (Decline & Fall, ch 39)

Justinian (another Christian "Great") – bankrupted the East by destroying the West!
Church of the Holy Wisdom – (Istanbul)
Justinian starved and robbed his troops and was merciless in his rapacious taxation – but he did build a big church.
Millions died as a result of his greed and vanity. Edward Gibbon estimated that the number of lives lost during the half century of his reign might have approached a hundred million. Procopius, in The Secret History, put the number even higher.
But then, we do have that big church ...
Enter the Christian Bishop...
Rome – as represented by the local aristocrat-cum-bishop – could bestow legitimacy, and with it all the pomp and ceremonial that filled subject people with awe and obedience. As the empire decayed, its rituals and regalia became ever more ornate and overbearing.
The barbarian kings delighted in Roman titles –which they put on their coinage, modelled very closely on Roman coinage. From 382 onwards barbarian tribes had been granted the status of 'federate of the Romans' (foedus) and their chieftains had been accorded patrician status. Some barbarian chiefs (for example, Fravitta, in 401) were even raised to the status of consul. When there were no longer emperors to bestow some grand honorific, the occasion fell into the hands of the bishop.
The barbarian kings sought marriage into the imperial bloodlines.
In a notable example, the Empress Galla Placidia was carried off to Gaul by the Goths, and in 414 she was married (in a Roman-style wedding ceremony) to the Visigothic chieftain Athaulf at Narbonne. The bridegroom wore a toga! 'Catholic princesses' were conveniently found at many convenient moments: Ingund married to Hermengild in 583 (intensifying the Gothic civil war in Spain); Bertha married to the Saxon Aethelbert in 600 (levering the Catholic church into Kent); and of course Clotilda, married to the hero Clovis.
The barbarian kings wanted Roman patricians in their entourage, men who could advise them in the governance of their newly acquired peoples. Everywhere, the indigenous 'Romans' outnumbered their warrior overlords.
The outstanding example is the court of Theodoric, Ostrogothic king of Italy. His administration was modelled on that of his imperial predecessors and was staffed by Romans. Among 'men of letters' at his court was Aurelius Cassiodorus, senator, statesman, monk and writer. As the local "statesman" the Bishops "spoke" for the native people and offered "administration" of cities and districts on behalf of the alien king.
Thus arose the Dark Age elite – a fusion of ex-pagan chiefs, who were in awe of all things Roman (including its Christianity), and degenerate Roman landowners who survived by foisting Christianity on to superstitious tribesmen.
Civil and ecclesiastical power coalesced. Saying much the same thing in Christ-speak, Bishop Isodore of Seville (560-636):
"Those who will not practice virtue by the admonition of the priest, may be kept from doing evil by the power of the king."(Isidore, Sententiae, I, 16).
The very heart of this veneer of legitimising romanitas was the religion by which the emperors had legitimised and made 'divine' their own rule – Christianity. Hence the rise and rise of the Christian bishops and, in particular, the Bishop of Rome – the custodian of the corpse of the empire and self-styled bestower of its legacy.


With his book of Christian spells and the inheritance of more than a thousand years of Roman 'gravitas' behind him, the patrician-bishop easily swayed the untutored mind of a barbarian king.As well as "Christ magic" he offered "legitimacy" and the power of the written word for kingly diplomacy. With his help, an upstart king's authority could now be proclaimed everywhere. With bribes and baubles, he gained access; he took on the role of ambassador and agent; he lent support to one side against another in fratricidal conflict; he advised; he provided 'virgin brides' and officiated at royal weddings and ceremonials; he governed the locals on behalf of his barbarian overlord.
Through it all, his own wealth and authority grew. And the nonsense he peddled – Christianity – became official dogma.
How the West was Won: The Rise and Rise of the Franks
Before the closing years of the 5th century the Christian Church showed no interest in converting barbarians. God, it seems, had chosen the Roman Empire to spread his Word. Yet when the fierce tribesmen arrived at the city gates, that event was "God's Judgement" and the Christian bishops were all too ready to abandon the empire and throw in their lot with the invader.
Despite the '3-day wonder' of the sack of Rome in 410 by the Visigoths, it was Gaul that was in dire straits in the 5th century, not Italy (which enjoyed a late 'Indian summer' under its Gothic king.)
In the late 5th century Salian Franks under Clovis began three centuries of expansion by absorbing the other Frankish tribes. In 486 Clovis defeated the Roman general Syagrius and the last Gallo-Roman region of Gaul – Soissons – was overrun. Subjugation of the Thuringians and Bavarians, followed.
The Franks were a heathen German tribe, almost the only one untouched by Arianism, spreading from the east. While the primitive Franks continued to give homage to their old Germanic gods, other, more Romanised, tribes had adopted Arian Christianity as a 'national' religion.
Backward and barbarous they may have been but for the beleaguered Catholic bishops, the Franks were the great hope. In the Franks, the papal agents found a fierce but malleable tribe and they spared nothing to bring the Frankish overlords under their sway. The dominion of the Franks in the west ensured the triumph of Roman Catholicism.
Thus, the "conversion" of Clovis is a crucial event, comparable to the "conversion" of Constantine – and equally is surrounded by the same fanciful mythology.
Clovis's conversion, like Constantine's, was no "inward experience of grace" but was a military matter. He was convinced that victory in battle lay in the gift of the god of the Christians. Christ for him was a talismanic war god.
According to the myth, in 496, after a close call against the Alamanni, the day had been 'saved' by a prayer either from Clovis himself, or the Catholic Bishop Gregory of Tours (or maybe both!) A grateful Clovis took baptism, to become the first "Catholic" ruler in the west.
Of course, he had been softened up somewhat by marriage in 493 to a Catholic princess, the Burgundian Clotilda, put forward as his bride 'on account of her beauty and wisdom' (and no doubt her Catholicism!) Clovis, like Constantine a century and a half earlier, was also aware of the political advantage of posing as a liberator of "those oppressed by religious heresy":
"It grieves me to see that the Arians possess the fairest portion of Gaul. Let us march against them, vanquish the heretics, and share out their fertile lands."
In 507 Clovis took Aquitaine from the weak Visigothic king Alaric II, and then subjugated Burgundy. Both areas were forcibly converted to Catholicism – to the delight of the local bishops.
At Clovis' death in 511, Clotilda went into a monastery at Tours where she stayed until her death in 545. No surprises that she made the sainthood!
In the half century after Clovis, the belligerent Franks advanced eastward as far as the Elbe and took advantage of the preoccupation of the Ostrogoths with Justinian's invasion of Italy to seize Gothic territories in Gaul and the north.
The religious war – such a fine innovation of Christianity! – would never end. In the 8th century, Frankish conquest carried the sword of Christ to the throat of the Thuringians and Bavarians, and halted the armies of Islam that had overwhelmed the Visigoths in Spain. Towards the end of the century, in forty bloody years of continuous aggression, Charlemagne's Franks slaughtered tens of thousands of Saxons, Avars and Slavs in order that they might know God's loving kindness.

WHY DON'T JEWS BELIEVE IN JESUS?

For 2,000 years, Jews have rejected the Christian idea of Jesus as messiah. Why?

It is important to understand why Jews don't believe in Jesus. The purpose is not to disparage other religions, but rather to clarify the Jewish position. The more data that's available, the better-informed choices people can make about their spiritual path.
Jews do not accept Jesus as the messiah because:
1) Jesus did not fulfill the messianic prophecies.
2) Jesus did not embody the personal qualifications of the Messiah.
3) Biblical verses "referring" to Jesus are mistranslations.
4) Jewish belief is based on national revelation.
At the end of this article, we will examine these additional topics:
5) Christianity contradicts Jewish theology
6) Jews and Gentiles
7) Bringing the Messiah
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) JESUS DID NOT FULFILL THE MESSIANIC PROPHECIES
What is the Messiah supposed to accomplish? The Bible says that he will:
A. Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28).
B. Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6).
C. Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore." (Isaiah 2:4)
D. Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: "God will be King over all the world -- on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One" (Zechariah 14:9).
The historical fact is that Jesus fulfilled none of these messianic prophecies.
Christians counter that Jesus will fulfill these in the Second Coming, but Jewish sources show that the Messiah will fulfill the prophecies outright, and no concept of a second coming exists.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) JESUS DID NOT EMBODY THE PERSONAL QUALIFICATIONS OF MESSIAH
A. MESSIAH AS PROPHET
Jesus was not a prophet. Prophecy can only exist in Israel when the land is inhabited by a majority of world Jewry. During the time of Ezra (circa 300 BCE), when the majority of Jews refused to move from Babylon to Israel, prophecy ended upon the death of the last prophets -- Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi.
Jesus appeared on the scene approximately 350 years after prophecy had ended.
B. DESCENDENT OF DAVID
The Messiah must be descended on his father's side from King David (see Genesis 49:10 and Isaiah 11:1). According to the Christian claim that Jesus was the product of a virgin birth, he had no father -- and thus could not have possibly fulfilled the messianic requirement of being descended on his father's side from King David!
C. TORAH OBSERVANCE
The Messiah will lead the Jewish people to full Torah observance. The Torah states that all mitzvot remain binding forever, and anyone coming to change the Torah is immediately identified as a false prophet. (Deut. 13:1-4)
Throughout the New Testament, Jesus contradicts the Torah and states that its commandments are no longer applicable. (see John 1:45 and 9:16, Acts 3:22 and 7:37)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3) MISTRANSLATED VERSES "REFERRING" TO JESUS
Biblical verses can only be understood by studying the original Hebrew text -- which reveals many discrepancies in the Christian translation.
A. VIRGIN BIRTH
The Christian idea of a virgin birth is derived from the verse in Isaiah 7:14 describing an "alma" as giving birth. The word "alma" has always meant a young woman, but Christian theologians came centuries later and translated it as "virgin." This accords Jesus' birth with the first century pagan idea of mortals being impregnated by gods.
B. CRUCIFIXION
The verse in Psalms 22:17 reads: "Like a lion, they are at my hands and feet." The Hebrew word ki-ari (like a lion) is grammatically similar to the word "gouged." Thus Christianity reads the verse as a reference to crucifixion: "They pierced my hands and feet."
C. SUFFERING SERVANT
Christianity claims that Isaiah chapter 53 refers to Jesus, as the "suffering servant."
In actuality, Isaiah 53 directly follows the theme of chapter 52, describing the exile and redemption of the Jewish people. The prophecies are written in the singular form because the Jews ("Israel") are regarded as one unit. The Torah is filled with examples of the Jewish nation referred to with a singular pronoun.
Ironically, Isaiah's prophecies of persecution refer in part to the 11th century when Jews were tortured and killed by Crusaders who acted in the name of Jesus.
From where did these mistranslations stem? St. Gregory, 4th century Bishop of Nanianzus, wrote: "A little jargon is all that is necessary to impose on the people. The less they comprehend, the more they admire."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4) JEWISH BELIEF IS BASED SOLELY ON NATIONAL REVELATION
Of the 15,000 religions in human history, only Judaism bases its belief on national revelation -- i.e. God speaking to the entire nation. If God is going to start a religion, it makes sense He'll tell everyone, not just one person.
Judaism, unique among all of the world's major religions, does not rely on "claims of miracles" as the basis for its religion. In fact, the Bible says that God sometimes grants the power of "miracles" to charlatans, in order to test Jewish loyalty to the Torah (Deut. 13:4).
Maimonides states (Foundations of Torah, ch. 8):
The Jews did not believe in Moses, our teacher, because of the miracles he performed. Whenever anyone's belief is based on seeing miracles, he has lingering doubts, because it is possible the miracles were performed through magic or sorcery. All of the miracles performed by Moses in the desert were because they were necessary, and not as proof of his prophecy.
What then was the basis of [Jewish] belief? The Revelation at Mount Sinai, which we saw with our own eyes and heard with our own ears, not dependent on the testimony of others... as it says, "Face to face, God spoke with you..." The Torah also states: "God did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us -- who are all here alive today." (Deut. 5:3)
Judaism is not miracles. It is the personal eyewitness experience of every man, woman and child, standing at Mount Sinai 3,300 years ago.
See "Did God Speak at Mount Sinai" for further reading.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5) CHRISTIANITY CONTRADICTS JEWISH THEOLOGY
The following theological points apply primarily to the Roman Catholic Church, the largest Christian denomination.
A. GOD AS THREE?
The Catholic idea of Trinity breaks God into three separate beings: The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost (Matthew 28:19).
Contrast this to the Shema, the basis of Jewish belief: "Hear O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is ONE" (Deut. 6:4). Jews declare the Shema every day, while writing it on doorposts (Mezuzah), and binding it to the hand and head (Tefillin). This statement of God's One-ness is the first words a Jewish child is taught to say, and the last words uttered before a Jew dies.
In Jewish law, worship of a three-part god is considered idolatry -- one of the three cardinal sins that a Jew should rather give up his life than transgress. This explains why during the Inquisitions and throughout history, Jews gave up their lives rather than convert.
B. MAN AS GOD?
Roman Catholics believe that God came down to earth in human form, as Jesus said: "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30).
Maimonides devotes most of the "Guide for the Perplexed" to the fundamental idea that God is incorporeal, meaning that He assumes no physical form. God is Eternal, above time. He is Infinite, beyond space. He cannot be born, and cannot die. Saying that God assumes human form makes God small, diminishing both His unity and His divinity. As the Torah says: "God is not a mortal" (Numbers 23:19).
Judaism says that the Messiah will be born of human parents, and possess normal physical attributes like other people. He will not be a demi-god, and will not possess supernatural qualities. In fact, an individual is alive in every generation with the capacity to step into the role of the Messiah. (see Maimonides - Laws of Kings 11:3)
C. INTERMEDIARY FOR PRAYER?
The Catholic belief is that prayer must be directed through an intermediary -- i.e. confessing one's sins to a priest. Jesus himself is an intermediary, as Jesus said: "No man cometh unto the Father but by me."
In Judaism, prayer is a totally private matter, between each individual and God. As the Bible says: "God is near to all who call unto Him" (Psalms 145:18). Further, the Ten Commandments state: "You shall have no other gods BEFORE ME," meaning that it is forbidden to set up a mediator between God and man. (see Maimonides - Laws of Idolatry ch. 1)
D. INVOLVEMENT IN THE PHYSICAL WORLD
Catholic doctrine often treats the physical world as an evil to be avoided. Mary, the holiest woman, is portrayed as a virgin. Priests and nuns are celibate. And monasteries are in remote, secluded locations.
By contrast, Judaism believes that God created the physical world not to frustrate us, but for our pleasure. Jewish spirituality comes through grappling with the mundane world in a way that uplifts and elevates. Sex in the proper context is one of the holiest acts we can perform.
The Talmud says if a person has the opportunity to taste a new fruit and refuses to do so, he will have to account for that in the World to Come. Jewish rabbinical schools teach how to live amidst the bustle of commercial activity. Jews don't retreat from life, we elevate it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6) JEWS AND GENTILES
Judaism does not demand that everyone convert to the religion. The Torah of Moses is a truth for all humanity, whether Jewish or not. King Solomon asked God to heed the prayers of non-Jews who come to the Holy Temple (Kings I 8:41-43). The prophet Isaiah refers to the Temple as a "House for all nations."
The Temple service during Sukkot featured 70 bull offerings, corresponding to the 70 nations of the world. The Talmud says that if the Romans would have realized how much benefit they were getting from the Temple, they'd never have destroyed it.
Jews have never actively sought converts to Judaism because the Torah prescribes a righteous path for gentiles to follow, known as the "Seven Laws of Noah." Maimonides explains that any human being who faithfully observes these basic moral laws earns a proper place in heaven.
For further study of the Seven Laws of Noah, see:
Bnei Noah of Fort Worthhttp://www.fastlane.net/~bneinoah/
Path of the Righteous Gentilehttp://www.chabad.org/gopher/outlook/7laws/index.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7) BRINGING THE MESSIAH
Maimonides states that the popularity of Christianity (and Islam) is part of God's plan to spread the ideals of Torah throughout the world. This moves society closer to a perfected state of morality and toward a greater understanding of God. All this is in preparation for the Messianic age.
Indeed, the world is in desperate need of Messianic redemption. War and pollution threaten our planet; ego and confusion erode family life. To the extent we are aware of the problems of society, is the extent we will yearn for redemption. As the Talmud says, one of the first questions a Jew is asked on Judgment Day is: "Did you yearn for the arrival of the Messiah?"
How can we hasten the coming of the Messiah? The best way is to love all humanity generously, to keep the mitzvot of the Torah (as best we can), and to encourage others to do so as well.
Despite the gloom, the world does seem headed toward redemption. One apparent sign is that the Jewish people have returned to the Land of Israel and made it bloom again. Additionally, a major movement is afoot of young Jews returning to Torah tradition.
The Messiah can come at any moment, and it all depends on our actions. God is ready when we are. For as King David says: "Redemption will come today -- if you hearken to His voice."

Errors in the Christian Text

#1
Modern Bible scholarship is in broad agreement that Mark was the first Gospel written yet Matthew is always listed first in Christian Bibles. My claimed error is that because "Mark" was written first it should be presented first in the Christian Bible. The Christian Bible implies that "Mark" and "Matthew" are the testimony of witnesses. Readers can see and the Church has always taught that there is dependence between the two. Common sense and legal procedure require that the testimony which was either relied on to some extent or even just available to another witness be presented first as this is what readers or jurys will assume if not told otherwise. The problem this would create for Christianity with "Mark" being first is why is there no mention of the "virgin birth", any description of a transition from Jesus to the subsequent Church or post resurrection sightings or communications? The Church has always explained that because "Matthew" was written first "Mark" didn't need to cover these topics.
#2
The first Gospel listed in Christian Bibles, Matthew, was written anonymously. The title
"Matthew" was added by the Church long after the Gospel was written.
#3
Christians have added chapter designations to the Bible which were not used by the original authors.
#4
Matthew 1:(KJV)
"4 And Aram begat Aminadab"
According to I Chronicles 2:10 it was Ram that begat Aminadab, not Aram. The earliest extant Greek manuscripts have the Greek equivalent of the English "Aram" for Matthew 1:4. (so presumably the KJV is correctly translating Matthew's error). The NIV has changed "Aram" to "Ram" correcting Matthew's error. The LXX states that Aram begat Aminadab so it's likely that Matthew made his error by simply copying from the LXX as he apparently was not fluent in Hebrew and so could not check the original Hebrew language. Some Bible scholars do theorize that the LXX was changed in some places to conform to the Gospels and that this is one of those instances. In any case Matthew's apparent use of "Aram" does not agree with any known Hebrew text and in the absence of any evidence that the Hebrew use of "Ram" was the result of any change would be an error by Matthew.
#5
Matthew 1:(KJV)
“5 And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab”
The only Rachab mentioned in the Tanakh was the Rachab of the Conquest who lived about two hundred years before Boaz. Every significant Church Father who commented on Matthew 1:5 assumed that Matthew was referring to the Rachab of the Conquest.
#6
Matthew 1: (KJV)
“7…Abia begat Asa; :8 And Asa begat Josaphat”
Generally, the oldest extant Greek manuscripts such as the Sinaitic and Vatican codices have the Greek equivalent of the English “Asaph” instead of “Asa” who according to the Tanakh should be in this location. The NASB has a footnote for Matthew 1:7 indicating that the Greek word was the equivalent of the English “Asaph”. Most of the older Greek manuscripts indicating “Asaph” were unknown to the translators of the KJV.
#7
Matthew 1: (KJV)
“8…Joram begat Ozias”
According to I Chronicles 3:11 (JPS), Joram begat Ahaziah so Matthew has omitted Ahaziah from his genealogy.

#8
Matthew 1: (KJV)
“8…Joram begat Ozias”
According to I Chronicles 3:11 (JPS), Joram begat Ahaziah who begat Joash so Matthew has also omitted Joash from his genealogy.
#9
Matthew 1: (KJV)
“8…Joram begat Ozias”
According to I Chronicles 3:11 (JPS), Joram begat Ahaziah who begat Joash who begat Amaziah so Matthew has also omitted Amaziah from his genealogy.
#10
Matthew 1: (KJV)
“10…Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias”
Generally, the oldest extant Greek manuscripts such as the Sinaitic and Vatican codices have the Greek equivalent of the English “Amos” instead of “Amon” who according to the Tanakh should be in this location. The NASB has a footnote for Matthew 1:10 indicating that the Greek word was the equivalent of the English “Amos”. Most of the older Greek manuscripts indicating “Amos” were unknown to the translators of the KJV.
#11
Matthew 1: (KJV)
“11 And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:”
According to I Chronicles 3:15 (JPS), Josiah (Josias in KJV) begat Jehoiakim who begat Jeconiah (Jechonias in KJV) so Matthew has omitted Jehoiakim from his genealogy.
#12
Matthew 1: (KJV)
“11 And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:”
According to the Tanakh Jechonias only had one brother.
#13
Matthew 1: (KJV)
“13 And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim”
According to the Tanakh (JPS), I Chronicles, 3:19-20, Abiud was not one of the eight children of Zerubbabel (“Zorobabel” in KJV).
#14
Matthew 1: (KJV)
“17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations”
Matthew has omitted four generations from his genealogy between David and the Babylonian exile. Even without them he still has fifteen chronological names.

#15
Matthew 1: (KJV)
“17…and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.”
Almost 600 years separate the birth of Shealtiel from the birth of Jesus resulting in an average of 46 years per generation. This average is contradicted by all known averages for this period outside of Matthew. Luke’s average would be 27 years and Josephus’ average would be 25 years.
#16
Matthew 1: (KJV)
“18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise:”
The Greek word for birth here, “genesis” is exactly the same Greek word used in Matthew 1:1, “a record of the genealogy” and has a wide range of meaning such as “birth”, “creation” and “genealogy”. Church Fathers generally used the Greek word “gennesis”, which has a more limited meaning of “birth” to describe the nativity. Thus, it is extremely unlikely that the same author would have used the exact same Greek word in Matthew 1:1 and 1:18 to describe a genealogy and a birth. The genealogy and birth stories are probably from two different sources.
#17
Matthew 1: (KJV)
“18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise:”
Most extant manuscripts have this wording but a few don’t have “Jesus”. The name is omitted in Irenaeus’ reference to 1:18. The position of “Jesus” in the sentence varies in Greek manuscripts which is often the sign of a scribal addition. There is no other uncontested instance of an article preceding “Jesus Christ” in the Christian Bible. Thus it is likely that “Jesus” is a scribal addition to Matthew 1:18.
#18
Matthew 1: (KJV)
“18… she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.”
Literally, the Greek reads “having in the womb” and not “with child”. In any case, there is no definite article, “the”, in front of “Holy Ghost” in almost all Greek manuscripts. The best translation would be “found to be pregnant through Holy Spirit”. Christian translators have provided the “the” in English translations (found to be with child of the Holy Spirit) in order to support their belief that the Holy Spirit is a separate person.
#19
Matthew 1: (KJV)
“18..When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. 19 Then Joseph her husband,”
Mary has gone from engaged to married after a mere thirteen words, a record that would stand until Liz Taylor two thousand years later.
#20
Matthew 1: (KJV)
“19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.”
The word that KJV has translated as “privily” is normally translated as “quietly”. Under Jewish law at the time Joseph would have had to deliver a writ of repudiation before two witnesses so it would have been tough to keep it “quiet” unless the witnesses Joseph had in mind were the blind and mute men of Chapter 9.
#21
Matthew 1: (KJV)
“20… fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife”
The literal translation of the Greek is, “do not be afraid to take Mary your wife” which is an incomplete sentence making the meaning ambiguous. Does it mean take as in sexually, take as in accept or take as in bring home? Most of the main Christian Bibles have added words in their translations to give the appearance of a complete sentence (the relatively newer RSV being the exception):
NIV “do not be afraid to take Mary home as your wife”
NASB “do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife”
RSV “do not fear to take Mary your wife”
Darby “fear not to take to [thee] Mary, thy wife”
YLT “thou mayest not fear to receive Mary thy wife”
WE “do not fear to take Mary to be your wife”

#22
Matthew 1: (KJV)
20…”for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.”
Same error as #18. There is no “the” before “Holy Ghost” in the Greek. Of the major translations only Darby acknowledges this, “for that which is begotten in her is of [the] Holy Spirit”.
#23
Matthew 1: (KJV)
20…”for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.”
In the Greek “spirit”(ghost) comes before “holy” and is separated by the verb “to be”. A literal translation is “for that which is conceived in her from spirit is holy”.
No mention of this in the major Christian translations. Again, Christian translators are creating support for their idea of the holy ghost as a separate person in their translations.
#24
Matthew 1: (KJV)
21 “And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.”
False prophecy. Everyone agrees that for two thousand years most Jews have died not believing in Jesus and therefore, according to Christian theology, were not saved from their sins.
#25
Matthew 1: (KJV)
22 “Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, 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.”
If you’re trying to make a list of 1001 errors in the Christian Bible then Matthew 1:22-23
is, as Banta said to Jerry Seinfeld, “Gold, Jerry! Gold!”. The “prophecy fulfillment” of sentences 22 and 23 is out of place as the fulfillment happens in the following sentences 24 and 25. Joseph is just dreaming in sentences 20 and 21 and wakes up from this dream in sentence 24. It’s likely that sentences 22 and 23 were later additions to the original text. Since the time of Irenaeus Christian commentators have “explained” that the formula citation was spoken by the angel of sentence 21.
#26
Matthew 1: (KJV)
23 “Behold, a virgin shall be with child,”
It’s undisputed that the Hebrew text has the definite article “the” instead of “a” before “young woman” (KJV’s “virgin”). A slim majority of major Christian translations now have “the” here instead of “a”. The use of the definite article “the” means that the woman in question was known to the speaker of the prophecy, Isaiah, and could not be referring to someone who lived about 700 years later.
#27
Matthew 1: (KJV)
22 “Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, 23 Behold, a virgin”
Matthew 1:23 uses the Greek word “parthenos” which has a primary meaning of “virgin”. The Hebrew word from Isaiah 7:14 that Matthew is referring to is “almah” which has a primary meaning of “young woman” according to all Jewish Bible scholars, virtually all Hebrew/English dictionaries, most Christian Bible scholars and the majority of modern Christian Bible translations. The Greek word “neanis” has a primary meaning of “young woman”. When the RSV first translated Isaiah 7:14 as “young woman” it was burned in several parts of the country by Christian fundamentalists. On a humorous note, even though the Catholic translators of the NAB had decided to translate Isaiah 7:14 as “young woman”, the American Bishops voted to use “virgin” instead. I guess they thought “it was the Christian thing to do.”
#28
Matthew 1: (KJV)
23 “Behold, a virgin shall be with child”
In the Hebrew, the verb for “shall be with child”, “harah”, is in the present tense. The proper translation of Isaiah 7:14 from Hebrew should be, “Look, the young woman is with child”.

#29
Matthew 1: (KJV)
23 “Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel”
The phrase above, “they shall call”, in the Hebrew is in the third person feminine form and should be translated, “she will call”. It’s likely that “Matthew” intentionally changed the phrase because in verse 21 Joseph was instructed to “call his name Jesus”.
#30
Matthew 1: (KJV)
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.”
The phrase “call his name”, which Matthew has translated from the Tanakh is a Semitic expression meaning to name. The phrase “call his name” would be redundant in Greek or English as one would say either, “call him” or “name him”. As the phrase in Hebrew refers to an actual name and not a description of someone Matthew has presented a false prophecy as no one ever called Jesus by the name “Emmanuel”.
#31
Matthew 2: (KJV)
5 …”for thus it is written by the prophet, 6 And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda,”
The Greek would translate literally as “And thou Bethlehem, land of Juda.”. That would be like saying “And thou Chicago, land of Midwest”. According to my third grade Greek teacher, Mrs. Soukoupoopalis, that’s bad grammar in Greek, Chicago or anywhere else. Codex Bezae and the Old Latin changed the phrase to “Bethlehem of the land of Judea”.
#32
Matthew 2: (KJV)
5 …”for thus it is written by the prophet, 6 And thou Bethlehem, in the land of Juda,”
In addition to bad grammar in the Greek virtually all translations of the Micah verse that “Matthew” is referring to say “Bethlehem Ephratah” such as KJV:
Micah 5:2 “But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah”
So Matthew has chopped off “Ephratah” from the words of the Prophet.
#33
Matthew 2: (KJV)
6…”art not the least among the princes of Juda”
Instead of “art not the least” the Masoretic text says “small to be”. Even the Christian Greek translations of Micah generally say, “are too small to be”. “Matthew” has changed the quote in the Tanakh to avoid any description of Bethlehem as insignificant.
#34
Matthew 2: (KJV)
6…”art not the least among the princes of Juda”
Instead of “princes” the Masoretic text says “clans” (literally, “thousands”). Christian Greek translations of Micah generally say “thousands”. The consonants of the Hebrew word (lpy) can mean “clans” or “rulers” so Matthew could have chosen to ignore the Hebrew tradition of “clans” even though it was accepted by the early Christians. In any case, using “princes” creates an error in Matthew’s sentence structure because after deleting “Ephratah” in the first part of the sentence he is then referring to a city, Bethlehem, and not a clan, Bethlehem-Ephratah, so saying a city “is not least among princes of Juda” makes no sense.
#35
Matthew 2: (KJV)
6… “for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.”
The Masoretic text and Christian Greek translations of Micah say, “for out of thee shall come forth for me a ruler”. “Matthew” has omitted “for me”, apparently so as not to give the appearance that Jesus is ruling on behalf of anyone else. Notice that KJV (also NKJV) has capitalized “governor” even though the original Hebrew of Micah gives no indication that this ruler would be divine. I’m not calling this an error because KJV is the only major translation which capitalizes “governor” (or “ruler”).

#36
Matthew 2: (KJV)
6… “for out of thee shall come a Governor, that shall rule my people Israel.”
The Masoretic text says, “from you there will come forth for me one who is to be a ruler in Israel”. (Early Christian Greek translations generally say, “”a leader of Israel”). “Matthew” has changed the prophecy of a leader of the country Israel to a leader of the people Israel. At the time that “Matthew” wrote he likely realized that Jesus was never a ruler or leader of the country Israel.
#37
Matthew 2: (KJV)
9 “When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was.”
By modern, astrological standards such an event would be impossible (the location of a star identifying the location of an individual house.) But claiming an error here based solely on modern standards would reflect an anti-supernatural bias. However, according to Matthew, this star moved from the East to Jerusalem, then south to Bethlehem and then stopped over Bethlehem. There were non-Christian astrologers around this time who recorded all unusual astrological phenomena and none of them mention this event which easily would have been the most unusual they would have reported.
#38
Matthew 2: (KJV)
15 … “that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.”
“Matthew” is referring to Hosea 11:1 (JPS):
“When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and out of Egypt I called My son.”
Hosea chapter 11 is referring to the history of Israel and is not a prophecy. Hosea 11:2 (JPS):
“The more they called them, the more they went from them; they sacrificed unto the Baalim, and offered to graven images. 3 And I, I taught Ephraim to walk, taking them by their arms; but they knew not that I healed them. 4 I drew them with cords of a man, with bands of love; and I was to them as they that take off the yoke on their jaws, and I fed them gently.”
Christian Greek translations of Hosea 11:1 generally acknowledge the plural subject of Israel by translating: “Out of Egypt have I summoned his children”.
#39
Matthew 2: (KJV)
15 … “that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son.”
As the KGB agent said to Clint Eastwood in the classic movie, “Firefox”, “Your papers, they are not in order.” “Matthew” gives a prophecy fulfillment claim that Jesus was called out of Egypt in verse 15. But up to verse 15 Jesus is still in Egypt. Jesus doesn’t leave Egypt until verse 21.
#40
Matthew 2: (KJV)
16 “Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under”
In his excitement to report this dastardly deed “Matthew” neglects to tell us exactly WHAT was sent forth by Herod. Some translations fill in obvious choices such as “orders” and “men”. A careless omission by Matthew and also a grammatical error.
#41
Matthew 2: (KJV)
16 “Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under”
No historian writing close to this time mentions any such massacre. The author of Luke doesn’t mention it either. Josephus thoroughly documented the brutal deeds of Herod during Herod’s final years yet makes no mention of this incident which easily would have been Herod’s worst. Christian apologists estimate that there would not have been much more than 20 such murders of baby males in Bethlehem by Herod based on assumed population and birth rates thereby arguing that such a low number may have escaped Josephus’ attention. Even 20 murders of babies would have been Herod’s worst act. The apologists ignore that the text also says “and the regions all around it” (in all the coasts thereof). The early Church assumed that according to Matthew thousands of male babies were killed in the “massacre”.
#42
Matthew 2: (KJV)
17 “Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying,
18 “In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.”
The real tragedy here is that I can only count this quote as one error. The context of the quote above in Jeremiah is that Rachel is mourning for the captivity of the ten northern tribes in general and the tribe of Ephraim (the main northern tribe) specifically. Rachel was the mother of Joseph who was the father of Ephraim. She is not mourning for anyone’s death or for the tribe of Judah which was a southern tribe and not in captivity at the time that Jeremiah wrote the above.

#43
Matthew 2: (KJV)
19 “But when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeareth in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, 20 Saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel: for they are dead which sought the young child's life.”
The above states “THEY are dead” but the antecedent is Herod (singular). The excerpt
“for they are dead which sought the young child's life” is almost the exact same wording from Christian Greek translations of Exodus 4:19. Apparently it was more important for the author of Matthew here to try and recreate exact wording from the Tanakh than it was to write a grammatically correct narrative.
#44
Matthew 2: (KJV)
22 “But when he heard that Archelaus did reign in Judaea in the room of his father Herod”
“Reign” implies that Archelaus was the King but Josephus and extant coins indicate that Archelaus was an ethnarch and not a king.
#45
Matthew 2: (KJV)
23 “And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.”
This prophecy fulfillment claim is unique in that Christian Bible scholars generally agree that there is no such prophecy in the Tanakh. Christian apologists are reduced to guessing what the author of Matthew meant.
#46
Matthew 3: (KJV)
1 “In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,
2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”
After 2,000 years I think it’s safe to say that this was a false prophecy.
#47
Matthew 3: (KJV)
3 “For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.
The quote from Isaiah in the Masoretic text is: (JPS 1985)
3 “A voice rings out: Clear in the desert A road for the LORD! Level in the wilderness A highway for our God!”
The author of Matthew has quoted word for word from the LXX of Isaiah 40:3 (surprise)
except for substituting the usual reference to Yahweh with a personal pronoun normally used to refer to Jesus. The context of Isaiah before and after chapter 40 indicates that Isaiah was referring to the Babylonian exile and subsequent return.
So other than changing the general wording of Isaiah chapter 40, specifically changing the reference to the coming of Jesus instead of Yahweh and ignoring the context of the author’s work, “Matthew” has made a perfect match.
#48
Matthew 3: (KJV)
10 “And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees: therefore every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.”
False prophecy. I realize it doesn’t rain much in the desert but surely the axe head would have rusted off after 2,000 years. On the other hand, maybe it would take 2,000 years to chop down a tree using only an axe handle.
#49
Matthew 3: (KJV)
11…”he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:”
In the Greek there is no “the” before “Holy Ghost”. Of the major translations, only Darby acknowledges this. Once again Christian translators are projecting their pre-conceived (pun intended) belief that “the” Holy Ghost is a separate, definite person of God. Simon says “Holy Ghost”. Holy Ghost. “The Holy Ghost”. The Holy Ghost. Uh, uh, Simon didn’t say.

#50
Matthew 3: (KJV)
14 “But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? 15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.”
The Greek word that “Matthew” uses for “fulfill” is generally the same word used by Matthew to claim fulfillment of prophecies from the Tanakh. There is no prophecy in the Tanakh that the Messiah would be baptized in a river. As far as performing a commandment from the Tanakh there is no commandment requiring baptism in a river as a general type of atoning or purification ritual. A related question is, “who baptized John with water?”
#51
Matthew 3: (KJV)
16 “And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water:”
The author of Matthew likely copied the story of Jesus’ baptism either from “Mark” or from the same source Mark used. This is the related sentence in Mark:
Mark 1: (KJV)
9… “and was baptized of John in Jordan.10 And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened”
Mark indicates that immediately after Jesus came out of the water the heavens opened. In the Greek Matthew’s sentence structure has joined the adverb “straightway” with the verb “went up” so he is saying that immediately after the baptism Jesus came out of the water. Generally, coming out of the water would signal the end of the baptism. Why would anyone stay in the water after the baptism? Maybe to go swimming or take a bath?
#52
Matthew 3: (KJV)
16… “and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him”
In the Greek there is no “the” before “Spirit”. Apparently, whenever Matthew does not say “the” spirit of God/holy spirit Christian translations say “the” spirit of God/holy spirit.
#53
Matthew 4: (KJV)
8 “Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;”
It would not be possible to see all the kingdoms of the world of a spherical world no matter how high the mountain was. Apparently the author, like most people of his time, mistakenly believed that the earth was flat.
#54
Matthew 4: (KJV)
12 “Now when Jesus had heard that John was cast into prison, he departed into Galilee; And leaving Nazareth, he came and dwelt in Capernaum, which is upon the sea coast, in the borders of Zabulon and Nephthalim: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying,
The land of Zabulon, and the land of Nephthalim, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles;
The people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up.”
Misquote. “Matthew’s” translation doesn’t agree with the Masoretic text or Greek translations of the Tanakh. Isaiah 8: (JPS 1917)
“23… Now the former hath lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, but the latter hath dealt a more grievous blow by the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, in the district of the nations.
9.1 The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light; they that dwelt in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined.”
Isaiah Chapter 8, JPS translation, is referring to the destruction of the kingdom of Israel by the Assyrians. The “former” and “latter” of 8:23 refers to the Assyrians and Samarians:
7:1 “And it came to pass in the days of Ahaz the son of Jotham, the son of Uzziah, king of Judah, that Rezin the king of Aram, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up to Jerusalem to war against it; but could not prevail against it. And it was told the house of David, saying: 'Aram is confederate with Ephraim.”
All of Isaiah, chapter 8(JPS), is written in prose. Isaiah chapter 9(JPS), starts out being written in synonymous parallelism poetry:
“The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light;
they that dwelt in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined.
Thou hast multiplied the nation,
Thou hast increased their joy;
they joy before Thee according to the joy in harvest,
as men rejoice when they divide the spoil.”
Even though Isaiah 8:23 and 9:1 of JPS refer to different subjects and have different writing styles Christian translations have combined them into the start of Chapter 9 because of Matthew’s misquote which attempted to combine them into evidence of prophecy fulfillment.
#55
Matthew 4: (KJV)
17 "From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."
False prophecy.
#56
Matthew 5: (KJV)
31 “It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement: 32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.”
The author of “Matthew” previously had Jesus say:
5:18 (KJV) “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.”
Regarding acceptable causes for divorce the Law of Deuteronomy states the following:
24:1 (JPS) “When a man taketh a wife, and marrieth her, then it cometh to pass, if she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some unseemly thing in her, that he writeth her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house, and she departeth out of his house, and goeth and becometh another man's wife, and the latter husband hateth her, and writeth her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, who took her to be his wife; her former husband, who sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled;”
So Jesus stated that he would not change the Law but he did change the Law regarding acceptable causes for divorce.

#57
Matthew 5: (KJV)

33 “Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:”
Contradicted by Deuteronomy 6:13 (JPS)
“Thou shalt fear HaShem thy G-d; and Him shalt thou serve, and by His name shalt thou swear.”
#58
Matthew 5: (KJV)
38 “Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.”
Contradicted by Deuteronomy 19:18 (JPS)
“and the magistrates shall make a thorough investigation. If the man who testified is a false witness, if he has testified falsely against his fellow, you shall do to him as he schemed to do to his fellow. Thus you will sweep out evil from your midst; others will hear and be afraid, and such evil things will not again be done in your midst. Nor must you show pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.”
#59
Matthew 6: (KJV)
1 “Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.”
Contradicted by Matthew 5: (KJV)
16 “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.”
#60
Matthew 8: (KJV)
1 “When he was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed him.
And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean. And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed. And Jesus saith unto him, See thou tell no man; but go thy way, shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them.”
Regarding a mountain near Jerusalem (shew thyself to the priest) I think “Matthew” is making a mountain out of a mohel. Anyway, Jesus tells the man not to tell anyone in order to keep the healing secret but someone has forgotten about the “great multitude” which was following Jesus in the previous connected sentence.
#61
Matthew 8: (KJV)
16 “When the even was come, they brought unto him many that were possessed with devils: and he cast out the spirits with his word, and healed all that were sick: That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses.”
Here’s the quote from Isaiah Chapter 53: (JPS)
4 “Surely our diseases he did bear, and our pains he carried; whereas we did esteem him stricken, smitten of G-d, and afflicted.”
“Matthew’s” quote of Isaiah 53:4 doesn’t agree with the Masoretic text and doesn’t even agree with Christian translations of 53:4. Isaiah 53:4 states that the subject would bear the diseases while the story by Matthew only says that Jesus made other people’s diseases go away.
#62
Matthew 8: (KJV)
21 “And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father. But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.”
Deuteronomy 5: (JPS)
16 “Honour thy father and thy mother”
The Tanakh has several verses indicating that lack of a timely burial is an insult so Jesus has contradicted one of the ten commandments here.
#63
Matthew 8: (KJV)
26 “And he saith unto them, Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith? Then he arose, and rebuked the winds and the sea; and there was a great calm. But the men marvelled, saying, What manner of man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey him! And when he was come to the other side into the country of the Gergesenes,”
The text implies that Jesus has just reached the other side of the lake and Gergesenes was on the eastern coast of the Sea of Galilee. The problem is that Gergesenes is almost certainly not the name of the city originally identified here by the author of “Matthew”. Mark (who Matthew and Luke both probably copied from) and Luke both identify the city as Gerasa which was 33 miles from the Sea Of Galilee. Matthew, knowing that Gerasa was too far away, likely changed the name of the town to Gadara which was six miles from the lake. Matthew 8:28 of the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus say the town was Gadara. Origen was the first Church Father who recognized that neither Gerasa or Gadara was next to the lake. Let’s see how our friendly Christian translators have handled this:
New International Version (NIV)
When he arrived at the other side in the region of the Gadarenes,
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
When He came to the other side into the country of the Gadarenes,
Revised Standard Version (RSV)
And when he came to the other side, to the country of the Gadarenes
NIV formatted (NT only) (NIV-IBS)
When he arrived at the other side in the region of the Gadarenes
Darby Translation (DARBY)
And there met him, when he came to the other side, to the country of the Gergesenes,
Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
And he having come to the other side, to the region of the Gergesenes,
Worldwide English (NT only) (WE)
Jesus came to the other side of the sea, to the country of the Gadarene people.
New King James Version (NKJV)
When He had come to the other side, to the country of the Gergesenes,
The Church of the Middle Ages changed Matthew 8:28 to “Gergesenes” from “Gadara” recognizing that Gadara was not on the lake. A majority of modern Christian Bible translations now recognize that “Matthew” probably originally used “Gadara” in 8:28 indicating that the author was not overly familiar with the geography of Israel.