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."
Showing posts with label Mistakes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mistakes. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
