HOW
TO UNDERSTAND THE BIBLE CONTROVERSIES
"The first to present his case seems right,
till another comes forward and questions him." (Proverbs 18:17)
Question:
Are there any controversies in The Holy Bible? Why anti-Christians claimed that
there are so many controversies in the Bible?
Answer:
Answer is simple. There were NO controversies in the Bible. Due to lack of
knowledge to understand the scriptures, many people claimed like that. There is
NO other reason. To understand this, see the examples given in Table
below:
Sl. No
|
Group-1
|
Group-2
|
Which statement is
correct? Which statement is wrong?
|
1
|
1+1=2
|
1+1=10
|
either 1+1=2 (or) 1+1=10
|
2
|
10+10=20
|
10+10=100
|
either 10+10=20 (or) 10+10=100
|
3
|
11+11=22
|
11+11=110
|
either 11+11=22 (or) 11+11=110
|
4
|
100+100=200
|
100+100=1000
|
either 100+100=200 (or) 100+100=1000
|
5
|
101+101=202
|
101+101=1010
|
either 101+101=202 (or) 101+101=1010
|
6
|
111+111=222
|
111+111=1110
|
either 111+111=222 (or) 111+111=1110
|
If you see each statement line by line, statements mentioned in Group-1 seem to be correct and statements mentioned in Group-2 seem to be wrong.
· Which statement is correct then?
· In fact, both the statements in each line are correct.
· How is it possible?
· Reason is simple. Statements in Group-1 belong to Decimal system and Statements in Group-2 belong to Binary system.
§ If a person is not aware of binary system, definitely he will claim that there are so many controversies in the above table.
§ But a person, who is aware of both the binary system and decimal system, ONLY can understand the logic involved in it. Definitely he can say that there are NO controversies in the above table.
§ Same thing is true and applicable to the HOLY BIBLE also.
· Because,
o few things in Bible were written literally,
o some other things in symbolic language,
o few things belong to physical and
o most of the things belong to spiritual.
· In order to understand the BIBLE, one must understand the B-language (Bible language).
· Did you know the B-language? Here you can learn.
·
HOW
ERRORS ENTERED INTO THE BIBLE:
TRANSLATION ERRORS: The
Bible, as it was originally revealed by God and written down by men in God's
name, being the God-inspired Word of God, is free of mistakes and as such
cannot have any contradictions. God is a God who cannot lie; instead He
proclaims truth and therefore His Word is absolute truth and inherently
accurate (2Timothy 3:16; 2Peter 1:20-21). However, we do not hold the
originally revealed Word of God in our hands, i.e. we do not have the originals
of the Holy Scriptures before us but instead we rather have translations or
revised versions of translations. If there appears to be a contradiction in the
Bible, the major cause will be due to a
mistake in the translation. In the case of contradictions which remain
even after understanding what is said correctly, the cause must be a mistake in
the translation. Often, a closer look at the translation in comparison to the
older texts in the biblical languages Hebrew or Greek is sufficient help in
order to solve the apparent contradiction. Many
Biblical critics do not reference the original Hebrew and Greek texts when
searching for errors. This is poor, irresponsible scholarship. Such critics
fail to realize translation difficulties are not exclusive to the Bible. Any text translated into another language will contain errors
due to the use idioms, archaic terminology, and puns that do not translate
properly into other languages. In
order to finally resolve such errors, links provided to the original
Hebrew/Greek throughout this article. Using this method, we will find most alleged contradictions do
not even exist.
Now let us discuss about some
controversies, which may help you to understand better.
DOES GOD TEMPT MAN?
(KJV) Contradiction 1: And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham. Genesis 22:1
(KJV) Contradiction 2: Let no man say when he is tempted, "I am tempted
of God" for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man. James 1:13
(NIV) Accurate: Some time later God tested Abraham... Genesis 22:1
The Hebrew lexicon primarily defines the word nacah used in Genesis as to
test, try, or prove in the sense of putting someone to the test-
not in the sense of tempting to do evil. On the
other hand, the Greek lexicon specifically states the definition of the word in
Galatians (apeirastos) as cannot be tempted by evil or not
liable to the temptation of sin. The Hebrew word implies to test while the Greek implies what we understand to literally mean tempt. Let's use a few examples
from the Old Testament which use the term nacah as a reference
to test / try:
- Daniel 1:12,14 Please test your servants for ten days: Give
us nothing but vegetables and water...
- I Kings 10:1 When the queen of Sheba
heard about the fame of Solomon and his relation to the name of the Lord, she came to test him with hard questions.
- Judges 6:39 Then Gideon said to
God... "Allow me one more test with the fleece."
- Ecclesiastes 7:23 All
this I tested by wisdom and I said...
If we replace the word test with the word tempt in the above passages, the verses
would make no sense whatsoever.
- Did Daniel ask the chief
official to tempt the effects of his requested diet
on his body?
- Did the Queen of Sheba tempt Solomon's wisdom with difficult questions?
- Was Gideon wanting to make a tempt with the fleece?
When we examine other
verses which use the word nacah,
we can reach a logical conclusion regarding
the correct definition in Genesis.
You can see the correct translation in NIV:
(NIV) Accurate: Some
time later God tested Abraham... Genesis 22:1
DID THOSE AT SAUL'S /
PAUL'S CONVERSION HEAR A VOICE?
Contradiction 1: The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless. They heard the sound but did not see anyone. Acts 9:7
Contradiction 2: My companions saw the light, but they did not hear the voice of him who was speaking to
me. Acts 22:9
In
the original Greek, Luke uses the word akouo which can also mean to understand, comprehend, or
perceive.
Now read Acts 22:9 again by inserting “understand” in place
of “hear”. It can be read as My companions saw the light, but they did not understand
the voice of him who was speaking to me. Acts 22:9
No contradiction in the above verses. Verse Acts 9:7
states that the men heard a voice but verse
Acts 22:9 expands on the incident by explaining the men did not understand what
was said. No contradiction at all.
Did
Jeremiah or Zechariah write?
Matthew
27:9-10 — Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet……………………………………. Zechariah 11:12-13 — Zechariah wrote
about 30 pieces of silver which were thrown into the house of the Lord.
These
two passages are sometimes used by critics of the Bible to show a contradiction
in reference to the prophet whose prophecy was fulfilled after Judas had
brought back the 30 pieces of silver (which he had received as reward for his
conspiracy against Jesus) to the priests and they then bought a piece of land
with that money. The record about this event is found in Matthew 27:9-10; but a
record about 30 pieces of silver which were cast into the house of the LORD is
not found in the book of Jeremiah but rather in the book of the prophet
Zechariah. How then can this apparent contradiction be solved?
First
of all one should read the records carefully to see whether one of the records
may contain a hint for a particular detail which could lead to a solution.
Matthew27:9-10:
In
various Bibles with center references or other reference systems you can find a
note pointing the reader to Jeremiah 32 and to Zechariah 11. Those are
traditionally the sections of Scripture which are regarded as the source for
what is said in Matthew 27:9-10, even if their wording doesn't really quite
match what is recorded in Matthew 27. There is only one hint to the purchase of
a field in the book of Jeremiah, and a reference to 30 pieces of silver in
Zechariah which however do not have much to do with the record in Matthew about
Judas. The passage in Zechariah could perhaps best be the source for the
wording in the quotation in Matthew, but a closer look at the text shows
quickly that something different is being talked about.
Zechariah11:12–13:
The
record in Zechariah deals with a completely different situation, and there is
no connection to be seen that it really is a prophecy about Judas.
What
is really the problem, and what is the cause for this apparent contradiction?
When we read carefully, the contradiction is caused by the claim that the
section from Zechariah actually is the source from which Matthew quotes even
though Matthew himself speaks of „Jeremy the prophet" as the source. If
one leaves the record in Matthew untouched, then at least there is already no
contradiction between Jeremiah or Zechariah.
There
remains the question where in the book of Jeremiah can this quotation be found.
The difficulty is solved when we notice what is said in the record in Matthew
and what really has been written!
Matthew27:9:
Matthew
does not even say that this was written in the book of Jeremiah, he only
mentions that Jeremiah SPOKE this.
These words by the prophet Jeremiah had been preserved and were well known, but
they were not necessarily written down in the book of Jeremiah..
This
apparent contradiction is solved when we read the text carefully and when we
understand it exactly as it is written without reading our own ideas into the
text.
Why does the
Bible have TWO Genealogies of Jesus that seems to contradict?
Matthew
1:16 and Jacob the
father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called
Christ.
Luke 3:23 Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry.
He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli,
As they are translated in our English versions,
both Matthew and Luke have a genealogy that comes through Joseph, which leads
to confusion in understanding what God is really saying to us. For one thing,
Joseph ends up with two different fathers, “Jacob” (Matt. 1:16) and “Heli”
(Luke 3:23), and Mary, who is the blood link between David and Jesus, ends up
having no genealogy at all recorded in Scripture.
The
genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 are about different bloodlines.
From King David to Christ they are very different.
Matthew’s genealogy flows from King
David, via his son Solomon, down to Christ, while Luke’s genealogy shows
the ancestry of Jesus coming through King
David via his son Nathan (Luke 3:31).
Matthew’s genealogy from David to Christ is: David,
Solomon, Rehoboam, Abijah, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Jerhoram, Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amon, Josiah, Jeconiah, Shealtiel,
Zerubbabel, Abiud, Eliakim, Azor, Zadok, Akim, Eliud, Eleazar, Mattan, Jacob,
Joseph, [Mary], Jesus.
Luke’s genealogy from David to Christ is: David,
Nathan, Mattatha, Menna, Melea, Eliakim, Jonam, Joseph, Judah, Simeon, Levi,
Matthat, Jorim, Eliezer, Joshua, Er, Elmadam, Cosam, Addi, Melki, Neri,
Shealtiel, Zerubbabel, Rhesa, Joanan, Joda, Josech, Semein, Mattathias, Maath,
Naggai, Esli, Nahum, Amos, Mattathias, Joseph, Jannai, Melki, Levi, Matthat,
Heli, Joseph, Jesus.
It
is very clear that these two genealogies must be describing two different
people.
The Genealogy in Luke: As we study the genealogies, it becomes clear that
Luke contains that of Joseph. The genealogy in Luke reads in a straightforward
manner from God through Adam through the generations to Joseph the supposed
father of Jesus, ending with Jesus. This, of course, is the best evidence there
is that Luke contains Joseph’s genealogy. Furthermore, Mary is never mentioned.
some scholars assert that the genealogy in Luke is Mary’s, not Joseph’s. They
assert that because Luke says that Joseph “was thought” to be the father of
Jesus (Luke 3:23),
Luke 3:23 Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry.
He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli,
This does not read like a genealogy of Mary would
naturally read. If Luke were Mary’s genealogy, the above verse should read,
“Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He
was the son of Mary, the son of Heli.” If Luke is Mary’s genealogy, as many
believe, why mention that Joseph is the supposed father of Jesus, and not
mention Mary herself? More importantly, why write the genealogy in such a way
that no one reading it would ever think it was about Mary? We believe that the
gospel of Luke can be taken at face value, and that it records the genealogy of
Jesus through Joseph, back through David, to Adam and then to God Himself as
the Creator of the human race.
Here is the key to resolve the
problem:
Matthew 1:17
(1)
Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David,
(2)
fourteen from David to
the exile to Babylon, and
(3)
fourteen from the exile
to the Christ.
This verse seems very clear, but it does not fit
with what appears in the genealogy in Matthew in most versions of the Bible.
Let’s count the 3 sets of 14 generations, from the first
set of 14, from Abraham to David.
1) Abraham, 2) Isaac, 3) Jacob, 4) Judah, 5) Perez,
6) Hezron, 7) Ram, 8) Amminadab, 9) Nahshon, 10) Salmon, 11) Boaz, 12) Obed,
13) Jesse, 14) David.
The second set of 14 generations is from David to the
carrying away to Babylon.
1) Solomon, 2) Rehoboam, 3) Abijah, 4) Asa, 5)
Jehoshaphat, 6) Jehoram, 7) Uzziah, 8) Jotham, 9) Ahaz, 10) Hezekiah, 11)
Manasseh, 12) Amon, 13) Josiah, 14) Jeconiah
The third set of 14 is “from the exile to Christ.”
If the genealogy is counted as it is translated in most Bibles, this is the way
it would be counted:
1) Shealtiel, 2) Zerubbabel, 3) Abiud, 4) Eliakim,
5) Azor, 6) Zadok, 7) Akim, 8) Eliud, 9) Eleazar, 10) Mattan, 11) Jacob, 12)
Joseph (the husband of Mary), 13) Jesus.
The 3rd set has only 13 generations,
whereas Scripture specifically states 14, from the Babylonian captivity to
Christ. The way Matthew 1:16 is usually translated produces a missing
generation.
(Note: The pattern of three sets of 14 generations
was very important to Matthew. We know that because, in actuality, there were
not three sets of 14 generations from Abraham to Christ. When the genealogy in
Matthew is compared with the other genealogies in the Bible, it is clear that
there are names missing in Matthew. For example, in Matthew 1:8, between
Jehoram and Uzziah, there are actually three unmentioned generations. Jehoram
begat Ahaziah (2 Kings 8:25), who begat Joash (also called Jehoash; 2 Kings
11:2 and 21), who begat Amaziah (2 Kings 12:21). There are some other
unmentioned names as well. Although there are some names missing, it is not
essential to give every name in a biblical genealogy of kings as we do today.)
What was
important to Matthew, although we are not certain why, is that he set forth a
pattern of three sets of fourteen generations from Abraham to Christ. Therefore,
to have only 13 names in the last set of 14 is a huge RED FLAG that something
is miissing. If we closely examine the list, however, we will see that it
does have 14 names, and thus 14 generations if each name represents a
generation.
Most versions translate Matthew 1:16 to say that
Joseph was the “husband” of Mary, not the “father” of Mary. However, we believe
that “husband” is a mistranslation. The Greek word translated “husband” is aner,
and means an adult male. Usually when used with the phrase “of ” some
woman, such as “Joseph, the man of Mary,” it refers to her husband, but there
is good evidence that aner should here be translated “father.” There is
evidence in the Aramaic text that “father” is the correct translation in this
case.
We know that Matthew 1:19 clearly refers to Joseph
as the “husband” of Mary because it speaks of Joseph thinking of divorcing her.
Matthew
1:19 Because Joseph
her husband was a righteous man and did not want to expose her to public
disgrace, he had in mind to divorce her quietly.
In the Greek text, Matthew 1:16 and 19 both contain
the same word, aner (“man” or “husband”), but the Aramaic text has two
different words, and thus makes a distinction between the two men.
In Matthew 1:16, the Aramaic word is gavra,
which means “mighty man,” “father,” or “husband,”
while in Matthew 1:19 the word is bala, which
is “man” or “husband,” (it is similar to the Hebrew baal, “lord”).
Thus, the Aramaic text preserves the truth that
there is a difference between the Joseph of verse 16, the “mighty man” of Mary,
and the Joseph of verse 19, the “husband” of Mary. [2]
Mary, the mother of Jesus: Both her father’s and husband's
names were Joseph
Once we realize that “Joseph” is the name of both
the father and the husband of Mary, the Word of God fits together perfectly.
Both the genealogies of Mary and Joseph are in the Bible, so that everyone can
see that each is a descendant of David, just as Scripture claims (Joseph: Matt.
1:20; Luke 1:27 and 2:4. Mary: Acts 2:30; Rom. 1:3).
Now we can read the third set of 14 i.e “from the
exile to Christ as below:
1) Shealtiel, 2) Zerubbabel, 3) Abiud, 4) Eliakim,
5) Azor, 6) Zadok, 7) Akim, 8) Eliud, 9) Eleazar, 10) Mattan, 11) Jacob, 12)
Joseph (the father of Mary), 13) Mary, 14) Jesus.
Now the language of the genealogies in Matthew and
Luke makes a lot of sense.
Matthew contains the genealogy of Jesus through his
mother Mary, and never mentions her husband Joseph, who was not part of her
genealogy anyway. In Mary’s genealogy in Matthew, four other women are
mentioned, Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and “Uriah’s wife,” emphasizing the role that women play in a genealogy.
Luke contains the genealogy of Jesus via his
adopted father, Joseph, and never mentions Mary, who was not part of Joseph’s
genealogy. Joseph’s genealogy in Luke does not include any women, but does
include two of his ancestors who were also named Joseph in his genealogy,
Last but not least, the three sets of fourteen
generations mentioned in Matthew are all complete.
NO CONTROVERSY
AT ALL
This is an excellent example to remind us that our bibles are
translations and there are errors in the translations.
The original God inspired word was perfect and whenever there
appears to be contradictions
it is either in our
understanding (i.e. interpretation) or
there’s a bad translation.
Okay.
No comments:
Post a Comment