Friday, 8 September 2017

Internal contradiction

it is often stated the Bible in a whole is inerrant and the absolute word of God. below is a small sample to show the Bible is not Inerrant and God cannot make such mistakes when revealing events to his Prophet.




--------------------

Methuselah according to Genesis 5:27, lived 969 years.
All the days of Methuselah came to 969 years; then he died.
(Genesis 5:27)

And begot his son Lamech at 187 years of age.

When Methuselah had lived 187 years, he begot Lamech.
(Genesis 5:25)

Lamech, we are told in Genesis 5:28-29, begot Noah at the age of 182.

When Lamech had lived 182 years, he begot a son. And he named him Noah, saying, “This one will provide us relief from our work and from the toil of our hands, out of the very soil which the LORD placed under a curse.” (Genesis 5:28-29)



That means, that Methuselah was 369 years of age when Noah was born and that Noah was 600 when Methuselah died. How can it be, then, that Methuselah was not in the ark? If the flood waters began to gather in the six hundredth year of Noah’s life (Gen. 7:11), that is, when he was 599 years old, and he attained the age of 600 while on the ark (he left the ark in the second month of his six hundred and first year (Genesis. 8:14-18), would not Methuselah, if he lived to the age of 969 (i.e. completed 969 years) have to be saved from the flood? but,  Ibn Hazm says, this was not the case; the text states that only Noah, his wife, and his sons and their wives entered the ark (Gen. 7:7). Thus the text of Genesis contradicts itself.


--------------------------------------------


The biographical data pertaining to Moses is arithmetically inaccurate. According to Dt. 34:7, he died at the age of one hundred and twenty,

Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died, yet his eyes were not weak nor his strength gone. (Deuteronomy 34:7)

After having left Egypt at the age of eighty (Ex:7:7)

Moses was eighty years old and Aaron eighty-three, when they spoke to Pharaoh. (Exodus 7:7).

But the events that occurred between the exodus and Moses’ death covered more than forty years, if the Torah is to be believed. Ibn Hazm sees Moses as having sojourned in the wilderness for over a year (Num. 1:1)

The LORD spoke to Moses in the tent of meeting in the Desert of Sinai on the first day of the second month of the second year after the Israelites came out of Egypt. He said: (Numbers 1:1)

Before the onset of the forty years of the wandering (Num. 14:31-34);

 31As for your children that you said would be taken as plunder, I will bring them in to enjoy the land you have rejected. But as for you, your bodies will fall in this wilderness. 33Your children will be shepherds here for forty years, suffering for your unfaithfulness, until the last of your bodies lies in the wilderness. 34For forty years—one year for each of the forty days you explored the land—you will suffer for your sins and know what it is like to have me against you.’ (Numbers 14:31-34)

And then, after the wandering, he waged war against Og and sihon (Num.32:33)

Then Moses gave to the Gadites, the Reubenites and the half-tribe of Manasseh son of Joseph the kingdom of Sihon king of the Amorites and the kingdom of Og king of Bashan--the whole land with its cities and the territory around them. (Numbers 32:33).


Thus Moses was at least one year beyond the age of the one hundred twenty. Once again the forger of the Torah erred in his calculations. But it doesn’t stop here, if we rewind to

Moses was eighty years old and Aaron eighty-three when they spoke to Pharaoh. (Exodus 7:7)

We read Moses was 80 years old and his brother Aaron 83 years old, 3 years old then him. If we fast forward to the book of Numbers we read Aaron Passed way when he was 123, which would make Moses 120

Aaron was a hundred and twenty-three years old when he died on Mount Hor (Numbers 33:39)

However if we rewind to Numbers 1:1 and add it to Numbers 33:39, then his would make Moses more then 120?. Also Moses lived through Numbers 34 all the till Deuteronomy 34 and still remained 120 years old how’s that possible? Are you saying the timeline from Numbers 34 to Deuteronomy 34 was less then 1 year?


They spent 38 years!


13 The Lord said, “Now get up. Go across the Zered Valley.” So we went across it.

14 Between the time we left Kadesh Barnea and the time we went across the Zered Valley, 38 years had passed. By then, all the fighting men who had been in our camp from the beginning had died. The Lord had warned them that it would happen. (Deuteronomy 2:13-14)


Looking at the time line of Aaron he should of lived longer then Moses? Yet Moses seems to still remain 120 even though he lived a few years longer after Aaron. That would make Moses 160 at least

-------------------------



The post-biblical scared texts of the Jews continue this practice of blasphemy. According to Ibn Hazm in one of these texts (the Mekhilta according to Rabbi Ishmael) the Jews forty years of wandering in the desert are explained in his way: on the road from Egypt yo Syria, Pharaoh had constructed an idol of Baal-zephon, a powerful talisman which impleded all who passed by. But how, ibn Hazm asks, could a talisman of Pharaoh have such power over God? if Pharoah indeed had such power over God, where was it when he was drowned in the Red Sea

Mekhilta 20:2 (“Beshallah,” c.2) refers to the hirot, in front of which Israel encamped (cf. Ex. 14:2). These are described as “not leaning but tapered to the apex, not rectilinear but slightly convex, not round but square, not what a human being had made but the world of heaven; they had eyes as window, were a kind of male and female….” These may be the “powerful talisman” to which Ibn Hazm refers. He apparently equated this talisman with Baal-zephon, mentioned in the same verse, in front of which Israel is also said to have encamped. The Mekhilta (20:6) says of Baal-zephon that he “survived among all the gods, so as to entice the hearts of the Egyptions.” By encamping before the powerful talisman (the idol of Baal-zephon), Israel in Pharoahs estimation had become “entangled” in the wilderness (Ex 14:3) (trans Neusner 1988, 1:135-136)


Speak to the children of Israel, and let them turn back and encamp in front of Pi hahiroth, between Migdol and the sea; in front of Baal Zephon, you shall encamp opposite it, by the sea. (Exodus 14:2)


----------------------------

Rashis commentary

and let them turn back: to their rear. They approached nearer to Egypt during the entire third day in order to mislead Pharaoh, so that he would say, “They are astray on the road,” as it is said: “And Pharaoh will say about the children of Israel…” (Exod. 14:3).

and encamp in front of Pi-hahiroth: That is Pithom [one of the cities built by the Israelites, Exod 1:11], but now it was called Pi-hahiroth, since there they [the Israelites] became free men (בְּנֵי חוֹרִין). They [the Hiroth] are two high upright rocks, and [because there is] the valley between them [this] is called the mouth (פִּי) of the rocks. — [from Mechilta]

in front of Ba’al Zephon: [Only] this was left from all the Egyptian deities in order to mislead them [the Egyptians], so they would say that their deity is powerful. Concerning this [tactic] Job explained: “He misleads nations and destroys them” (Job 12:23). — [from Mechilta]

--------------------------



The devil said to him, "If you are the Son of God, tell this stone to become bread." (Luke 4:3)

The tempter came to him and said, "If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread." (Matthew 4:3)

Did you catch the difference? Luke states, Satan said “tell this stone to become bread” (singular). Whereas Matthew states, Satan said “tell these stones to become bread” (plural).  to many this may seem very minor, but one must accept the two authors could not have been inspired by the same spirit, a contradiction indeed. also notice Satan asked Jesus to “tell” the stone or stones, i.e. speak to the objects. Why didn’t Jesus respond by saying how can I tell these stones to turn into bread? Unless he was aware those stones could hear him and obey? Rather he replied by saying

Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Man shall not live on bread alone.'" (Luke 4:4)

Whats worse, Jesus said he would give a white stone to his followers?

Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who is victorious, I will give some of the hidden manna. I will also give that person a white stone with a new name written on it, known only to the one who receives it. (Revelations 2:17)

One wonders what this white stone could possibly be? did you know Al-Lat was a white stone with inscriptions on, and we find from the very Bible that Jesus would give a white stone with a new name written on it (inscription)..

------------------------

Arithmetical Errors


Ibn Hazm claims to have found another numerical inconsistency, further supporting his charge of tahrif. Taking as his point of departure the assertion in Ex. 12:40 that Israel dwelt in Egypt 430 years, Ibn Hazm points to another inconsistency. We are told in Gen. 6:11 that Kohath, the son of Levi, was among those who descended to Egypt with Jocob. Assume for the sake of argument, Ibn Hazm says, that he was a month old or less when he arrived in Egypt and therefore spent all of his 137 years there (cf Ex. 6:16). Assume further, he tells the reader, that his son Amram, was born after his father’s death and that Moses, the son of Amram, was born after Amram’s death at the age of 133. We know from the Torah that Moses was 80 years of age at the time of the Exodus (cf 7:7). This would mean that the sojourn of Egypt would have lasted 137+133+80 or 350 years- not 430 years, as Ex.12:40 states. Where, Ibn Hazm asks, are the missing eighty years?  

He even anticipates the Jews’ response that the figure of 430 incudes Joseph’s time in Egypt before his father’s arrival. But still the desired total is not attained. Joseph, Ibn Hazm notes, was 17 when sold into Egypt (Gen. 37:2), and 39 when his family arrived (in that he entered Pharaoh’s service at 30 (Gen. 41:46) and then seven years of plenty and two years of the seven-year famine had elapsed (Gen.41:53, 45:11) before the Israelites’ migration). That amounts to only 22 years. Where, Ibn Hazm ask, are the other 58 years needed to reach a total of 430? With similar calculations earlier in the Treatise, Ibn Hazm had shown that the prophecy purportedly made to Abraham as recorded in Gen. 15:13(“.... your descendants… will be oppressed for four hundred years” was fallacious.

Ibn Hazm wonders how in more than fifteen hundred years the Jews had not detected the arithmetical error in the Numbers regarding the numbers of males at least one month of age in the tribe of Live. The Gershonites are said to have numbered 6500, the Kohathites, 8600; and the families of Merari, 6200 (Num. 322, 28, 34)- for a total of 21,300

(This figure differs from that given in the MT and Vulgates (7500) and that given in the LXX (7200).

And yet Num. 3:39 gives the total as 22,000. Even an ox or an ass would not be so ignorant of simple arithmetic. And this erroneous figure cannot be attributed merely to the carelessness of a copyist; it is intrinsic to the text. That is, according to Num. 3:42-46, special provision had to be made for the redemption of 273 of the first-born of Israel since only 22,000 of their total number (22,273)were redeemed by the Levites.



----------------------------


Ibn Hazm detects problems with the tabulation of the descendants of Jacob in Gen. 46, seeing in this pericope of miscalculation to be explained by human tampering with the text- since obviously no one would dare attribute such an arithmetical error to God! verses 9-14 list Jacob’s offspring through Leah. These include Reuben and his four sons (5), simon and his six sons (7), Levi and his three sons (4), Judah and his three sons and two grandsons by Perez (6), Issachar and his four sons (5), zebulon and his three sons (4), and, finally, Dinah. This yields a total of 32, not 33 as stated in v. 15. This error then causes a further error in calculation. Verses 16-18 list Jacobs’s offspring through Zilpah (a total of 16); vv. 19-20, his offspring through Rachel (a total of 14); and vv. 23-25, his offspring through Bilhah (a total of 7). The periscope ends with the summary that all the offspring of Jacob who came into Egypt numbered 66(v. 26), and the total number of the house of Jacob in Egypt amounted to 70 (v. 27). To these figures Ibn Hazm reacts as follows:

This is a monstrous error because the sum of the aforementioned numbers (32+16+14+7) is 69, and if the two sons of Joseph born to him in Egypt are subtracted from them there remain 67, while it says 66. This is a lie. Them it said “All of those who entered into Egypt with him were 70.” And this is another lie. We have already maintained that the one who fabricated the Torah for them was dim witted in numbers


Thus Ibn Hazm claims to have found another numerical inconsistency, further supporting his charge of tahrif.


---------------------------------------



kings??

These were the kings who reigned in Edom before any Israelite king reigned: (Genesis 36:31)


The medieval rabbi Isaac ibn Yashush recognized that Moses could not have described Edomite kings as reigning before any king reigned over the Israelites (Genesis 36:31), since in Moses time there was no way of knowing that Israel would one day have a king. And Abraham ibn Ezra (1089-1164) noticed that Genesis 12:6 (and the Canaanites were then in the land) must have been written when the Canaanites no longer represented a major portion of Palestines population. Ibn Ezra also saw a problem with Deuteronomy 1:1, which refers to the territory east of the Jordan as the other side of the Jordan. Obviously, this passage was written from the perspective of someone on the western side of the Jordan (Canaan)yet Moses died east of the Jordan, having never reached Canaan.5

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 31. - And these (which follow) are the kings that reigned in the land of Edom, before there reigned any (literally, before the reigning of a) king over (or, to) the children of Israel.


1. The reference to Israelitish kings in this place has been explained as an evidence of post-Mosaic authorship (Le Clerc, Bleek, Ewald, Bohlen, et alii), or at least as a later interpolation from 1 Chronicles 1:43 (Kennicott, A. Clarke, Lange), but is sufficiently accounted for by remembering that in Genesis 35:11 kings had been promised to Jacob, while the blessing pronounced on Esau (Genesis 27:40) implied that in his line also should arise governors, the historian being understood to say that though the promised kings had not yet arisen in the line of Jacob, the house of Esau had attained at a somewhat early period to political importance (Calvin, Michaelis, Rosenmüller, Keil, Kalisch, Gerlach, Havernick, and others).

----------------------------------


From a historical perspective, the crux of this question comes down to dating the exodus event (so that we can identify the Pharaoh in question). The most common date suggested for this event is around 1250 BC. The reason for this is Exodus 1:11 saying that the Hebrew slaves helped build Ramesses (believed to be the city Pi-Ramesses because no city just called Ramesses ever existed). Pi-Ramesses, which means "House of Ramesses", was founded about the mid-13th century BC. Additionally, the land of Israel is identified on a late 13th century BC stele erected by the Egyptian Pharaoh Merneptah. Therefore, it is believed that the exodus would have been between these two events (building the cities, being mentioned in their own land).
If 1250 BC is close to the date, then the Pharaoh would have been Ramesses II. He did not die in the sea. His mummy is in Cairo's Egyptian Museum. His son Merneptah's mummy was unwrapped in 1907. His father Seti I's mummy is also at Cairo's Egyptian Museum. Therefore, it is unlikely that any Pharaoh associated with Israel drowned in the sea.
Furthermore, it is also unlikely that the exodus event occurred the way it is told anyway. There are dozens of reasons for this. To name just a few...
  1. 600,000 men (not counting women and children) supposedly fled Egypt (Ex 12:37). However, this is only four generations removed from Joseph and his brothers (Ex 6:16-20). It is nigh impossible for 70 people (Ex 1:5) to have turned into 2 million people (including women and children) over the course of only four generations. Every male descendent would have had to father about 40 male children (not to mention female children).
  2. If Egypt had lost 2 million slaves AND the entire army of Pharaoh, then Egypt would have been severely weakened. Egypt could not have continued to be the regional superpower that it was. Yet, Ramesses II and Merneptah both maintained powerful armies and had successful reigns. The New Kingdom of Egypt lasted until 1069 BC.
  3. The archaeological evidence for Pharaoh's army drowning in the sea would be massive. We would expect to find thousands of spearheads, metal parts from chariots, pieces of armor, etc. Instead, we find nothing. The archaeological evidence for a marching band of 2 million Israelites would also have left behind considerable evidence. Again, nothing.
  4. Pharaoh's horsemen are mentioned multiple times in this account. However, horsemen didn't even play a part in warfare for another couple of centuries. So the usage in the text is likely anachronistic.
This anachronism points to the fact that this story was written much later than the event it purports to tell. If that is the case, then it makes much more sense how the details of the story came to be exaggerated. In pre-literary societies, transmission of history is done by Oral Tradition (stories told by each generation to the next). If you've ever played the "telephone game," then you know how quickly stories change when told over and over again.


If Yahweh wrote the tablets with his own hands (Exodus 34:1), and those tablets are now missing. Why do Christians throw a fit by saying how could the Torah be corrupted when God sent it down. They forget the Torah was written by unknown men, there is no early manuscripts of the Torah.

Think of it like this, if Moses wrote the Torah around 3500 years ago and the earliest manuscripts we have in possession goes back 200BC how many year is the gap between  the DDS manuscripts and Moses? About 1300 years! Ask yourself could you possibly believe the Torah which has a 1300 year gap the exact same as the one Moses wrote?

If the TABLETS written by the hands of God went missing, what makes you think the Torah you have which has no chain of narration still be original.

-----------------------

The blessing Isaac conferred upon Jacob, as recorded in the Torah (Gen 27:27-29) is proved false by subsequent historical events.


So he came near and kissed him. And Isaac smelled the smell of his garments and blessed him and said, “See, the smell of my son is as the smell of a field that the LORD has blessed! May God give you of the dew of heaven and of the fatness of the earth and plenty of grain and wine. Let peoples serve you, and nations bow down to you. Be lord over your brothers, and may your mother’s sons bow down to you. Cursed be everyone who curses you, and blessed be everyone who blesses you!” (Genesis 27:27-29)

That is, Isaac tells Jacob, “Let people serve you, and nations bow down to you” (Gen 27:29).  But even according to the Torah itself, this blessing never came to fruition. It was Jacob who served Laban

So Jacob went in to Rachel also, and he loved Rachel more than Leah, and served Laban for another seven years. (Genesis 29:30)

It was Jacob who bowed down before Esau and not vice versa.

Then Jacob went on ahead. As he approached his brother, he bowed to the ground seven times before him.(Genesis 33:3)

In speaking with Esau, Jacob refers to himself as “your servant” (Gen. 33:5) according to Gen.36:8, it was Esau who maintained dominion over the inheritance of the sons of Jacob in seir. In fact, Ibn Hazm notes, the sons of Jacob never dominated the sons of Esau, Lot or Ismael. The Jews themselves admit that the sons of Esau and Lot retained control of Seir, Moab and Amman even after the kingdom of Israel has disappeared. Furthermore, “until the present day” the sons of Ishmael (i.e., the Arabs) possess lands once claimed by Israel. Thus the facts of history plainly show the Torah’s account of Isaac’s blessing upon Jacob to be corrupt.


----------------------------

Claims in the Torah contradict historical facts, Ibn Hazm contends. In Gen 4:15, for example, it is promised that Cain would be ransomed sevenfold (which Ibn Hazm interprets as referring to divine guarantee of safekeeping for seven generation). The Jews however, hold that cain was killed by Lamech, who lived only five generations after him. Thus God’s promise as recorded in the Torah was not historically validated.

We can also confirm the above from Jewish sources that Lamech did kill cain. Below is the commentary from Rashi, a renowned Jewish (Bible) scholar

-------------------------------

The LORD said to him, “I promise, if anyone kills Cain, sevenfold vengeance shall be taken on him.” And the LORD put a mark on Cain, lest anyone who met him should kill him.  ( Genesis 4:15)

Rashi commentary

VENGEANCE SHALL BE TAKEN SEVENFOLD — God says, I do not wish to take vengeance on Cain now, but at the end of seven generations I will execute my vengeance upon him, that Lamech, one of his descendants, will arise and slay him.

Lamech said to his wives, "Adah and Zillah, listen to me; wives of Lamech, hear my words. I have killed a man for wounding me, a young man for injuring me. If Cain is avenged seven times, then Lamech seventy-seven times." (Genesis 4:23-24)

Rashi commentary

 For his wives separated from him because he had killed Cain and Tubal-Cain, his own son. Lamech was blind and Tubal-Cain used to lead him. The latter saw Cain and thought him to be an animal. He therefore told his father to draw the bow, and thus Lamech killed him. As soon as he learned that it was his forefather Cain,



there you have it another reason why the Bible can not be trusted.

--------------

I do not believe in the Bible the Christians and Jews follow why? Because the current Torah and gospels proceeded neither from God nor from any prophet; in fact. It cannot even be deemed the word of a wise or well- informed author. It is without a doubt the work of some impious person, false and mocking. The only other explanation is that the author was an imbecile simpleton, unlearned in arithmetic, astronomy, geography, and theology, and unreflective in his own writing.


-------------------------------------------


It will well known from the Bible, that Aaron fashioned the Golden calf for the Children of Israel.

When the people saw that Moses delayed to come down from the mountain, the people gathered themselves together to Aaron and said to him, “Up, make us gods who shall go before us. As for this Moses, the man who brought us up out of the land of Egypt, we do not know what has become of him.” So Aaron said to them, “Take off the rings of gold that are in the ears of your wives, your sons, and your daughters, and bring them to me.” So all the people took off the rings of gold that were in their ears and brought them to Aaron.  And he received the gold from their hand and fashioned it with a graving tool and made a golden calf. And they said, “These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!” (Exodus 32:1-4)


Here’s the problem, the children of Israel demanded Aaron to “make gods” for them which Aaron did, he fashioned “a golden calf”.  Just for the record in many places the Bible and Talmud is clear there was only One idol calf fashioned not two or three Exodus 32:8, Deuteronomy 9:16, Nehemiah 9:18, Berakhot 7a:5, Megillah 25b:11 etc.. If Aaron supposed to have fashioned “a golden calf” why did the Jews say “These are your gods”? (plural) how many golden calf did Aaron make?

We call it Inconsistency !


---------------------------------------------


So David prevailed over the Philistine with a sling and with a stone, and struck the Philistine and killed him. There was no sword in the hand of David. (1 Samuel 17:50)

Then David ran and stood over the Philistine and took his sword and drew it out of its sheath and killed him and cut off his head with it. When the Philistines saw that their champion was dead, they fled. (1 Samuel 17:51)

Amazing inconsistency between the 2 verses.  In verse 50, David killed Goliath with  sling and stone "without a sword". Verse 51 David killed Goliath "AGAIN" this time with his sword.  It doesn't stop here verse 54 really takes the Biscuit.

David took the Philistine's head and brought it to Jerusalem; he put the Philistine's weapons
in his own tent. (1 Samuel 17:54)

How could David take Goliath's head to Jerusalem? According to the biblical narratives, Jerusalem was not the capital during Sau's reign, but Gibeah and David was still in Saul's service. Jerusalem had not been conquered yet. So the story of David bringing a severed head to Jerusalem must have happened much later, when Jerusalem was David's capital, and therefore what he carried in triumph cannot have been the head of Goliath. Then who's head was it?  Jerusalem was not captured until 7 years after David became king read 2 Sam 5.



The Gemara continues: Come and hear: Beloreya the convert once asked Rabban Gamliel: It is written in your Torah: “The great, mighty, and awesome God who favors no one” (Deuteronomy 10:17), and elsewhere it is written: “The Lord shall show favor to you and give you peace” (Numbers 6: 26). How can this contradiction be resolved?
 Another reason  to believe the Bible is not inspired.


------------------------------



To this he replied: "Brothers and fathers, listen to me! The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham while he was still in Mesopotamia, before he lived in Harran. (Acts 7:2)

Wrong, according Genesis Abraham received his call in Haran years later.

Terah took his son Abram, his grandson Lot son of Haran, and his daughter-in-law Sarai, the wife of his son Abram, and together they set out from Ur of the Chaldeans to go to Canaan. But when they came to Harran, they settled there. (Genesis 11:31)


The LORD had said to Abram, "Go from your country, your people and your father's household to the land I will show you. (Genesis 12:1)

This shows Stephen could not have been inspired by the Holy Ghost, or else why would he make such an error with Abraham location. Maybe he read a different version?


whats fascinating about all this is, not a single member of the Sanhedrin including the high priest challenged Stephen for his gross exegesis of the "Torah". yes the "HIGH PRIEST"

Then the high priest asked Stephen, "Are these charges true?" (Acts 7:1)



-----------------------------

once again Stephen lied his way out!
So Abraham left the land of the Chaldeans and lived in Haran until his father died. Then God brought him here to the land where you now live. (Acts 7:4)

Wrong, Acts 7:4 says that Abram didn't leave Haran until after his father died. Genesis 11:26 says that Abram's father was 70 years old when Abram was born, and Abram's father lived to be 205 (11:32). Clearly, then, Abram was at least 135 when he left Haran. Yet Genesis 12:4 says he left Haran when he was only 75.

After Terah was 70 yearsold, he became the father of Abram, Nahor, and Haran. (Genesis 11:26)

Terah lived 205 years, andhe died in Harran. (Genesis 11:32)

Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out ofHaran. (Genesis 12:4)

Genesis 11:26 says that Terah was 70 years old when he became the father of Abram, Nahor and Haran. After Terah ’s death Abraham leftHaran at the age of 75 . By adding those two numbers together you come up withTerah ’s age of 145 when he died . The problem is that Genesis 11 :32 says Terah lived 205 years, not 145

The question is, how old was Abraham when he left Haran 75 or 135? Stephen once again made an error regarding Abraham in front of the high priest.


------------------------------

From all the clean animals you shall take seven each, man and wife And from all unclean animals you shall take two, man and wife (Genesis 7:2)
מכל הבהמה הטהורה תקח לך שבעה שבעה איש ואשתו ומן הבהמה אשר לא טהרה הוא שנים איש אשתו

If you read the verse carefully you’ll notice something unusual. Yahweh seems to refer the animals as “man and wife”. The Hebrew in the Masoretic text is very clear, (איש ואשתו man and wife). Why did Yahweh use such a term for animals? The Bible is clear between the creation of man and animals, so whats with the confusion?


This creates another problem, in Genesis 1:26 it says, “Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image,”. If man is supposed to be in God’s image and the same God refers to animals as “man” does this means animals were also made in Yahweh’s image? Maybe those Christians who claim the Holy Ghost is guiding them could explain this problem. 


--------------------------------------


And God finished his work on the Seventh day and he rested on the Seventh השביעי ביום אלהים ויכל (Masoretic Torah Genesis 2:2)

According to Masoretic text, Yahweh finished his work on the seventh day and rested on the seventh day.  However, the Samaritan and Septuagint including the Peshitta say, Yahweh finished his work on the sixth day and rested on the seventh day?

And God finished his work on the Sixth day and he rested on the Seventh day הששי ביום אלהים ויכל (Genesis 2:2 Samaritan/Septuagint Torah)


This is a blatant discrepancy on the authenticity of the “Torah” Christians and Jews claim to be the very inerrant/inspired word of God, where not a single word was added or taken away. Maybe our Christian friends who claim to be guided by the Holy Ghost can tell us which version is correct.  Now Christians have to make the choice between the three versions, either the Masoretic is correct making the Samaritan and Septuagint corrupt, or the Samaritan and Septuagint is correct making the Masoretic corrupt. Just for the record the Samaritan predates the Masoretic and possibly the Septuagint (debatable)


----------------------------------------

And Terah took Abraham and Lot…and they left with them from Ur of the Chaldeans to the Land of Canaan and they travelled to Haran ויקח תרח את אברם בנו ואת לוט... ויצאו אתם מאור כשדים ללכת ארצה כנען ויבאו עד חרן (Genesis 11:31 Masoretic Torah)

Lets compare the Masoretic with other earlier versions (excluding Latin vulgate)

And Terah took Abraham and Lot…and brought them from Ur of the Chaldeans to the Land of Canaan : ויקח תרח את אברם בנו ואת לוט...ויוצא אותם מאור כשדים ללכת ארצה כנען ויבאו עד חרן  (Genesis 11:31 Samaritan, Septuagint, Latin VulgateTorah)

The Masoretic text is confusing: The highlighted verb vayetz’u (and they left) is clearly performed by all the people Terah took at the beginning of the verse, just like the final verbs of the verse (and they travelled to Haran…). It is unclear however, who else the preposition ittam (with them) refers to in this version.

The variant reading suggested by the Samaritan, Septuagint and Latin Vulgate, provide one with a smoother reading, the highlighted verb is performed by Terah, the subject at the beginning of the verse.


This creates a problem since Christians rely on the Masoretic version, which is confusing compare to a smoother reading from earlier versions. Are Christians willing to dismiss the confusing version and replace it with a smoother one? 

-------------------------

God said to him, "Your name is Jacob, but you will no longer be called Jacob; your name will be Israel." So he named him Israel. (Genesis 35:10)

As we can read from the above verse, God is telling Jacob he will no longer be called by that name, his new name shall be Israel. Did Yahweh fulfil his saying? And the answer is no

God spoke to Israel in visions of the night and said, "Jacob, Jacob." And he said, "Here I am." (Genesis 46:2)

It’s fair to say the Yahweh lied to Jacob. Genesis 35 blatantly contradicts Genesis 46. One moment Yahweh tells Jacob he wont be calling him by that name, a few chapters later he goes back on his words and calls him Jacob. A God who doesn’t keep up to his words what kind of a lesson can you learn from this. What’s ironic about this is, if Moses was the author of Genesis didn’t he notice this problem? Did not Moses question Yahweh and seek some sort of an answer? It’s not like Moses was unable ask him, if Moses can make Yahweh repent as found in Exodus 32:14 why wouldn’t he clear this up? Makes no sense.

-----------------------------------------------

After Terah was 70 years old, he became the father of Abram, Nahor, and Haran. (Genesis 11:26)

Terah lived 205 years, and he died in Harran. (Genesis 11:32)

Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran. (Genesis 12:4)

Genesis 11:26 says that Terah was 70 years old when he became the father of Abram, Nahor and Haran. After Terah ’s death Abraham left Haran at the age of 75 . By adding those two numbers together you come up with Terah ’s age of 145 when he died. The problem is that Genesis 11 :32 says Terah lived 205 years, not 145

This would mean Abraham married Sarah when he was 135, how then did he have Ismael at the age of 86 and Isaac at the age of 100 when he was still living with his father unmarried?  This would mess up the entire dating system from Abraham lineage. By calculation Sarah was 48 years younger then Abraham, which means Sarah was roughly 90 years old when the king found her attractive and wanted to marry her?

The problem gets worse as sarah would of had her first child Isaac decades later, which again shows the inconsistency as she would of lived longer then 127 years if Isaac was married at the age of 40. She would of seen his marriage and possibly his offspring.

Abraham fell facedown; he laughed and said to himself, "Will a son be born to a man a hundred years old? Will Sarah bear a child at the age of ninety?" (Genesis 17:17)

If Sarah was 90 years old when she met the king, and many years later gave birth to Isaac, that sis 14 after Ishmael was Born she would have been 104 years old when she had Isaac.


Do you see the problem

------------------------------

All Scripture is God-breathed…  (1 Timothy 3:16). Probably one of the biggest lie found in the New Testament by Paul, that “All Scripture is God Breathed”. below is rock-solid evidence the Bible is not the word of God. would God truly inspired such inconsistency. another reason why the Bible should be dumped, purely because of it's inconsistency

And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth. (Genesis 5:32)

According to Genesis Noah begat his 3 sons when he was 500 years old. We also read when Noah was 600 years old the flood happened

Noah was six hundred years old when the floodwaters came on the earth. (Genesis 7:6)

The flood remained for 150 days (Gen 7:24). And the flood lasted for 5 month (Gen 8:4)

Here’s the interesting part, note “Shem was 100 years old, “two years after the flood”.

This is the account of Shem's family line. Two years after the flood, when Shem was 100 years old, he became the father of Arphaxad. (Genesis 11:10)

How could Shem be 100 years old two years after the flood?

If Noah had Shem when he was 500 years old, and the flood happened when Noah was 600 years old. This would make Shem 100 years old when the flood happened. How them could Shem be 100 years old two after the flood? This means Noah had Shem when he was 498, or shem was 98 years old if we are to resolve this two-year discrepancy.


But the text is clear Noah had Shem when he was 500 years old. Unless you can show us else where Shem was born when Noah was 502 years old?  But till then this book cannot be taken as the very word of God.

----------------------------------


Another perfect example of inconsistency within the “supposed word of God”


21 The cities belonging to the tribe of the people of Judah in the extreme south, toward the boundary of Edom, were Kabzeel, Eder, Jagur, 22 Kinah, Dimonah, Adadah, 23 Kedesh, Hazor, Ithnan, 24 Ziph, Telem, Bealoth, 25 Hazor-hadattah, Kerioth-hezron (that is, Hazor), 26 Amam, Shema, Moladah,27 Hazar-gaddah, Heshmon, Beth-pelet, 28 Hazar-shual, Beersheba, Biziothiah, 29 Baalah, Iim, Ezem, 30 Eltolad, Chesil, Hormah, 31 Ziklag, Madmannah, Sansannah,32 Lebaoth, Shilhim, Ain, and Rimmon: in all, twenty-nine cities with their villages.(Joshua 15:21-32)

---------------------

Joshua must have had trouble with maths. He says there are 29 cities in verse 32, but he lists 38 in verses 21-32. Then he says there were 14 cities in verse 36, but lists 15 in verses 33-36.

33 And in the lowland, Eshtaol, Zorah, Ashnah, 34 Zanoah, En-gannim, Tappuah, Enam, 35 Jarmuth, Adullam, Socoh, Azekah, 36 Shaaraim, Adithaim, Gederah, Gederothaim: fourteen cities with their villages. (Joshua 15:33-36)

The question is why would Joshua who Moses laid his hand on by the command of Yahweh make such an error? “So the LORD said to Moses, "Take Joshua son of Nun, a man in whom is the spirit of leadership, and lay your hand on him.” (Numbers 27:18)


Either Yahweh who inspired Joshua made a mistake, or Joshua was written by some random tom who was bad at maths? 

----------------------


We have no doubt the Exodus of Moses with the children of Israel took place. However, the biblical narration is very dubious. It is highly unlikely such a “mass Exodus” happened. According to the Bible Moses travelled 2,600,000 (two million six hundred thousand) people.  This is a outrageous exaggeration from the biblical part.

The Israelites journeyed from Rameses to Sukkoth. There were about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children. (Exodus 12:37)

Note the above verse state, six hundred thousand men on foot, “BESIDES WOMEN AND CHILDREN”. If we add the women and children, then we’ll be counting over two million plus. The Talmud says that there had been twice as many Prophets as the number of people who left Egypt. (Megillah 14a).

The question is, how would have Moses controlled two and half million people at once? Lets’ also bear in mind along side the people there were animals and carriage, belonging etc. can you imagine over two million people travelling under the instruction of one man? How did he communicate with such many people?

Now let’s think of this for a moment. The population of Mauritius is 1.263 million,2016 census.  Mauritius has half the pollution of what Exodus tells us imagine that. The population of Qatar 2,168,673, down by 400,000 compare Exodus.

Again, we are not disputing that an Exodus did not happened, rather we are dismissing the erroneous biblical account of such a mass Exodus. 

-----------------

The age of Jacob when he meets Pharaoh                             130       Gen 47:9


Less  Age of Joseph when he explains Pharaoh's dream      30       Gen 41:46
       
Years of plenty before Jacob enters Egypt                               7        Gen 41:53
       
Years of famine before Jacob enters Egypt                     2  = 39        Gen 45:6

                                                                                                       ---
age of Jacob when Joseph is born                                          91



Joseph was born 14 years after Jacob departed to find a wife in Padan Aram,
refer Gen 30:25-43, 31:41. If Jacob was indeed 91 years old when Joseph was
born, then Jacob would have been 77 years old when he departed for Padan
Aram.


The age of Jacob when he departed for Padan Aram is important because this
is when a 'father' of Esau (and Jacob) died!


     Gen   27:41   So Esau hated Jacob because of the blessing with
                   which his father blessed him, and Esau said in his
                   heart, "The days of mourning for my father are at
                   hand; then I will kill my brother Jacob".

Since Isaac lived until 180 years of age (Gen 35:28) and Jacob was born
when Isaac was 60 years old (Gen 25:26), Isaac would not have died until
Jacob reached 120 years of age. How could this be if Isaac did not die yet?
Yet Genesis 27:41 says he did? Whats worse Genesis 35:28 says they both

buried their father?

---------------------

"It is I who made the earth, and created man upon it. I stretched out the heavens with My hands And I ordained all their host. (Isaiah 45:12)

According to Isaiah, Yahweh stretched out the heavens with his "HANDS" and  "ORDAINED" all its host, i.e. stars. This verse is contradicted by Psalms.

By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, by the breath of His mouth, all their host. (Psalm 33:6)

Here we have Yahweh saying, the heavens were made by his "WORD" and the hosts i.e. by his "BREATH". Completely different to what the god of Isaiah said?. 

Did Yahweh use his Hand and ordain or use his word and breath? It doesn’t stop here the very same book of Psalm tells us :

Of old hast thou laid the foundation of the earth: and the heavens are the work of thy hands.(Psalm 102:25)


The heaven was the work of Yahweh's hand yet 70 chapters earlier Yahweh said he used his word to make the heavens?


---------------------


According to David Write from Answering Genesis, Noah's flood happened 2348 BC.

"Using the Bible, well-documented historical events, and some math, we find that the Flood began approximately 4,359 years ago in the year 1656 AM or 2348 BC."

According Egyptologists the Great Pyramids of Giza was built during 2560 BCE

"The Great Pyramid of Giza was built for the Fourth Dynasty Pharaoh Khufu (or Cheops), and was completed around 2560 BCE."

Romer, John (2007). The Great Pyramid: Ancient Egypt Revisited. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Romer (2007), p. 8

this is unanimously agreed by Magnitudes of Egyptologists that the pyramids were built 2560 BCE . We also know that the Hebrews build the Pyramids in Giza. So the question is, if the Pyramids were built 200 years prior to the flood how did the Jews build the pyramids? Also don’t forget the Tower of Babel was built after the great flood.


This goes to show the Bible got it wrong and it's timeline has serious discrepancies.

-------------------------
Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. (Genesis 1:29)

 Accordingto Kent Hovind (an Evangelist), said "there is a vitamin found inside the seed of the peach called B17".
What he didn’t tell us is that, this seed carries cyanide. “One hundred grams of moist peach seed contains 88 mg of cyanide,while an equivalentamount of apricot seed holds 217 mg.”
A single peach fruit of course doesn’t have nearly as much as a hundred grams of seed. But how dangerous is that amount, as a high level reference? Now Kent Hovind claims B17 cures cancer, which is a medicine from the Bible. thereality is:
"Vitamin B17" has been shown to have no anti- cancer benefit, or else why don't Bible believing cancer patient use it? It's only effect is cyanide poisoning. we know there are many more poisonous fruits, that if eaten could  have a life threatening effect. We can conclude the author of the Bible did now know how dangerous some fruits and seeds could be.
-----------------------

Major historical error found in the “supposed preserved Torah”
Only King Og of Bashan was left of the remaining Rephaim. His bedstead, an iron bedstead, is now in Rabbah of the Ammonites; it is nine cubits long and four cubits wide, by the standard cubit! (Deuteronomy 3:11)
Moses mentions Rabbath, where Og's bedstead is located. Moses could not have any knowledge of Rabbath,which was not captured by the Hebrews until David's time,500 years later

Now Joab fought against Rabbah of the Ammonites and took the royal city. (2 Sam 12:26).
This clearly shows Deuteronomy was written much later after  Kings David’s arrival.

The book of Joshua contains anachronism in the following verses proving it was written much after Joshua the son of Nun. another reason to dismiss the Bible being the inspired word of God.
----------------
About the City of Dan
When the territory of the Danites was lost to them, they went up and attacked Leshem, took it, put it to the sword and occupied it. They settled in Leshem and named it Dan after their ancestor. Joshua 19:47
But this incidence happened after his death
Then they took what Micah had made, and his priest, and went on to Laish, against a people at peace and secure. They attacked them with the sword and burned down their city. There was no one to rescue them because they lived a long way from Sidon and had no relationship with anyone else. The city was in a valley near Beth Rehob. The Danites rebuilt the city and settled there. They named it Dan after their ancestor Dan, who was born to Israel—though the city used to be called Laish. There the Danites set up for themselves the idol, and Jonathan son of Gershom, the son of Moses, and his sons were priests for the tribe of Dan until the time of the captivity of the land. They continued to use the idol Micah had made, all the time the house of God was in Shiloh. Judges 18:27-31
Joshua wrote about his death:
After these things, Joshua son of Nun, the servant of the Lord, died at the age of a hundred and ten. And they buried him in the land of his inheritance, at Timnath Serah in the hill country of Ephraim, north of Mount Gaash. Israel served the Lord throughout the lifetime of Joshua and of the elders who outlived him and who had experienced everything the Lord had done for Israel. Joshua 24:29-31.
--------------------

Miracle indeed wouldn't you say kodede lol A jew can marry a 3 year old girl (Talmud Sanhedrin 55b)
Jesus was 12 when he was left alone by hos parents at the temple Age 12/ 1+2 = 3 cross reference Jew can marry a 3 year old Jesus was 30 when he stared his ministry Age 30/ 3+0 = 3 cross reference Jew can marry a 3 year old Jesus was 33 years old when he was crucified Age 33/ 3-3 = 3 cross reference Jew can marry a 3 year old Jesus had 12 disciples Disciples 12/ 1+2 = 3 cross reference Jew can marry a 3 year old Jesus spoke about 3 days and 3 nights? Time length 3 days 3 nights/ 3d -3n = 3 cross reference Jew can marry a 3 year old Christians claim God is triune, (trinity) 3 persons in 1 Triune 3 persons in 1 / 3-1 = 3 cross reference Jew can marry a 3 year old
There are 39 books of the Old Testament, we presume Jesus would have known about this, though the bible was not canonised (note the New Testament did not exist then.)
Books of the Old Testament 39/ 3-9 = 3 cross reference Jew  can marry a 3 year old
The numerical value of the name Jesus in Greek is 888
888 divide by 8 = 111/ 1+1+1 = 3 cross reference Jew  can marry a 3 year old

Corinthians 7:36 speaks of child marriage
7 x 36 = 252 / 252 divide by 7 = 36 / minus 3 from 6 your left with 3, cross reference Jew  can marry a 3 year old
Woooow miracle Christians man god's age perfectly fits with the Talmudic age for marriage ( 3 years old)
Note the age for marriage is nowhere to be found in the entire bible, yet the age of Jesus and Talmud fit perfectly like a glove lol
----------------------

There goes your preserved bible
Now Nahash king of the Ammonites oppressed the Gadites and the
Reubenites severely. He gouged out the right eye of all of them and there was no one to save Israel. There did not remain an Israelite man who was beyond the Jordan whose right eye Nahash king of the Ammonites did not gouge out, except seven thousand men who escaped from the hand ofthe Ammonites and went to Jabesh Gilead. And they were there about a month. (1 Samuel 11 DSS 4Q51 Samuela)
Amazing Christians tell us the Bible was preserved like the diaper of a baby once defecated on it's never reused, i.e. once the Bible was penned no alteration was made ,nor any changes, nor was anything added or taken off. Clearly that’s a lie . This lengthy reading is not in any other known Bible text i.e. Septuagint or Masoretic, but Josephus seems to be aware of it in Antiquities of the Jews, book VI, chapter 5. the question is Josephus was aware of such reading which pre dates the Masoretic and Septuagint, why then is it missing from the current Bible?
---------------------------
Do you believe this
God gave Solomon wisdom as measureless as the sand on the seashore.
(1-King 4:29)
Solomon's temple was only about ninety feet long by thirty feet wide, and
(1-Kings 6:2, 2 Chronicles 3:3)
yet --
153,300 persons were employed to build it.
(1-Kings 5:15-16 )
It took seven years to build.
(1-Kings 6:38)
13,100,000 lbs. of gold and 116,400,000 lbs. of silver were consumed in its construction.
(1-Chronicles 22:14)
24,000 supervisors and 6,000 officials and judges were employed to manage it.
(1-Chronicles 23:4)
The whole world sought an audience with Solomon to hear his wisdom
(1-King 10:24)

1 Kings 6:2 gives us the measurements of his temple: 60 cubits long (one cubit is 1.5 feet, so that makes this 90 feet long), 20 cubits (30 feet) wide, and 30 cubits (45 feet) tall. As far as churches go, it seems kind of small, especially given Solomon’s wealth. He could have afforded to build the first mega church. To put its size in perspective, in baseball the plates are 90 feet apart. The length of the church was merely the length of running to first base.
In 2 Chronicles 2:1-2 we are shown the size of the workforce Solomon employed to build this church. He “assigned 70,000 men to carry loads and 80,000 men to quarry stone in the mountains and 3,600 to supervise them.” That’s 153,600 men just to build a church. I’m not saying it’s easy for iron age men to carve stones out of mountains, but 153,600 men seems massively absurd. That’s about the total population of Springfield, Massachusetts! Imagine if everyone in Springfield suddenly quit their jobs to build a church that could only seat–at best–a few hundred.
----------------------

Scientific blunder star wars
How did the stars fight?

From the heavens the stars fought, from their courses they fought against Sisera. (Judges 5:20)

Interesting stars were fighting Sisera. It's funny how Christian bring up stars as missiles from the Quran, yet their own bible tells us stars fought?

RabbeinuBahya, Bereshit 1:14:9 commentary. Rabbi sees the verse as a problem Looking at the plain meaning of our verses: The reason why one of the two luminaries is described as (relatively ) small is because whenever there are two phenomena both described as “great or large,” it is usual that one of the two is larger than the other.

If youwill examine the text of our paragraph in the Torah carefully, you will find that it explains four separate matters. 1) These luminaries are always found in the same positions which have been assigned to them initially, i.e. they are stationary and do not move. [Here too the astronomy of our author is based on outdated concepts. The luminaries are deemed captive on the periphery of the planet and are assumed to move with it automatically. The only part of this chapter which is relevant to our times is that the moon does not have light of its own and that only the sun has been assigned by G’d to emit light. I see no point in translating discarded concepts even if the author thought he could use scripture to support the theories current in his time. Ed.]
Take note the Rabbi wrote " I see no point in translating discarded concepts even if the author thought he could use scripture to support the theories current in his time.". Rabbiis admitting the author messed up. also notice how the rabbis said"AUTHOR" he knows this wasn't written by Joshua rather an unknown scribe.

--------------
Outrageous ! Christians have no problem accepting such nonsense
Then a wind from the Lord sprang up, and it brought quail from the sea and let them fall beside the camp, about a day's journey on this side and a day's journey on the other side, around the camp, and about two cubits above the ground. And the people rose all that day and all night and all the next day, and gathered the quail. Those who gathered least gathered ten homers. And they spread them out for themselves all around the camp (Numbers 11:31-32)
---------------------------------------------------
There's a problem with the sheer number of quail this story involves. It seems the quail are spread over a circle around the camp, with so many that they are piled up about 0.9 meters high. If we conservatively estimate a day's journey to be 8 hours' walk at 5 kilometers per hour, the volume of quail is about 4,500,000,000 cubic meters. Even loosely packed, the number of quail is getting into the trillions. There does seem to be an implausibly large population of quail in the area.
God sends quails to feed his people until they were "two cubits [about a meter] high upon the face of the earth." Taking the "face of the earth" to be a circle with a radius of say 30 kilometers (an approximate day's journey), this would amount to 3 trillion (3x1012) liters of quails. At 2 quails per liter, this would provide a couple million quails for each of several million people.
Let's not forget everyone who eats the quail gets plague. It is well known the bible exaggerates time to time thinking we are STUPID and will believe such absurdities.

------------------------------

Interesting!
According to the Talmud, those who tried to build the "tower of babel" and wag war with God were turned into "APES, spirits, devils, and female-demons"
Rather, Rabbi Yirmeya bar Elazar says: They divided into three factions; one said: Let us ascend to the top of the tower and dwell there. And one said: Let us ascend to the top of the tower and engage in idol worship. And one said: Let us ascend to the top of the tower and wage war. With regard to that faction that said: Let us ascend to the top of the tower and dwell there, God dispersed them. And that faction that said: Let us ascend to the top of the tower and wage war, became apes, and spirits, and demons, and female demons. And with regard to that faction that said: Let us ascend to the top of the tower and engage in idol wor-ship, it is written: “Because there the Lord confounded the language of all the earth” (Genesis 11:9). (Talmud Sanhedrin 109a)
----------------
How beautiful was Sarah?
As he was about to enter Egypt, he said to his wife Sarai, “I know what a beautiful woman you are. (Genesis 12:11)
Rabbinic Commentary
Rabbi Bena’a says: I gazed at his, Adam’s, two heels, and they shone so brightly that they are similar to two suns. Along these lines, the Gemara states that all people compared to Sarah are like a monkey compared to a human,as Sarah was exceedingly beautiful; Sarah compared to Eve is like a monkey compared to a human; Eve compared to Adam is like a monkey compared to a human; and Adam compared to the Divine Presence is like a monkey compared to a human. (TALMUD Bava Batra Daf 58a)

--------------------------

Did yahweh create everyone in his image or just adam?
So God created man in his own image (Genesis 1:27)
(Note only Adam was created in the image of God not every single human so why not worship Adam as he has an exclusive resemblance to Yahweh?.)
And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth: (Genesis 5:3)
Did you catch the joke here Seth his son had his own likeness and was created in the image of Adam?. None of the other sons or daughters had any resemblance to Adam which means Yahweh gave special privilege whilst creating Adam why giving his own image his likeness his RESEMBLANCE!.
Next time Christians say God created man his own image tell him Adam had exclusive resemblance to God so why don't you worship him!.

-------------------
Yahweh has the image of animals (dog, cat, pig etc)
From all the clean animals you shall take seven each, man and wife And from all unclean animals you shall take two, man and wife (Genesis 7:2)
מכל הבהמה הטהורה תקח לך שבעה שבעה איש ואשתו ומן הבהמה אשר לא טהרה הוא שנים איש אשתו
If you read the verse carefully you’ll notice something unusual. Yahweh seems to refer the animals as “man and wife”. The Hebrew in the Masoretic text is very clear, (איש ואשתו man and wife). Why did Yahweh use such a term for animals? The Bible is clear between the creation of man and animals.
So what's with the confusion you may ask?
This creates another problem, Genesis 1:26 it says, “Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image,”.If man is supposed to be in God’s image and the same God refers to animals as “man” does this means animals were also made in Yahweh’s image? Maybe those Christians who claim the Holy Ghost is guiding them could explain this problem.
------------

King Ahaz was 11 years old when he became a father

Twenty years old was Ahaz when he began to reign, and reigned sixteen years in Jerusalem, and did not that which was right in the sight of the Lord his God, like David his father. (2 Kings 16:2)

20 And Ahaz slept with his fathers, and was buried with his fathers in the city of David: and Hezekiah his son reigned in his stead. (2 Kings 16:20)

Note after Ahaz his son Hezekiah succeeded him

1Now it came to pass in the third year of Hoshea son of Elah king of Israel, that Hezekiah the son of Ahaz king of Judah began to reign.

2 Twenty and five years old was he when he began to reign; and he reigned twenty and nine years in Jerusalem. His mother's name also was Abi, the daughter of Zachariah. (2 Kings 18:1-2)

Ahaz was thirty-six years old when he died. His twenty-five-year-old son Hezekiah succeeded him. Thus, Ahaz was a ten or eleven-year-old father.


The question is, how old was his wife if he was 11?


-----------


Genesis 1:2 explained







Wednesday, 6 September 2017

Speaking in Tongues and Virgin Births

written by Dr. Bart D Ehrman 

I will deal with two questions in this week’s Readers’ Mailbag.  The first has to do with why some conservative Christian theologians insist that the “gifts of the Spirit” (such as speaking in tongues and doing miracles) are no longer available to believers today (doesn’t the Bible indicate that they are?), and the second about whether the Gospel of Matthew mistranslates or misunderstands the passage of Scripture that allegedly indicated that the messiah would be born of a woman who was still a virgin.
I need to unpack the first question before giving it, since it may not make sense on first reading.  The questioner is asking about the scene in the book of Acts, chapter 2, where, on the day of Pentecost, the Spirit comes upon the apostles allowing them to speak in foreign tongues.   Peter explains to the crowds that this is a fulfillment of what had been prophesied in Scripture.
Today conservative theologians are split on the question of whether the Spirit still empowers believers to speak in tongues and do other miraculous deeds.  Some say emphatically yes, others emphatically no.  The person who asks the following question refers to this as the “cessationist debate” – that is, the debate over whether the gifts of the Spirit have now “ceased” to be given.  The questioner doesn’t understand how someone would could interpret Acts this way.  This is his question:

QUESTION:
Can you elucidate a little on the cessationist debate with respect to Pentecost and Acts 2:39 in particular where “the promise is for you and your children” bit would seem to obviously extend beyond just the very next generation of those present?  What does the Greek seem to imply?  In your view, why did so much of believing Christian intelligentsia come to sacrifice the continuity of miracle working and accept cessationism? Was it careful reading or just confronting reality?

RESPONSE
I’ll give a personal response to this question.  When I was seventeen, and just heading off to Bible school, I was involved in a charismatic Christian group where we practiced speaking in tongues, and people prophesied, and healed the sick by the laying on of hands, and did other amazing things because they had the “Spiritual gifts.”
When I went to Moody Bible Institute, I was taught that these manifestations of the Spirit were in fact from the Devil, that the gifts were no longer given.  Why?  Because Paul had said in 1 Corinthians 13:8-10, in a context where he is speaking about such gifts (prophecy, tongues, healing etc.), that “Love never ends; as for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away.  For our knowledge is imperfect and our prophecy is imperfect; but when the perfect comes, the imperfect will pass away.”  That was interpreted to mean that the spiritual gifts were given to the church only for a short time, until the perfect revelation of God, that is, the New Testament, was written.  Since now we have “what is perfect” (the Bible) then “what was imperfect” (spiritual gifts) are no longer needed or legitimate.
How committed was the faculty and administration of Moody Bible Institute to this view?  On each floor of each dormitory there was a senior student in charge, the “Resident Assistant” or RA.  Each RA had, next to the phone in his room, a card indicating what number to call in case of an emergency.  The emergencies were listed, with the appropriate phone numbers, and included “fire, medical emergency, and … charismatic activity.”  Really.

QUESTION:
I’ve read somewhere, in some atheist tract, that the original Biblical term for Mary was the Hebrew word “amah,” meaning “young girl.” The author of the tract went on to say that a mistranslation into Greek resulted in the word “virgin.” Any truth to that?

RESPONSE
This is a kind of complicated matter, and what you read was close to being right, but not exactly.  I explained the actual issue a long while ago on the blog, and this is what I said then.  The context was a discussion of the “fulfillment citations” found in the Gospel of Matthew – that is, passages where Matthew quotes a passage of the Old Testament and claims that the prophecy found there had been fulfilled by Jesus.   Matthew uses these fulfillment citations to demonstrate that Jesus really was the messiah.  One of them is in Matthew 1:22-23, a quotation of Isaiah 7:14 to show that Jesus must have been the messiah because his mother was a virgin.
There are numerous problems with these fulfillment citations.  Of most relevance to the season we are in now is the quotation of Isaiah 7:14.  As I mentioned in other posts, from what seems like many years ago (though it was just months), the author of Isaiah does not predict that a future messiah will be born of a virgin.   For several reasons.
First, Isaiah is not talking about a future messiah.  Read all of Isaiah 7 and you’ll see – the messiah is not mentioned in the passage.  That is, the world “messiah” does not occur.  And Isaiah is not talking about a future savior of any kind.  The context is quite clear.   Ahaz the king of Judea is in a bad way because the kings of Syria and Israel have ganged up upon him and laid siege to his capital city of Jerusalem.  Ahaz is in a panic and doesn’t know what to do.  He calls in Isaiah, who tells him.  He has to do nothing.   There is a young woman who has become pregnant.  Before the child to be born to her is old enough to know right from wrong, he will be eating curds and honey (that is, there will be prosperity in the land) and the two kings who are now threatening will be dispersed.  That’s the context of Isaiah 7:14, which in its original context does not say that “a virgin will conceive and bear a son” but instead “a young woman is with child and will bear a son.”
The word Isaiah uses is “ALMA,” a word that means young woman without reference to whether she has ever had sex or not (as opposed to the Hebrew word “BETHULAH” which does mean a woman who has never had sex, a virgin); and he says that the woman is already pregnant, not that she will become pregnant.
Matthew, of course, did not read Isaiah in Hebrew but in Greek, and the Greek translators (of the “Septuagint” – i.e., the Greek version of the Jewish Scriptures) translated ALMA with the Greek word PARTHENOS, which also meant “young maiden” but eventually took on the meaning of “young maiden who has not yet had sex” – i.e., virgin.   Matthew read the passage that way, and interpreted it to refer not to something in Isaiah’s time but in the distant future, with reference to the messiah.
It’s hard to know whether Matthew is simply misinterpreting Isaiah as predicting the messiah would be virgin-born or if – to be more generous to him – he thinks that Jesus “fills the prophet’s words full of meaning” in the second sense of “fulfillment” I mentioned above.  In that sense, Isaiah may have one thing in mind, but the appearance of Jesus gives that thing fuller meaning, salvation again not from one’s political enemies but from the greatest enemy of all, the sin of the world.

Aisha’s marriage revisited


Screen Shot 2017-09-05 at 22.24.49

Tuesday, 5 September 2017

Problems with Some Bible Translations, including the King James: A Blast from the Past


In my Introduction to the New Testament undergraduate class this semester, I have told the students that they can use most any Bible translation they want, but I prefer the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), and I do *not* want them using either a paraphrase or the King James.  Some of them want to know why, and so I explain to them.  Here is a post on the topic from almost exactly five years ago.  (Note: I’m talking about undergraduates; my graduate students read the NT in Greek) (and also note: despite what I say about the NIV I certainly allow students to use it in class, since it is the most popular translation on college campuses today)
*********************************************************************
I have indicated that my preferred translation is the NRSV. Everyone, of course, has their favorite. My judgment is that among main-line, serious biblical scholars, the NRSV is far and away the preferred translation. But it is not so among general readers. I believe the King James Bible (the KJV) (or its slight revision: The New King James) and the New International Version (NIV) are better sellers among the population at large. So let me say a few words about these two. (Some readers of this blog will want to write to me to ask what I think of their own preferred translation: the Jerusalem Bible; the New English Version; the New American Standard Bible; etc etc. Most of the time I tell them that it’s fine. It just isn’t the one that I think is the best)
First: The King James. Published in 1611, the KJV (or “Authorized Version” as it was called, since it was a translation “authorized” by the head of the Anglican Church – guess who? King James of England), is one of the great classics of the English language and ought to be read and learned by everyone. If you want to read a fascinating account of the making of the KJV, see Adam Nicolson’s terrific study, God’s Secretaries: The Making of the King James Bible.

Even though it is a great piece of English literature, the KJV is not a great study Bible.  That is for a couple of reasons.  First, when the KJV translators were doing their work at the beginning of the 17th century, they did not have access to most of the thousands of manuscripts of the New Testament that have been discovered and studied in the intervening centuries.  As a result, especially for the NT, the KJV is based on poor manuscripts, and that has a serious effect on the translation.  The KJV includes numerous passages that were not originally part of the NT and altered forms of yet other passages (most famously: the “final twelve verses” of Mark; the story of the woman taken in adultery in John; the passage affirming the Trinity in 1 John 5:7-8; etc.).  Not good, if you want to know what Mark, John, Paul, etc. “originally” wrote.
Second, as much as people (somewhat ignorantly) want to deny it, the English language has changed dramatically over the past four hundred years.  There are places where the KJV just doesn’t seem to make sense in our modern language.  Worse, there are places where the words do seem to make sense, but in fact they meant something different in 1611 from what they mean today.  As just one of my favorite examples:  in Revelation 17 the prophet has a vision of the horrid “Whore of Babylon” who is a terrible and frightening figure seated on a beast with seven heads and ten horns, and who is “drunk with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus.”  And after the author describes this horrific woman, he says that he “looked upon her with great admiration.”   (!)   400 years ago “admiration” meant “astonishment.”  It doesn’t carry the same meaning today, leading to a very real possibility that someone reading the passage may be more than a bit confused.
Second: the NIV.   I will admit that the NIV is a very, very readable translation, and that it was produced by some very fine scholars.   The problem is that to be on the NIV translation committee a scholar had to be a committed evangelical Christian with specific views about the infallibility of the Bible (I don’t recall just now the specific doctrinal statement on the Bible that they had to sign off on, but it involved a high view of biblical inspiration).  That means that there was one perspective on the Bible represented on the committee, and it had a real effect on translation decisions that were made.
Rather than spell out the differences for you, I’ll suggest that if you’re really interested, you just do an exercise yourself.   Compare the three accounts of Paul’s conversion in Acts 9, 22, and 26 in the NRSV and notice the detailed differences; then do the same thing with the NIV, and see if any of these differences have been smoothed over.  Or do the same thing with the sale of Joseph by his brothers to the Midianites (or was it the Ishmaelites?) in Genesis 37.
My view is that a Bible translation should not be driven by a theological view of the text but by the science of philology, and that translating the Bible is in principle no different from translating Homer, Plato, Epictetus, or Ignatius of Antioch.   The translation should be made with an eye of communicating in the new language the words, phrases, sentences, and paragraphs of the original language, as readably, but also as accurately, as possible.  I think the NRSV does this better than most, if not all, the other translations.

Sunday, 3 September 2017

it was Ishmael Pbuh

Qur’anic Evidence

In Surah As-Saffat, Allah gives tidings of Isma’el, then there is a narration of the story of sacrifice, then Allah gives tidings of Is’haq, followed by Ya’qoob:
وَقَالَ إِنِّي ذَاهِبٌ إِلَىٰ رَبِّي سَيَهْدِينِ رَبِّ هَبْ لِي مِنَ الصَّالِحِينَ فَبَشَّرْنَاهُ بِغُلَامٍ حَلِيمٍ فَلَمَّا بَلَغَ مَعَهُ السَّعْيَ قَالَ يَا بُنَيَّ إِنِّي أَرَىٰ فِي الْمَنَامِ أَنِّي أَذْبَحُكَ فَانْظُرْ مَاذَا تَرَىٰ ۚ قَالَ يَا أَبَتِ افْعَلْ مَا تُؤْمَرُ ۖ سَتَجِدُنِي إِنْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ مِنَ الصَّابِرِينَ فَلَمَّا أَسْلَمَا وَتَلَّهُ لِلْجَبِينِ وَنَادَيْنَاهُ أَنْ يَا إِبْرَاهِيمُ قَدْ صَدَّقْتَ الرُّؤْيَا ۚ إِنَّا كَذَٰلِكَ نَجْزِي الْمُحْسِنِينَ إِنَّ هَٰذَا لَهُوَ الْبَلَاءُ الْمُبِينُ وَفَدَيْنَاهُ بِذِبْحٍ عَظِيمٍ وَتَرَكْنَا عَلَيْهِ فِي الْآخِرِينَ سَلَامٌ عَلَىٰ إِبْرَاهِيمَ كَذَٰلِكَ نَجْزِي الْمُحْسِنِينَ إِنَّهُ مِنْ عِبَادِنَا الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَبَشَّرْنَاهُ بِإِسْحَاقَ نَبِيًّا مِنَ الصَّالِحِينَ وَبَارَكْنَا عَلَيْهِ وَعَلَىٰ إِسْحَاقَ ۚ وَمِنْ ذُرِّيَّتِهِمَا مُحْسِنٌ وَظَالِمٌ لِنَفْسِهِ مُبِينٌ
And [then] he said, "Indeed, I will go to [where I am ordered by] my Lord; He will guide me. My Lord, grant me [a child] from among the righteous." So We gave him good tidings of a forbearing boy. And when he reached with him [the age of] exertion, he said, "O my son, indeed I have seen in a dream that I [must] sacrifice you, so see what you think." He said, "O my father, do as you are commanded. You will find me, if Allah wills, of the steadfast." And when they had both submitted and he put him down upon his forehead, We called to him, "O Abraham, You have fulfilled the vision." Indeed, We thus reward the doers of good. Indeed, this was the clear trial. And We ransomed him with a great sacrifice, And We left for him [favorable mention] among later generations: "Peace upon Abraham." Indeed, We thus reward the doers of good. Indeed, he was of Our believing servants. And We gave him good tidings of Isaac, a prophet from among the righteous. And We blessed him and Isaac. But among their descendants is the doer of good and the clearly unjust to himself.
Qur’an 37:99-113 (Sahih International translation)
It may be concluded that the above-mentioned verses are relating the story in sequence. If so, then the sacrifice was Isma'el. However, it is well known that the word and in Arabic does not necessarily indicate sequence. For example, in Qur’an 54:18, Allah says: “'Aad denied; and how [severe] were My punishment and warning.” Allah’s punishment occurred after His warning, but the verse mentions the word "punishment" first (not in sequence).
When the Qur'an mentions the good tidings of Is'haq:
وَلَقَدْ جَاءَتْ رُسُلُنَا إِبْرَاهِيمَ بِالْبُشْرَىٰ قَالُوا سَلَامًا ۖ قَالَ سَلَامٌ ۖ فَمَا لَبِثَ أَنْ جَاءَ بِعِجْلٍ حَنِيذٍ فَلَمَّا رَأَىٰ أَيْدِيَهُمْ لَا تَصِلُ إِلَيْهِ نَكِرَهُمْ وَأَوْجَسَ مِنْهُمْ خِيفَةً ۚ قَالُوا لَا تَخَفْ إِنَّا أُرْسِلْنَا إِلَىٰ قَوْمِ لُوطٍ وَامْرَأَتُهُ قَائِمَةٌ فَضَحِكَتْ فَبَشَّرْنَاهَا بِإِسْحَاقَ وَمِنْ وَرَاءِ إِسْحَاقَ يَعْقُوبَ قَالَتْ يَا وَيْلَتَىٰ أَأَلِدُ وَأَنَا عَجُوزٌ وَهَٰذَا بَعْلِي شَيْخًا ۖ إِنَّ هَٰذَا لَشَيْءٌ عَجِيبٌ
And certainly did Our messengers come to Abraham with good tidings; they said, "Peace." He said, "Peace," and did not delay in bringing [them] a roasted calf. But when he saw their hands not reaching for it, he distrusted them and felt from them apprehension. They said, "Fear not. We have been sent to the people of Lot." And his Wife was standing, and she smiled. Then We gave her good tidings of Isaac and after Isaac, Jacob. She said, "Woe to me! Shall I give birth while I am an old woman and this, my husband, is an old man? Indeed, this is an amazing thing!"
Qur’an Hud 11:69-72 (Sahih International translation)
It is mentioned that Ibrahim was informed about Is'haq, and after Is'haq comes Ya'qoub. We know now that Ya'qoub was Is'haq's son, but from the verse it could be that he would be Is'haq's son, or another son of Ibrahim after Is'haq, and so on. There is no explicit mention in the verse that Ya'qoub would be Is'haq's son.

Hadiths’ Evidence

The most famous hadith that mentions Isma’el by name was documented in Musnad Ahmad:
إن جبريل ذهب بإبراهيم إلى جمرة العقبة فعرض له الشيطان فرماه بسبع حصيات فساخ ثم أتى الجمرة الوسطى فعرض له الشيطان فرماه بسبع حصيات فساخ ثم أتى الجمرة القصوى فعرض له الشيطان فرماه بسبع حصيات فساخ فلما أراد إبراهيم أن يذبح ابنه اسماعيل قال لأبيه: يا أبت أوثقني لا أضطرب فينتضح عليك من دمي إذا ذبحتني فشده فلما أخذ الشفرة فأراد أن يذبحه نودي من خلفه أن يا إبراهيم قد صدقت الرؤيا
Jibril went with Ibrahim to the Jamrah of Aqaba, the Shaitan appeared to him, so Ibrahim threw seven pebbles at the Shaitan. The Shaitan disappeared. When Ibrahim reached the middle jamrah, the Shaitan re-appeared to him, so Ibrahim threw seven pebbles at the Shaitan. The Shaitan disappeared again. When Ibrahim reached the farthest jamrah, , the Shaitan re-appeared to him, so Ibrahim threw seven pebbles at the Shaitan. The Shaitan disappeared again. When Ibrahim wanted to slay his son Isma’el, Isma’el told his father: O father, tie me up so that if I jitter, my blood does not get on you when you slay me. So Ibrahim tightened the knot, then when he took the knife to slay him, he heard from behind: "O Abraham, You have fulfilled the vision."
— Musnad Ahmad, Hadith #144283 (my own translation, so treat with care).
This hadith is narrated through the authority of ‘Ataa’ ibn Al-Sa’eb through ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas. Although ‘Ataa’ ibn Al-Sa’eb is considered a trusted source, during his last years, his memory became weaker, and as such with this particular hadith which is not definite when he narrated it, it is not considered an authentic hadith by some scholars.
There is a number of other hadiths that say the sacrifice was Is’haq, but all of them do not go above the level weak (weak, very weak, or fabricated). Thus, in terms of hadiths, there is no conclusive evidence that the sacrifice was either Isma’el or Is’haq.

Scholars' Opinions

There are several books that discussed the topics from Zahrat At-Tafasir to Al-Dorr Al-Manthour to At-Tafsir Al-Kabir to Zaad Al-Mi'aad to Al-Bedaya Wa Al-Nehaya, among others. There is a difference in opinions. In summary, Abdullah ibn 'Abbas, 'Abdullah ibn Mas'ood, 'Umar ibn Al-Khattab, and 'Ali ibn Abi Talib, Al-Zohry, among others, said that the sacrifice was Is'haq. Abdullah ibn 'Umar, Sa'id ibn Al-Musayyib, Hassan Al-Basry, Mujahid, 'Ataa' ibn Abi Rabah, among others, said that the sacrifice was Isma'el.
We know from the Seerah that Isma'el was in Mecca, and that Is'haq was in Jerusalem, and that the sacrifice act took place in Mecca. However, from a scholarly point of view, this is not enough evidence to draw a conclusion.
The bottom line is we do not know which son was the son of sacrifice, neither should we be too bothered about it. As Muslims, we believe both Isma'el and Is'haq were prophets of Allah, and that Ibrahim was a mighty prophet of Allah. We also believe that Allah tests his prophets at the highest level of tests (as their faith is also at the highest level). It was a test from Allah to Ibrahim and his son, and they passed. May Allah's blessings be on all of them.

Where can I find the Injeel?

The argument “Where is the Injeel?” is an absurd rhetorical claim that doesn’t make any sense, as we will demonstrate. Christians often disp...