HHMI Newsgroup Archives

Anne,

Shalom! Before I discuss Michael Drazin's book, let me make the following introduction: Sometimes this whole kind of discussion seems absurd. It's like two people arguing whether it can theoretically rain cats and dogs when, in fact, outside it is. Similarly, people could argue that, since it never rains fire and brimstone from heaven onto earth, therefore the biblical account of Sodom's destruction cannot be correct. But if you are a believer, then you first accept the truth of the biblical text, and only then can you hope to understand it better.

Thus, we could say: look, Shoshana, the New Testament reports that Jesus was born of a virgin, that He did miracles, that He raised the dead, that He taught wondrously, that He was killed by a Jewish-Roman conspiracy, and that He finally rose from the dead. Whether you like this or not does not matter; you either accept its truth or not.

There is another case like this in the Old Testament. God originally had told Abraham:

Ge 15:13 And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;

And then it says:

Ex 12:40 Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years.
Ex 12:41 And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt.

But from other verses in Exodus, the rabbis calculate that Israel was in Egypt only 210 years. So they ask how this fits with the prophecy to Abraham of 400 or 430 years. And they explain:

>From the Covenant of the Parts to the birth of Isaac was 30 years, from Isaac's birth to the Exodus from Egypt was 400 years, and during that whole period of time Israel were strangers in a land not their own. Thus the 430 years included all the years of the Patriarchs, when Israel was not in physical bondage in Egypt, as well as the time of actual physical bondage. They further explain that of the 210 years in Egypt, only 86 were of actual harsh bondage. The rest of the time, while the Sons of Jacob yet lived, the Israelites flourished.

I mention all this to show that the rabbis themselves are prepared to resort to extreme measures to explain seemingly irresolvable difficulties in the Scriptures. Most of the time Jews who oppose Jesus are not aware of these efforts, and so they imagine that only the New Testament presents textual difficulties. This cannot be further from the truth.

The rabbis also explain that most of the Israelites who did not leave Egypt with Moses (about 80% of the people) did not accept that their time of Deliverance could arrive before the entire period of 430 (or 400) years was up. They considered Moses' claims to be fraudulent and chose not to follow him into the wilderness. And this despite the fact that Moses convincingly displayed very anointed power in the plagues and other miracles.

Similarly do Jewish objections to Jesus, despite His overwhelming demonstration of Divine Grace and Power, derive from the fact that He did not fit in precisely to every expectation that they had about Messiah's purposes. But we must accept Scripture first and only then hope to understand them through the illumination of the Holy Spirit.

And as Jesus Himself said of His own recalcitrant generation:

John 10

37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.

Furthermore, books like Drazin's that quibble over minor textual discrepancies in the New Testament completely overlook the wild and ridiculous assertions and outright lies that congest the pages of the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds. For instance the Talmudic claim that the numbers of dead in the Betar uprising that the Romans crushed reached into the billions, and that the blood of the dead flowed like a river into the Mediterranean, and that the piles of bodies did not decay for 20 years, is a total lie. And the Talmud is filled with so many countless stupid home remedies, superstitions, and fantasies that a good portion of Yeshiva study is devoted simply to sorting out what parts of the Talmud are relevant and what parts are simply folklore. The most prestigious Orthodox rabbis today are those who are considered to have the authority to decide what parts of the Talmud are to be taken literally and what parts may - and indeed must -be dismissed as irrelevant fantasy!

1 Timothy 1.4: Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.

Adam Clarke's Commentary

Neither give heed to fables] Idle fancies; things of no moment; doctrines and opinions unauthenticated; silly legends, of which no people ever possessed a greater stock than the Jews. Their Talmud abounds with them; and the English reader may find them in abundance in Stehlin's Jewish Traditions, 2 vols. 8vo.=20

1 Timothy 4.7: But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness.

Adam Clarke's Commentary

But refuse profane and old wives' fables] This seems to refer particularly to the Jews, whose Talmudical writings are stuffed with the most ridiculous and profane fables that ever disgraced the human intellect.

__________________

Now let me proceed to the main part of my message:

I have been reading Michael Drazin's book, Their Hollow Inheritance, and I have found some interesting answers to some of the questions he proposes against the veracity of the New Testament. I warn you in advance that you may not like these answers, because they will shake up your confidence in Drazin and all the anti-missionaries like him, who throw up half-truths in their zeal to debunk the book of Messiah Jesus. So if you do not want to be disturbed out of your comfort zone of Jewish rabbinical falsehood, then I suggest you delete this message right now. But if you are brave enough to desire eternal life, no matter what the cost, then please read on:

Drazen reports the following "inaccuracies" in the New Testament:
I Samuel 21:2

Then David came to Nob, to Ahimelech the priest, and Ahimelech came to meet David trembling, and said to him:

"Why are you alone, and no man with you?"

New Testament Distortion

Mark 2:25--26

And he [Jesus] said to them: "Have you never read what David did, when he was in need and was hungry, he and those who were with him; how he entered the House of G-d, when Abiathar was high priest,..." Ahimelech was high priest at that time. Only after his death (I Samuel 22:18) did his son, Abiathar, succeed him:

I Samuel 30:7
And David said to Abiathar the priest, the son of Ahimelech..

and John Calvin comments in his Geneva Bible Notes:

In 1Sa 21:1 he is called Ahimelech and his son is called Abiathar, but by conferring other places it is plain that both of them had two names; see 1Ch 24:6; 2Sa 8:17; 15:29; 1Ki 2:26; 2Ki 25:18.

2 Samuel 8.15-18
And David reigned over all Israel; and David executed judgment and justice unto all his people. And Joab the son of Zeruiah was over the host; and Jehoshaphat the son of Ahilud was recorder; And Zadok the son of Ahitub, and Ahimelech the son of Abiathar, were the priests; and Seraiah was the scribe; And Benaiah the son of Jehoiada was over both the Cherethites and the Pelethites; and David's sons were chief rulers.

Thus clearly Drazin is wrong, for the High Priest is called both Abiathar and Ahimelech.

II Samuel 5:6--7

And the king and his men went to Jerusalem against the Jebusites..David took the stronghold of Zion, the same is the city of David.

New Testament Distortion

Luke 2:4--5

And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be enrolled with Mary, his betrothed wife who was with child.

Jerusalem, not Bethlehem, is called the "city of David."

Drazin deliberately overlooks the reason the NT calls Bethlehem the city of David, because David was born and raised there. Another point: everyone knew that Jerusalem was called the City of David, but that had long since been eclipsed by Herod's building projects. However Bethlehem remained unchanged to Jesus' time as it was at the time of David's birth.

Genesis 11:26

When Terah had lived seventy years he became the father of Abram....

Genesis 12:4
...Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed from Haran.

Genesis 11:32
The days of Terah were 205 years and Terah died in Haran.

New Testament Distortion

Acts 7:4

Then he [Abraham] departed from the land of the Chaldeans, and lived in Haran. And after his father died, G-d removed him from there into the land [in which] you are now living.

Abraham left Haran when Terah was 145 (70+75), which was sixty years before Terah died (205 - 145).

Regarding Acts 7.4, even Rashi admits that Lech Lecha follows Noah, which terminates with Terah's death, so as to give the impression that Abraham did not dishonour his father by leaving him while he was still alive. Thus the NT merely repeats the common sense of the OT. Here are two commentaries by Christian scholars that explain this:

Albert Barnes
(2.) It is not affirmed that Abraham was born just at the time when Terah was seventy years of age. All that the passage in Ge 11:26 proves, according to the usual meaning of similar expressions, is, that Terah was seventy years old before he had any sons, and that the three were born subsequently to that. But which was born first, or how long intervals intervened between their birth, does not appear. Assuredly it does not mean that all were born precisely at the time when Terah was seventy years of age. Neither does it appear that Abraham was the eldest of the three. The sons of Noah are said to have been Shem, Ham, and Japheth, (Ge 5:32;) yet Japheth, though mentioned last, was the eldest, (Ge 10:21.) As Abraham afterwards became much the most distinguished, and as he was the father of the Jewish people of whom Moses was writing, it was natural that he should be mentioned first. If it cannot be proved that Abraham was the eldest, as assuredly it cannot be, then there is no improbability in supposing that his birth might have occurred many years after Terah was seventy years of age.
(3.) The Jews unanimously affirm that Terah relapsed into idolatry before Abraham left Haran; and this they denominate death, or a moral death.--Kuin"el. It is certain, therefore, that, from some cause, they were accustomed to speak of Terah as dead, before Abraham left him. Stephen only used language which was customary among the Jews; and would use it doubtless correctly, though we may not be able to see precisely how it can be reconciled with the account in Genesis.

Adam Clarke
Genesis 11:26
Verse 26. And Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran.] Haran was certainly the eldest son of Terah, and he appears to have been born when Terah was about seventy years of age, and his birth was followed in successive periods with those of Nahor his second, and Abram his youngest son. Many have been greatly puzzled with the account here, supposing because Abram is mentioned first, that therefore he was the eldest son of Terah: but he is only put first by way of dignity. An in stance of this we have already seen, Ge 5:32, where Noah is represented as having Shem, Ham, and Japheth in this order of succession; whereas it is evident from other scriptures that Shem was the youngest son, who for dignity is named first, as Abram is here; and Japheth the eldest, named last, as Haran is here. Terah died two hundred and five years old, Ge 11:32; then Abram departed from Haran when seventy-five years old, Ge 12:4; therefore Abram was born, not when his father Terah was seventy, but when he was one hundred and thirty.

When any case of dignity or pre-eminence is to be marked, then even the youngest son is set before all the rest, though contrary to the usage of the Scriptures in other cases. Hence we find Shem, the youngest son of Noah, always mentioned first; Moses is mentioned before his elder brother Aaron; and Abram before his two elder brethren Haran and Nahor. These observations are sufficient to remove all difficulty from this place.

Genesis 46:27

And the sons of Joseph, who were born to him in Egypt, were two souls; all the souls of the house of Jacob that came into Egypt were seventy.

New Testament Distortion

Acts 7:14
And Joseph sent and called to him Jacob his father and his kindred; seventy-five souls.

The Septuagint records 75 souls that went with Jacob to Egypt. This is the source for Acts 7.14. Here is Adam Clarke on Genesis 46:20:

Verse 20. Unto Joseph-were born Manasseh and Ephraim] There is a remarkable addition here in the Septuagint, which must be noticed: egenonto de uioi manassh, ous eteken autw h pallakh h sura, ton macir. macir de egennhse ton galaad. uioi de efraim adelfon manassh, soutalaam kai taam. uioi de soutalaam, edem. These were the sons of Manasseh whom his Syrian concubine bore unto him: Machir; and Machir begat Galaad. The sons of Ephraim, Manasseh's brother, were Sutalaam and Taam; and the sons of Sutalaam, Edem. These add five persons to the list, and make out the number given by Stephen, Ac 7:14, which it seems he had taken from the text of the Septuagint, unless we could suppose that the text of Stephen had been altered to make it correspond to the Septuagint, of which there is not the slightest evidence from ancient MSS. or versions. The addition in the Septuagint is not found in either the Hebrew or the Samaritan at present; and some suppose that it was taken either from Nu 26:29,35, or 1Ch 7:14-20, but in none of these places does the addition appear as it stands in the Septuagint, thought some of the names are found interspersed. Various means have been proposed to find the seventy persons in the text, and to reconcile the Hebrew with the Septuagint and the New Testament.

A table given by Scheuchzer, extracted from the Memoires de Trevoux, gives the following general view:

The twelve sons of JACOB with their children and grandchildren.
Reuben and his four sons............. 5
Simeon and his six sons.............. 7
Levi and his three sons.............. 4
Judah and his seven sons and grand-sons............................... 8
Issachar and his four sons........... 5
Zebulun and his three sons........... 4
Total sons of JACOB and LEAH.......=33
Gad and his seven sons............... 8
Asher and his seven sons and grand-sons............................... 8
Total sons of JACOB and ZILPAH..... =16
Joseph and his two sons.............. 3
Benjamin and his ten sons............ 11
Total sons of JACOB and RACHEL....... =14
Dan and his son...................... 2
Naphtali and his four sons........... 5
Total sons of JACOB and BILHAH..... =7
Total sons of Jacob and his four wives.............................. =70

"To harmonize this with the Septuagint and St. Stephen, Ac 7:14, to the number sixty-six (all the souls that came out of Jacob's loins, Ge 46:26) add nine of the patriarchs' wives, Judah's wife being already dead in Canaan, (Ge 38:12,) Benjamin being supposed to be as yet unmarried, and the wife of Joseph being already in Egypt, and therefore out of the case: the number will amount to seventy-five, which is that found in the Acts."-Universal History.

Dr. Hales' method is more simple, and I think more satisfactory: "Moses states that all the souls that came with Jacob into Egypt which issued from his loins, (except his sons wives,) were sixty-six souls, Ge 46:26; and this number is thus collected:-

JACOB'S children, eleven sons and one daughter.................................. 12
Reuben's sons............................... 4
Simeon's sons............................... 6
Levi's sons................................. 3
Judah's three sons and two grandsons........ 5
Issachar's sons............................. 4
Zebulun's sons.............................. 3
Gad's sons.................................. 7
Asher's four sons, one daughter, and two grandsons................................. 7
Dan's son................................... 1
Naphtali's sons............................. 4
Benjamin's sons............................. 10 --66

"If to these sixty-six children, and grandchildren, and great grandchildren, we add Jacob himself, Joseph and his two sons, the amount is seventy, the whole amount of Jacob's family which settled in Egypt.

"In this statement the wives of Jacob's sons, who formed part of the household, are omitted; but they amounted to nine, for of the twelve wives of the twelve sons of Jacob, Judah's wife was dead, Ge 38:12, and Simeon's also, as we may collect from his youngest son Shaul by a Canannitess, Ge 46:10, and Joseph's wife was already in Egypt. These nine wives, therefore, added to the sixty-six, give seventy-five souls the whole amount of Jacob's household that went down with him to Egypt; critically corresponding with the statement in the New Testament, that 'Joseph sent for his father Jacob and all his kindred, amounting to seventy-five souls.' The expression all his kindred, including the wives which were Joseph's kindred, not only by affinity, but also by consanguinity, being probably of the families of Esau, Ishmael, or Keturah. Thus does the New Testament furnish an admirable comment on the Old."-Analysis, vol. ii., p. 159.

It is necessary to observe that this statement, which appears on the whole the most consistent, supposes that Judah was married when about fourteen years of age, his son Er at the same age, Pharez at the same, Asher and his fourth son Beriah under twenty, Benjamin about fifteen, and Joseph's sons and grandsons about twenty. But this is not improbable, as the children of Israel must all have married at a very early age, to have produced in about two hundred and fifteen years no less than six hundred thousand persons above twenty years old, besides women and children.

Joshua 24:32

The bones of Joseph, which the children of Israel brought up from Egypt, were buried in Shechem, in the portion of ground that Jacob bought from the sons of Hamor, the father of Shechem, for one hundred pieces of money; and they became the inheritance of the children of Joseph.

New Testament Distortion

Acts 7:15--16

And Jacob went down into Egypt, and he died, he and our fathers, and they were carried over to Shechem and laid in the tomb that Abraham had bought for the sum of money from the sons of Hamor of Shechem. Only Joseph was buried in Shechem, and Jacob bought the plot, not Abraham.

Here is Treasury of Scripture Knowledge:

Of the two burying-places of the patriarchs, one was at Hebron, the cave and field which Abraham purchased of Ephron the Hittite, (Ge 23:16, etc.); the other in Sychem, which Jacob (not Abraham) bought of the sons of Emmor, (Ge 33:19.) To remove this glaring discrepancy, Markland interprets [para < See definition 3844>,] from, as it frequently signifies with a genitive, and renders, "And were carried over to Sychem; and afterwards from among the descendants of Emmor, the father, or son, of Sychem, they were laid in the sepulchrewhich Abraham bought for a sum of money." This agrees with the account which Josephus gives of the patriarchs; that they were carried out of Egypt, first to Sychem, and then to Hebron, where they were buried.

Exodus 14:22

And the children of Israel went into the midst of the sea on dry land; the waters were a wall to them on their right side and on their left.

New Testament Distortion

I Corinthians 10:1
I want you to know, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized to Moses in the cloud and in the sea....

One is baptized in water, not under a cloud, and the Jews stood on dry land, not in the sea itself.

The Midrashim compare the crossing of the Red Sea to a mikvah immersion. Paul writes in this sense and similarly incorporates the cloud, which the rabbis admit covered the nation during their 40 years of wanderings in the wilderness (the clouds of glory - annanay hakavod).

Numbers 25:9

And those that died by the plague were 24,000.

New Testament Distortion

I Corinthians 10:8
We must not indulge in fornication as some of them did, and 23,000 fell in a single day.

23000 died by plague, while another 1000 were executed at Moses' command by the people.

Galatians 3:16
Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his seed. It does not say, "and to his seeds," referring to many, but, referring to one, "and to your seed," which is Christ.

The Hebrew word zera (seed) is invariably used in the singular when referring to progeny, whether one person or many are meant. For example, wherever G-d promised to bless Abraham's "seed," his descendants were intended:

Genesis 13:16
I will make your seed as the dust of the earth ; so that if one could count the dust of the earth, then your seed would also be counted.

Genesis 15:13
Then the L-rd said to Abram: "Know for sure that your seed will be sojourners in a land that is not theirs, and they will be slaves there, and they will be oppressed for four hundred years."

Genesis 26:4
...and I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and will give to your seed all these lands...

Genesis 22:17
...I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and as the sand upon the seashore; and your seed shall possess the gate of their enemies; and through your seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed, because you have hearkened to My voice.

This explanation of Seed in the singular (zera) is a derasha, showing that although it is a collective noun it also has an ultimate meaning of one special seed in whom will be attached much seed. Jesus is the one seed who is much seed. Besides, according to the rabbinical view, this prophecy to Abraham never occurred, since the Jews hardly have amounted to a vast multitude in their history. But with the engrafting of Gentiles through Christ the unique Seed of Abraham, Abraham's seed number truly a vast multitude of billions.

Exodus 24:6--8
And Moses took half the blood and put it in basins; and half the blood he sprinkled on the altar. Then he took the Book of the Covenant and read in the hearing of the people; and they said: "All that the L-rd has spoken we will do and obey." And Moses took the blood and sprinkled it upon the people, and said: "Behold, the blood of the covenant that the L-rd has made with you in accordance with all these words."

New Testament Distortion

Hebrews 9:19--20

For when every commandment of the law had been declared by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool and hyssop, and sprinkled on both the book itself and all the people, saying: "This is the blood of the covenant which G-d commanded you."

The Book of the Covenant was not sprinkled with blood.

This was a tradition that the Book was sprinkled. Or Clarke renders this:

And sprinkled both the book] The sprinkling of the book is not mentioned in the place to which the apostle refers, (see above,) nor did it in fact take place. The words auto te to biblion, and the book itself, should be referred to labwn, having taken, and not to errantise, he sprinkled; the verse should therefore be read thus: For after every commandment of the law had been recited by Moses to all the people, he took the blood of the calves, and of the goats, with water and scarlet wool, and the book itself, and sprinkled all the people.=20

Genesis 47:31

And he [Jacob] said: "Swear to me." And he [Joseph] swore to him. Then Israel [Jacob] bowed himself upon the head of his bed.

New Testament Distortion

Hebrews 11:21

By faith Jacob, when dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, bowing in worship over the head of his staff.

The Hebrew word for bed, mita, is the same root for staff, mateh. And this is how the Septuagint translates the verse in Genesis. Barnes:

And worshipped, leaning upon the top of his staff. This is an exact quotation from the Septuagint in Ge 47:31. The English version of that place is, "and Israel bowed himself upon the bed's head," which is a proper translation, in the main, of the word HEBREW--mittah. That word, however, with different points--HEBREW--matteh, means, a branch, a bough, a rod, a staff, and the translators of the Septuagint have so rendered it. The Masoretic points are of no authority, and either translation, therefore, would be proper.

Joseph bowed upon the head of his bed, not his staff. Some attempt to explain these discrepancies by claiming that the Hebrew Bible was altered after the New Testament was written. But a supplement15 to The Revised Standard Version, a Protestant Bible, states otherwise:

The Hebrew Old Testament was translated into Greek at Alexandria (285--246 B.C.) in order to provide a copy for the library there, and as a service to the many Greek- speaking Jews. It is known as the Septuagint, a word that suggests the seventy-two scholars whom it is thought were engaged to make the translation.

The Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible was known to the world 246 years before the birth of Jesus. Therefore, it could not have been altered after the emergence of Christianity. Rather, the New Testament stands alone in its errors.

Here Drazin lies blatantly, or at least deceives us through his own ignorance, for in a number of the above cases the Septuagint version exactly accords with the version in the New Testament. Drazin himself is guilty here of what he castigates the New Testament of: fraud, although in Drazin's case it would not seem to be pious, but simply malice!

Please, Anne, realize that the anti-missionaries have their own agenda. They are people who support their families and earn their money by slamming Christianity. This is their parnassa. Don't assume they are doing their work out of benevolence or even love of the Truth. No! They are simply pandering to an audience and seeking to promote their product. Their love of money and fame severely undermines their integrity, for as the Lord Jesus said: man cannot serve both God and mammon.

Don't put your destiny of either eternal life or eternal damnation into the hands of the wicked and the greedy. Be careful! Don't be gullible! Don't be a fool! Each one of us will stand naked before God's Judgment seat. No rabbi will be there to hold our hands. We will not be able to exonerate ourselves by saying that we trusted their blasphemous books. We will be punished for not listening to the still small voice of conscience within each and every one of us that knows the truth and persistently tries to whisper it to us: Jesus Christ is King of Kings and Lord of Lords!

Return to Newsgroup Archives Main Page

Return to our Main Webpage


�2011 Hebraic Heritage Ministries International. Designed by Web Design by JB.