Bible mistranslation Matthew 1:16

by Kobe 9 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Kobe

    <!-- @page { margin: 2cm } P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm } -->

    First look at Luke 3:23 ;23 Furthermore, Jesus himself, when he commenced [his work], was about thirty years old, being the son, as the opinion was,

    of Joseph,

    [son] of He′li,

    Now read Matthew 1:16; 1 6 Jacob became father to Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.

    Problem number one. Here we read that Joseph has two fathers. In Matthew it says his father is Jacob, but in Luke it's He'li. Doesn't add up.

    Second problem. Read Matthew 1:17; 17 All the generations, then, from Abraham until David were fourteen generations, and from David until the deportation to Babylon fourteen generations, and from the deportation to Babylon until the Christ fourteen generations.

    It say that all the generations from Babylon to Christ are fourteen generations. So, lets add them up.

    Matthew 1: 12-16;12 After the deportation to Babylon Jec·o·ni′ah became father to She·al′ti·el;

    She·al′ti·el became father to Ze·rub′ba·bel;

    13 Ze·rub′ba·bel became father to A·bi′ud;

    A·bi′ud became father to E·li′a·kim;

    E·li′a·kim became father to A′zor;

    14 A′zor became father to Za′dok;

    Za′dok became father to A′chim;

    A′chim became father to E·li′ud;

    15 E·li′ud became father to El·e·a′zar;

    El·e·a′zar became father to Mat′than;

    Mat′than became father to Jacob;

    16 Jacob became father to Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.

    Jec·o·ni′ah (1), She·al′ti·el; (2), Ze·rub′ba·bel (3), A·bi′ud (4), E·li′a·kim (5), A′zor (6), Za′dok (7), A′chim (8), E·li′ud (9), El·e·a′zar (10), Mat′than (11), Jacob (12) , Joseph (13)

    There is one generation missing. Some might think that they forgot to put in He'li, but that won't make it work either. In Luke it tells you a completely different family line starting from David. I do believe there is an answer to this.

    First thing you must know is that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew. Among scholars, it was determined that New Testament if not parts were written in Hebrew . Nehemia Gordon, a Dead Sea Scroll scholar, in research, came across a book written by an early Jewish man named Shem-Tob. In the book he refutes Catholicism arguing that they really don't follow the teachings of Jesus, and and the end of the book he included a Hebrew version of the Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew. Many refer to this book of Matthew as Shem-Tob's Hebrew Matthew.

    In the Hebrew language, a dot can change the word. While translating Matthew into Greek a translator could easily take no note of a dot, jot or tittle, and therefore he mistranslates a word. In the Hebrew language, a dot can change the word from Husband to Father. So what it should read in Matthew is;

    “Jacob became father to Joseph the father of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.”

    Mary's fathers name was Joseph, and she married a man by the name of Joseph.

    Mary was apart of David's kingly line, not Joseph her husband. If you read in Luke, it say Nathan son of David. Nathan wasn't a king, whereas in Matthew it reads David became father to Sol'omon. Sol'omon who was king. We know that Joseph, the Husband of Mary was not the father of Jesus, so to keep the promise to David that Jesus would come through the kingly line, a woman would have to birth the Messiah.

    This also gives you the fourteenth generation, making Matthew all add up.

  • EndofMysteries

    I hope to remember to come here later, I got some interesting things to say on this topic. But alas, I must go to work now.

  • Mad Sweeney
    Mad Sweeney

    Jec·o·ni′ah (1), She·al′ti·el; (2), Ze·rub′ba·bel (3), A·bi′ud (4), E·li′a·kim (5), A′zor (6), Za′dok (7), A′chim (8), E·li′ud (9), El·e·a′zar (10), Mat′than (11), Jacob (12) , Joseph (13)

    There is one generation missing.

    Doesn't Christ himself count? There are much worse things in the Bible than the possibility of a miscount.

  • sabastious

    Doesn't Christ himself count? There are much worse things in the Bible than the possibility of a miscount.

    Like baby burning.


  • debator

    Hi Kobe

    Many have also thought one of these is the geneology from Mary's line.

    Others hold that one of the gospels actually records the genealogy of Mary. [ 3 ]

  • Leolaia

    What is your source?

    1) Matthew is an expanded version of Mark, containing about 80-90% of the text of Mark, largely verbatim. Mark, all agree, was written originally in Greek. The tradition of a Hebrew original to Matthew in the church fathers reflects the fact that various edited versions of Matthew later circulated in Hebrew or Aramaic (e.g. the Gospel of the Nazoreans, the Gospel of the Ebionites, the Gospel of the Hebrews, etc.), as well as the early testimony of Papias who referred to the Matthean composition of the "sayings" in Hebrew; this may well refer to one of the sources of Matthew, a collection of sayings of Jesus written originally in Aramaic.

    2) Shem-Tob most agree (George Howard notwithstanding) is a translation from Greek. Among other things, it contains a scribal error that originated in the Greek manuscript tradition and it contains the explanation of the Hebrew meaning of Immanuel found in the Greek original of Matthew, which would not have been necessary in a book written in Hebrew.

    3) Shem-Tob was not an "early Jewish man". Shem-Tob wrote about 1,300 years after the book of Matthew was written.

    4) The Hebrew words for "husband" are 'ysh and b`l and the word for "father" is 'b. These involve different consonants (the niqqud system of writing "dots" is not relevant here and did not exist at the time the Greek text of Matthew proliferated), and there is little resemblance between the words in question (certainly not involving missing a stroke or tittle). Nor is there any MS evidence indicating that what you conjecture occurred.

    5) The Shem-Tob version of Matthew has "husband" in 1:16, as George Howard shows (1998:5), not "father" as you imply. So it is somewhat disingenuous to refer to Shem-Tob the way you do.

    6) There is no missing generation; the author counts 14 generations from the exile "until the Christ", yet you stop one short of Jesus' generation. Similarly, the author says there are 14 generations from Abraham to David; if you stop short of David's generation, you again will have 13 generations, not 14.

  • Terry

    Matthew strikes me as obsessed with certain things appearing a certain way and artificially creates resonances where they don't normally occur.

    My reading has led me to the conclusion that Paul's letters were first, then compilations and redactions of his letters spread.

    THEN, the gospel Q, then Mark followed by other people doing a FAN-FICTION version of Mark.

    I am not a scholar. This is just what my reading has given me to understand.

  • Kobe

    <!-- @page { margin: 2cm } P { margin-bottom: 0.21cm } A:link { so-language: zxx } -->

    Hi Leolaia,

    Thank you for adding those points, without them I would have forgotten other facts I neglected to include.

    Your right that Papias quoted referring about a Hebrew Matthew. He said, “ Matthew collected the oracles in the Hebrew language and each translated them as best he could.”

    Papias said this, but really there is no Hebrew Matthew to find, all there that can be found is Greek or some Aramaic, so you have every right to question if Matthew was originally written in Hebrew.

    First point, you said, “the niqqud system of writing "dots" is not relevant here and did not exist at the time the Greek text of Matthew.” Correct, the dots would not be in the Greek form Matthew, but I'm not basing the argument on the Greek text of Matthew, rather the Hebrew. Ancient Hebrew did have jots or tittles that could change the meaning of words, Jesus refers to the jots in Matthew 5: 18 : For verily I say unto you, “ Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (KJV)

    You mentioned that in Hebrew husband is 'ysh and b`l and the word for "father" is 'b. I was referring to something more like this, ??? and ?? . Notice the only difference between the two words is a tittle.

    Many people would also agree the Shem-Tob's Hebrew Matthew was translated from Greek. In some studies that where carried out though, some suggested that it was actually written in Hebrew, this being so because of one of the main characteristics of his Matthew, which were Hebrew word puns. A Hebrew word pun is when you take two similar sounding words, use it with different meanings in the same passage. Every ancient document in Hebrew has these words puns. For example in Genesis it refers to Adam (First Man), to be taken from the Adamah (ground).

    Genesis 2:25, 3:1 it refers to Adam and Eve being naked ( arumin ) and the serpent being clever(arum). Depending on what translation you read from it may read that the serpent was crafty or subtle.

    In Jeremiah 1:11-12 it talks about an almond(shaked) tree and being diligent(shoked).

    We know that Genesis and Jeremiah were written in Hebrew, but when researching Shem Tob's Matthew, scholars have found that Shem Tob's version also contains these Hebrew word puns.

    Matthew 9:8 it contains saw (vayir'u) and feared ( vayir'u).

    Matthew 12: 13-15 it say, and he stretched out ( vayet) and he turned (vayet).

    Matthew 18:23-35 in the parable of debt, it say to pay five time, to pay(shalem), and at the end of the parable it say complete(shalem).

    Another common belief among scholar is that Matthew was written in Aramaic, then Greek. In the Aramaic text it reads “Givra” in the place of husband. “Givra” meaning father.

    Here is a link to Nehemia Gordon, a Dead Sea Scroll scholar talking about Matthew being written in Hebrew. If you have two hours free one day, its a very interesting video to watch and it talks about a more interesting mistranslation that I haven't mentioned. If you don't have two free hour, just skip to around the fifty minute mark. There it starts talking about this.

    You may have to drag the arrow to start.

  • Kobe

    Just notice, where the question marks are I did try to put the ancient Hebrew text. I guess it did not work.

  • debator

    Hi kobe

    Nice research a pleasure to read. Of course this cannot be proved for definite one way or the other so remains an intriguing issue. Also having a matthew gospel originally written in ancient Hebrew or Aramaic throws up more contraversial points than just this one. It would clear up usage of the tetragramation if found.

Share this