Posts: 783
Threads: 130
Joined: Dec 2007
Reputation:
0
Hello,
When one compares the Matthew 1 genealogy, one finds that Matthew just has proven a thing, the Messiah roots from David.
He mentions 14 generations 'before' exile, 14 after etc.
But when one compares Chronicles, Matthew skips generations! So, instead of 14 generations, he could have mentioned 28 generationes (I'm not being exactly by counting the registers in the OT, but you get the point).
So, Im not saying that Matthew was doing a sloppy job, I think he shortened it as he was interested in the Lords words, not in history.
So now I come to the point. The word 'Kitab' which exists in Hebrew/Arabic/Aramaic might mean more than we know.
Anyway, in Arabic, according to M. H. Ma'rifat, the word 'Kitab' has a root which means 'collection' or summary. So, was Matthew not just making a summary of the genealogy and is the ARamaic word, also lending this meaning: "Summary of..."???
Thanks for your thoughts!
Posts: 786
Threads: 61
Joined: Nov 2003
Reputation:
1
Shlama Akhi,
"Kitab" is not the word used in Matthew. The word is "Kathava" , which means, "writing", "book", "decree".
Please be specific when you refer to Chronicles, Which chapter? Which verse? I don't want to waste my time doing your homework for you.
Besides, I detect that you are more interested in planting doubts rather than information about The Peshitta, and you are not doing a very good job of it, since you
are misinformed about the scriptures. Where do you get 14 missing generations in Chronicles?
What's next-The Virgin Birth, or The Trinity?
Dave
Posts: 783
Threads: 130
Joined: Dec 2007
Reputation:
0
Dave,
Why are some Christians so quick judging?
Do I HAVE to prove my faith? Do I have to give you letters of being child of God (Jesus declared us so)?
It is not planting doubts, ah, let's say the word you just seemed to forget to mention, maybe i'm a messenger of Satan, right?
Dave, if your faith is stable, you don't need to worry about anything.
Instead: Like the Apostle Paul praised the Bereans, for daily studying the scriptures to see if things were as said, I'm daily researching.
So Dave, it's not DOGma's that save us, it's the faith in the sacrifice that Jesus offered.
NO where, Jesus said: "If you believe trinity, you will be saved..."
In addition NO where Jesus said: "If you believe the Aramaic scriptures as delivered 2000 years after the original, you will be saved!"
I'm fully asure, that our Lord is not like a Pharisee, who required common people to be actors, but He requires us to live to our hearts, filled with love.
So Dave, excuse me if I ask questions. If you don't want to waste time on me, then don't.
About the generations, According chapter 1 vers 11 King Josia was in Babylon but
2 Kings 23:29 says that Josia died during the war against Egypt in Megiddo.
1 Chron. 3 (ASV)
15 And the sons of Josiah: the first-born Johanan, the second Jehoiakim, the third Zedekiah, the fourth Shallum.
16 And the sons of Jehoiakim: Jeconiah his son, Zedekiah his son.
Mattew 1
11 and Josiah begat Jechoniah and his brethren, at the time of the carrying away to Babylon. (ASV)
As you see, Matthew skips constantly, one generation he must have had a reason for this.
If you call this 'doubts' I don't see what's the base of your faith then.
B.t.w. just LET me hand to you some papers of 'Faith'. I am translating the Peshitta to Dutch.
Secondly, I have helped many others to free themselves from slavery to humen and Satan.
Remember this: If you think you are full of faith, and full of diploms proving that, don't sit on Gods throne to quickly jugde me for ASKING questions!
(Compare Genesis: 18:25, how did Jehovah himself respond on questions!)
Posts: 783
Threads: 130
Joined: Dec 2007
Reputation:
0
ps: About my nickname.
It is greek as you have guessed.
When Jesus grabbed the hand of Simon who was sinking because of lack of faith, (Matthew 14:31)Jesus said to him: "Why have you hesitaded?"
In 2006, I was sinking 'virtually' because I did not want to lie in name of Jehovah as a 'Jehovah's Witness'.
So I 'virtually' started walking myself, while I never -had walked- because the Governing Body of Brooklyn -thinks- for JW's.
But Jesus grabbed my hand and saved me and said: "Why have you hesitated"
That's why my nick is: "Distazo"
I hope, brother(s), that you stop quickly judging or otherwise, I won't waste my time here anymore.
Posts: 513
Threads: 70
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation:
0
Shlama to you Akhi Distazo,
If you are truly interested in a detailed explanation on all things in Matti 1, including the question you ask, let me recommend my Gowra chapter from here:
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.tushiyah.org/TheGowra.pdf">http://www.tushiyah.org/TheGowra.pdf</a><!-- m -->
Hope this helps at least a little bit!
Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth
Posts: 783
Threads: 130
Joined: Dec 2007
Reputation:
0
Andrew,
Great article, I knew that gawra-issue b.t.w. <!-- s  --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt=" " title="Smile" /><!-- s -->
And you tell more about Luke, for instance.
So lots of the issues are explainable.
But how do we explain 1:11? Since Joshea, never was in Babylon so he could not father his sons there.
Is it maybe because of some Aramaic misreading?
I ask this, not to raise questions to the inspiration of the holy word, but just as other Christians, I like to defend the good news as good as possible.
So, as long as my understanding of Aramaic is practically zero, I cannot contribute but just ask questions.
Regards
Posts: 513
Threads: 70
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation:
0
Shlama Akhi Distazio,
I am glad you enjoyed the article.
Although I don't understand your point. The Scripture says:
5 The king of Assyria invaded the entire land, marched against Samaria and laid siege to it for three years. 6 In the ninth year of Hoshea, the king of Assyria captured Samaria and deported the Israelites to Assyria. He settled them in Halah, in Gozan on the Habor River and in the towns of the Medes.
2 Kings 17:5-6
Where are these places? Assyrian? Most definitely. But the Persians conquered both Assyria and Babylon and absorbed them. These geographical areas though are still part of...
Nave's Topical Bible
Gozan [E] [H] [S]
(A district of Mesopotamia)
Israelites taken in captivity to, by the king of Assyria, after the conquest of Samaria
1 Chronicles 5:26; 2 Kings 17:6; 18:11; 19:12
Mesopotamia = Babylon.
So you see, there is no problem and I don't think "Christians" would disagree since there are many of them here and they know the need to check these things, correct?
Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth
Posts: 783
Threads: 130
Joined: Dec 2007
Reputation:
0
Dear Gabriel,
Maybe we talk about different kings.
I'm talking of this king Josiah, who never went into captivity.
<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josiah#Josiah.27s_death">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josiah#Josiah.27s_death</a><!-- m -->
Because of the different ways of writing names (Joshiah / Josiah), and the fact that the Dutch names sound often totally different, we might have a confusion here.
Matthew says that Josiah went into captivity and fathered sons there...
I -think- that the translation only can fit, if it would be like this (From Aramaic into English)
Matthew 1:11 Joshiah begot Yokania & his brothers IN the captivity of Babel... (IN??? But Joshiah died in Jerusalem after the battle at Megiddo!)
vs
Matthew 1:11 Joshiah begot Yokania & his brothers BEFORE the captivity of Babel...
Posts: 513
Threads: 70
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation:
0
Shlama akhi Distazio,
Sorry I got the name of the king wrong. I was reading and writing too quickly. But I still think you are incorrect:
John Gill's Exposition of the Bible
about the time they were carried away to Babylon,
which is not to be connected with the word "begat": for Josiah did not beget Jeconiah and his brethren at that time, for he had been dead some years before; nor with Jechonias, for he never was carried away into Babylon, but died in Judea, and slept with his fathers, (2 Kings 24:6) but with the phrase "his brethren": and may be rendered thus, supposing (touv) understood, "which were at", or "about the carrying away to Babylon", or the Babylonish captivity.
But what about the Aramaic? Paul Younan is going in literal word order which can create confusion, so let me clarify with other versions:
Hezekiah begat Manasseh, Manasseh begat Amon, Amon begat Josiah, Josiah begat Jechoniah and his brothers about the captivity of Baylon.
(Lamsa)
So Lamsa says it is about the time of the captivity, not the exact time. The beyt proclitic carries this meaning which can be "in" also means "about", "around" etc. Now let's see another way to express this, from Etheridge:
Ahaz begat Hezakia, Hezakia begat Menasha, Menasha begat Amun, Amun begat Jushia, Jushia begat Jukania and his brethren at the exile of Bobel.
See, this is the proper use of the beyt prolcitic. Not IN BABYLON but "about the time of Babylon"
Again, sorry for writing quickly and not ascertaining your point at first. But now I trust you see the Aramaic reads the same as the Greek does when it is properly understood. Hope this helps!
Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth
Posts: 783
Threads: 130
Joined: Dec 2007
Reputation:
0
This is great.
Thanks for the explanation!
|
