{"id":1012,"date":"2013-04-03T16:06:54","date_gmt":"2013-04-03T16:06:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.kriesi.at\/themes\/enfold\/?page_id=1012"},"modified":"2013-04-03T16:06:54","modified_gmt":"2013-04-03T16:06:54","slug":"blog-single-small","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/muscularchristianityonline.com\/platform\/?page_id=1012","title":{"rendered":"Blog Single Author Small"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"

Prove It! | Part VI: Bible Difficulties<\/span><\/a><\/h2>Apologetics<\/a>, Discipleship<\/a>, Muscular Christianity<\/a><\/span>\/<\/span>by Bruce Gust<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/header>

\"\"<\/p>\n

Not an Option<\/h3>\n

On occasion, you’ll run into passages of Scripture that either don’t make sense or they appear contradictory.<\/p>\n

Critics love to seize on these apparent “errors,” and use them to justify their resolve to dismiss the Bible as flawed and therefore irrelevant.<\/p>\n

Even those that believe the resurrection of Christ will sometime side with those that process the Bible as corrupted in light of what appear to be passages that seem nonsensical.<\/p>\n

However logical it may be to acknowledge the capacity of human beings to make mistakes, when evaluating the Word of God, you want to be sensitive to the fact that you’re not merely inspecting the accuracy of a human effort as much as you’re criticizing God’s Ability to maintain the integrity of His Word.<\/p>\n

\n
Dr Gleason Archer<\/div>\n
The problems and questions dealt with in this volume have been directed to me during the past thirty years of teaching on the graduate seminary level in the field of biblical criticism.As an undergraduate at Harvard, I was fascinated by apologetics and biblical evidences; so I labored to obtain a knowledge of the languages and cultures that have any bearing on biblical scholarship. As a classics major in college, I received training in Latin and Greek, also in French and German. At seminary I majored in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Arabic; and in post-graduate years I became involved in Syriac and Akkadian, to the extent of teaching elective courses in each of these subjects. Earlier, during my final two years of high school, I had acquired a special interest in Middle Kingdom Egyptian studies, which was furthered as I later taught courses in this field. At the Oriental Institute in Chicago, I did specialized study in Eighteenth Dynasty historical records and also studied Coptic and Sumuerian.Combined with this work in ancient languages was a full course of training at law school, after which I was admitted to the Massachusetts Bar in 1939. This gave me a thorough grounding in the field of legal evidences. Additionally, I spent three years in Beruit, Lebanon, in specialized study of modern literary Arabic. This was followed by a month in the Holy Land, where I visited most of the important archaeological sites.1<\/sup><\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Consider these verses:<\/p>\n

\u201cIs not my word like fire,\u201d declares the Lord, \u201cand like a hammer that breaks a rock in pieces? (Jer 23:29)<\/strong><\/p>\n

For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (Matt 5:18)<\/strong><\/p>\n

16<\/sup> All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17<\/sup> so that the servant of God[a] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. (2 Tim 3:16-17)<\/strong><\/p>\n

For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Pet 1:21)<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Bible doesn’t allow itself to be anything less than inerrant. And it makes sense because to regard anything that resonates as “incorrect” as a legitimate discrepancy that simply has to be accepted and \/ or overlooked, is to call into question the substance of the gospel, the Reality of the empty tomb, and even the existence of God Himself. Your skepticism can’t remain specific to one particular verse. If it can be proven that one particular passage has been contaminated, there’s nothing to prevent foundational Scriptures from being corrupted as well.<\/p>\n

Bear in mind, we’re not talking about “differences,” as much as we’re talking about discrepancies. Just because a different word is used to communicate a particular idea when comparing different versions and translations to one another, doesn’t alter the fundamental meaning of the text. For more information about the authenticity of the New Testament, click here.<\/a><\/p>\n

That said, there are passages that seem problematic and that’s what we’re talking about in this final installment of the “Prove It!” series.<\/p>\n

Three Days and Three Nights<\/h3>\n

For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (Matt 12:40)<\/strong><\/p>\n

According to Luke 23:44, Jesus died at 3:00 PM on a Friday. If that’s the case, according to what Jesus said in the book of Matthew, His Resurrection should’ve occurred on Monday, or perhaps Tuesday, if you’re assuming that a day is a full 24 hour period.<\/p>\n

Jesus is not mistaken, nor is there an error in what Matthew wrote or what has since been passed down through the centuries.<\/p>\n

Hebrews reckoned a day as beginning at 6:00 PM…<\/p>\n

The Hebrew day (yom) begins at sundown, when three stars<\/b> become visible in the sky (the rabbis reasoned that the day begins at sunset based on the description of God’s activity in creation, “and the evening and the morning were the first day,” Genesis 1:5). Evening is sometimes defined as the late afternoon, that is, between 3:00 pm to sundown.<\/em>2<\/sup><\/p>\n

Not everyone in the ancient world documented time in the same way, certainly not the Romans who defined 12:00 AM as the beginning of the new day.<\/p>\n

Consequently, according to ancient parlance, in order to refer to three separate twenty-four hour timeframes, you would say, “Three days and three nights” – even though only a portion fo the first and third days might be involved. Refer to the diagram below to better visualize the way dates and times were processed back then.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

The Potter’s Field<\/h3>\n

9<\/sup> Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: \u201cThey took the thirty pieces of silver, the price set on him by the people of Israel, 10<\/sup> and they used them to buy the potter\u2019s field, as the Lord commanded me.\u201d (Matt 27:9-10)<\/strong><\/p>\n

This passage refers to the money that was originally paid to Judas for betraying Jesus who, upon recognizing his treachery, returned the money to the Pharisees and the proceeded to hang himself (Matt 27:5).<\/p>\n

The Pharisees then took the money and purchased the “potter’s field,” which is referenced in the book of Zechariah.<\/p>\n

And the Lord said to me, \u201cThrow it to the potter\u201d\u2014the handsome price at which they valued me! So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them to the potter at the house of the Lord. (Zec 11:12-13)<\/strong><\/p>\n

And yet, Matthew cites Jeremiah as the source of the quotation. At first glance, this looks like an error right up until the time you consider Jeremiah 32:6-9:<\/p>\n

6<\/sup> Jeremiah said, \u201cThe word of the Lord came to me: 7<\/sup> Hanamel son of Shallum your uncle is going to come to you and say, \u2018Buy my field at Anathoth, because as nearest relative it is your right and duty to buy it.\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\n

8<\/sup> \u201cThen, just as the Lord had said, my cousin Hanamel came to me in the courtyard of the guard and said, \u2018Buy my field at Anathoth in the territory of Benjamin. Since it is your right to redeem it and possess it, buy it for yourself.\u2019<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cI knew that this was the word of the Lord; 9<\/sup> so I bought the field at Anathoth from my cousin Hanamel and weighed out for him seventeen shekels[a] of silver. (Jer 32:6-9)<\/strong><\/p>\n

So, it would appear that Matthew is correct in referring to Jeremiah as being the prophecy being fulfilled in the context of the money Judas gave back to the Pharisees, but it’s there’s actually several things happening simultaneously that makes this scenario especially meaningful.<\/p>\n

What you have here is a composite of two prophecies; one from Jeremiah and one from Zechariah, with Zechariah referring to what Jeremiah had previously said.<\/p>\n

Look at this:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Jeremiah & Zechariah<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Jeremiah 18-19<\/td>\nChapter 18 has God telling Jeremiah to go to a nearby potter’s house and recognize how God is similar to the potter in the way he can shape the course of nations, just as a potter can shape, destroy, and remake a piece of pottery.<\/p>\n

In chapter 19, God instructs Jeremiah to use a piece of pottery to describe to the kings of Judah and the people of Jerusalem how God was getting ready to, “…bring disaster on this place.” In the same chapter, God says the the Valley of Ben Hinnom would come to be referred to as the “Valley of Slaughter.”<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

Zechariah 11:12-13<\/td>\nHere you have a dollar amount of thirty pieces of silver being “thrown to the potter.” Given the way the “potter” had been used by Jeremiah, you now have a common thread running through those two passages.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Acts 1:19<\/td>\nHere, Luke names the area that the Pharisees purchased which was referred to as the “potter’s field” in the book of Matthew as “Akeldama,” which is located in…the Valley of Hinnom.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
So, between these two passages, you have<\/p>\n