Problems with New Testament...

[Blake]

I've been studying the New Testament and all the instances it references the Tanakh and I've found some things that don't make sense...

Matt. 1.9: "And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias."

Why are Joash, Amaziah and Azariah ommitted in this genaeology when they appear in Chronicles 1?

Matt. 1:12: "Salathiel begat Zorobabel."

Wasn't Zerubbabel Pediah's son and Salathiel's nepehew?

Matt. 2:23: "And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth; that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, 'He shall be called a Nazarene.'"

Does anyone know where to find this prophecy? I don't seem to be able too.

Matt. 28:9-10: "Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, 'And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value. And gave them for a potter's field as the Lord appointed me'"

This propechy does not appear in Jeremiah, but in Zehariah 11:12-13. How could such a collassal error have been made?

If you could answer my questions my mind would be put at ease...

[Todah Yeshua]

Matt. 28:9-10: "Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, 'And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value. And gave them for a potter's field as the Lord appointed me'"

That's not what Matthew 28:9,10 says.


your talking about Matthew 27:9,10.

I'm not trying to nit pick, I was just trying to give the person that helps you the correct scripture.

With that being said, you bring up some points that I hope someone can answer for us.

[Blake]

Ah, thank you for correcting me. I was copying and pasting from notes I had taken earlier so I failed to proof-read for errors.

I do too hope my questions can be answered.

[R' Y'hoshua Moshe]

One thing that may be helpful when comparing passages from the Brit Chadashah and the Hebrew TeNakh is that many quotes in our New Covenant writings where derived from the Septuigant and not the Hebrew TaNaKh. You may want to get a copy of the Septuigant.

Hope that is helpful,

Reuel

[Elishava]

I'm not sure if this will help, but i did find a few things in Matthew Henry's commentary. I know it's not Scripture and/or Messianic, but sometimes his insights truly help. I'm just going to copy and paste:
1) The only famous man of that house that we meet with at their return from captivity was Zerubbabel, elsewhere called the son of Salathiel, but appearing here to be his grandson (1Ch_3:17-19), which is usual in scripture


2) In this is said to be fulfilled what was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene. Which may be looked upon, (1.) As a man of honour and dignity, though primarily it signifies no more than a man of Nazareth; there is an allusion or mystery in speaking it, speaking Christ to be, [1.] The Man, the Branch, spoken of, Isa_11:1. The word there is Netzar, which signifies either a branch, or the city of Nazareth; in being denominated from that city, he is declared to be that Branch. [2.] It speaks him to be the great Nazarite; of whom the legal Nazarites were a type and figure (especially Samson, Jdg_13:5), and Joseph, who is called a Nazarite among his brethren (Gen_49:26), and to whom that which was prescribed concerning the Nazarites, has reference, Num_6:2, etc. Not that Christ was, strictly, a Nazarite, for he drank wine, and touched dead bodies; but he was eminently so, both as he was singularly holy, and as he was by a solemn designation and dedication set apart to the honour of God in the work of our redemption, as Samson was to save Israel. And it is a name we have all reason to rejoice in, and to know him by. Or, (2.) As a name of reproach and contempt. To be called a Nazarene, was to be called a despicable man, a man from whom no good was to be expected, and to whom no respect was to be paid. The devil first fastened this name upon Christ, to render him mean, and prejudice people against him, and it stuck as a nickname to him and his followers. Now this was not particularly foretold by any one prophet, but, in general, it was spoken by the prophets, that he should be despised and rejected of men (Isa_53:2, Isa_53:3), a Worm, and no man (Psa_22:6, Psa_22:7), that he should be an Alien to his brethren Psa_69:7, Psa_69:8. Let no name of reproach for religion's sake seem hard to us, when our Master was himself called a Nazarene.

Thanks for the questions, Blake, and remember, if there is something in the Scripture that seems not to fit or contridict, it's always something with us and our intrepretation...we just have to keep digging. Hope this helps. Shabbat Shalom.

[Chizuk Emunah]

Blake,
A lot of times with genealogy, it was common to omit names and skip generations. The speculation for why this was done in Mattiyahu, is that those who were ommitted was because they were wicked kings and turned away into idolatry. Another possible reason is that if by using sets of 14, Mattiyahu was showing how Yeshua was indeed descended from David and therefore the Moshiach. (According to the 29th Rule of Rabbi Eleazer)

posted by Elishava

2) In this is said to be fulfilled what was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene. Which may be looked upon, (1.) As a man of honour and dignity, though primarily it signifies no more than a man of Nazareth; there is an allusion or mystery in speaking it, speaking Christ to be, [1.] The Man, the Branch, spoken of, Isa_11:1. The word there is Netzar, which signifies either a branch, or the city of Nazareth; in being denominated from that city, he is declared to be that Branch.
~snip~

In a sense, he's right on this point. The prophecy spoken of is Yeshayahu 11:1-5, which gives us a description of the Moshiach. The Hebrew word for branch is "netzar." So by Mattiyahu calling Yeshua a Netzar, it would serve a purpose readily identifying him as the Mosiach. Henry missed something here when he called Yeshua a Nazarene, because the English word "Nazarene" is the equivilant of the Hebrew word "Netzarim" which is plural, and not singular. As Henry also noted, this is also the name that was used by the early followers of Yeshua. As we know, they didn't call themselves "Christians," but instead called themselves Netzarim. Thus readily indentifying themselves as followers of Yeshua.

[Blake]

Well, these explanations make sense but why does Matthew erroneously say that he is quoting Jeremiah when Zechariah is being quoted?

[Chizuk Emunah]

Sorry, forgot to touch on that issue as well.
Matthew is indeed quoting the prophet Yiremiyahu.

I'm not on my PC at the moment, so I can't get you the reference. I'll look it up after work today.

[Chizuk Emunah]

Okay got those references for you Blake. Sorry it took so long.

Here you go: Yiremiyahu 19:1-13; 32:6-9.