Freethought & Rationalism Archive

JoeWallack · 11-05-2005, 05:49 PM

JW:
Peter Kirby has created a new site:

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

primarily to cut down on my posts here but also for polite determination of whether there are Errors In The Bible. I present to the Unfaithful here my own Ram offering of Potential Error in the Christian Bible. Everyone is welcome to critique except for Harvey Dubish. Enjoy!:

Matthew 1:13

"and Zerubbabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;" (ASV)

According to the Jewish Bible, 1 Chronicles 3:19:

"And the sons of Pedaiah: Zerubbabel, and Shimei. And the sons of Zerubbabel: Meshullam, and Hananiah; and Shelomith was their sister;
and Hashubah, and Ohel, and Berechiah, and Hasadiah, Jushab-hesed, five."

Abiud was not one of the eight children of Zerubbabel.

The Greek Matthew1:13:

"Ζο�?οβαβὲλ δὲ �?γ�*ννησεν τὸν Ἀβιο�?δ Ἀβιοὺδ δὲ �?γ�*ννησεν τὸν Ἐλιακίμ Ἐλιακὶμ δὲ �?γ�*ννησεν τὸν Ἀζώ�?"

"Ἀβιο�?δ" (Abiud), fifth Greek word from the left.

The Greek 1 Chronicles 3:19:

"καὶ υἱοὶ Σαλαθιηλ Ζο�?οβαβελ καὶ Σεμει καὶ υἱοὶ Ζο�?οβαβελ Μοσολλαμος καὶ Ανανια καὶ Σαλωμιθ ἀδελφὴ α�?τῶν 20 καὶ Ασουβε καὶ Οολ καὶ Βα�?αχια καὶ Ασαδια καὶ Ασοβαεσδ π�*ντε"

Don't see it. An apologist defense here again is that "Matthew" intentionally skipped a generation so Abiud was a descendant of Zerubbabel and not an immediate son. Let's take a closer look at the Greek:

NESTLE-ALAND
GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
27TH EDITION
with GRAMCORD™ Greek New Testament Alpha Morphological Database
and the McReynolds English Interlinear
Former Editions edited by
Kurt Aland, Matthew Black, Carlo M. Martini Bruce M. Metzger, and Allen Wikgren
Fourth Revised Edition edited by
Barbara Aland, Kurt Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlo M. Martini, and Bruce M. Metzger
in cooperation with the
Institute for New Testament Textual Research, Münster/Westphalia
DEUTSCHE BIBELGESELLSCHAFT UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES
Aland, B., Aland, K., Black, M., Martini, C. M., Metzger, B. M., & Wikgren, A. 1993, c1979. The Greek New Testament (4th ed.). United Bible Societies: Federal Republic of Germany

"13 Ζο�?οβαβὲλ δὲ �?γ�*ννησεν τὸν Ἀβιο�?δ, Ἀβιοὺδ δὲ �?γ�*ννησεν τὸν Ἐλιακίμ, Ἐλιακὶμ δὲ �?γ�*ννησεν τὸν Ἀζώ�?,"

"�?γ�*ννησεν" (begat). Now a search of the use of this word in the Christian Bible:

"Search Results
{el}"γεννάω"{/}
46 Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, 27th Ed., With GRAMCORD(TM) Greek New Testament Alpha Morphological Database and McReynolds English Interlinear (97 occurrences in 30 articles)
Chapter 1A (41) [Matthew 1:2] 1
υἱοῦ Δαυὶδ υἱοῦ Ἀβ�?αάμ. 2 Ἀβ�?αὰμ �?γ�*ννησεν τὸν Ἰσαάκ, Ἰσαὰκ δὲ �?γ�*ννησεν
Chapter 2A (2) [Matthew 2:1] 2
2 Τοῦ δὲ Ἰησοῦ γεννηθ�*ντος �?ν Βηθλ�*εμ τῆς Ἰουδαίας �?ν ἡμ�*�?αις Ἡ�?ῴδου τοῦ
Chapter 19 [Matthew 19:12] 3
ε�?νοῦχοι οἵτινες �?κ κοιλίας μητ�?ὸς �?γεννήθησαν οὕτως, καὶ εἰσὶν ε�?νοῦχοι οἵτινες
Chapter 26 [Matthew 26:24] 4
πα�?αδίδοται· καλὸν ἦν α�?τῷ εἰ ο�?κ �?γεννήθη �? ἄνθ�?ωπος �?κεῖνος. 25 ἀποκ�?ιθεὶς
Chapter 14 [Mark 14:21] 5
ἀνθ�?ώπου πα�?αδίδοται· καλὸν α�?τῷ εἰ ο�?κ �?γεννήθη �? ἄνθ�?ωπος �?κεῖνος. 22 Καὶ �?σθιόντων
Chapter 1A (3) [Luke 1:13] 6
δ�*ησίς σου, καὶ ἡ γυνή σου Ἐλισάβετ γεννήσει υἱόν σοι καὶ καλ�*σεις τὸ ὄνομα α�?τοῦ
Chapter 23 [Luke 23:29] 7
αἱ στεῖ�?αι καὶ αἱ κοιλίαι αἳ ο�?κ �?γ�*ννησαν καὶ μαστοὶ οἳ ο�?κ ἔθ�?εψαν. 30 τότε
Chapter 1 [John 1:13] 8
�?κ θελήματος ἀνδ�?ὸς ἀλλ᾽ �?κ θεοῦ �?γεννήθησαν. 14 Καὶ �? λόγος σὰ�?ξ �?γ�*νετο καὶ
Chapter 3A (8) [John 3:3] 9
Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λ�*γω σοι, �?ὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν, ο�? δ�?ναται ἰδεῖν τὴν βασιλείαν
Chapter 8 [John 8:41] 10
οὖν] α�?τῷ, Ἡμεῖς �?κ πο�?νείας ο�? γεγεννήμεθα· ἕνα πατ�*�?α ἔχομεν τὸν θεόν. 42
Chapter 9A (5) [John 9:2] 11
ἢ οἱ γονεῖς α�?τοῦ, ἵνα τυφλὸς γεννηθῇ; 3 ἀπεκ�?ίθη Ἰησοῦς, Οὔτε οὗτος ἥμα�?τεν
Chapter 16A (2) [John 16:21] 12
ὅτι ἦλθεν ἡ ὥ�?α α�?τῆς· ὅταν δὲ γεννήσῃ τὸ παιδίον, ο�?κ�*τι μνημονε�?ει τῆς
Chapter 18 [John 18:37] 13
ὅτι βασιλε�?ς εἰμι. �?γὼ εἰς τοῦτο γεγ�*ννημαι καὶ εἰς τοῦτο �?λήλυθα εἰς τὸν κόσμον
Chapter 2 [Acts 2:8] 14
τῇ ἰδίᾳ διαλ�*κτῳ ἡμῶν �?ν ᾗ �?γεννήθημεν; 9 �*ά�?θοι καὶ Μῆδοι καὶ Ἐλαμῖται
Chapter 7A (3) [Acts 7:8] 15
α�?τῷ διαθήκην πε�?ιτομῆς· καὶ οὕτως �?γ�*ννησεν τὸν Ἰσαὰκ καὶ πε�?ι�*τεμεν α�?τὸν
Chapter 13 [Acts 13:33] 16
, Υἱός μου εἶ σ�?, �?γὼ σήμε�?ον γεγ�*ννηκά σε. 34 ὅτι δὲ ἀν�*στησεν α�?τὸν �?κ
Chapter 22A (2) [Acts 22:3] 17
φησίν, 3 Ἐγώ εἰμι ἀνὴ�? Ἰουδαῖος, γεγεννημ�*νος �?ν Τα�?σῷ τῆς Κιλικίας, ἀνατεθ�?αμμ�*νος
Chapter 9 [Romans 9:11] 18
Ἰσαὰκ τοῦ πατ�?ὸς ἡμῶν· 11 μήπω γὰ�? γεννηθ�*ντων μηδὲ π�?αξάντων τι ἀγαθὸν ἢ φαῦλον
Chapter 4 [1 Corinthians 4:15] 19
Ἰησοῦ διὰ τοῦ ε�?αγγελίου �?γὼ ὑμᾶς �?γ�*ννησα. 16 πα�?ακαλῶ οὖν ὑμᾶς, μιμηταί μου
Chapter 4A (3) [Galatians 4:23] 20
�? μὲν �?κ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ σά�?κα γεγ�*ννηται, �? δὲ �?κ τῆς �?λευθ�*�?ας δι᾽ �?παγγελίας
Chapter 2 [2 Timothy 2:23] 21
ἀπαιδε�?τους ζητήσεις πα�?αιτοῦ, εἰδὼς ὅτι γεννῶσιν μάχας· 24 δοῦλον δὲ κυ�?ίου ο�? δεῖ
�*ΡΟΣ ΘΙΛΗΜΟ�?Α [Philemon 10] 22
πα�?ακαλῶ σε πε�?ὶ τοῦ �?μοῦ τ�*κνου, ὃν �?γ�*ννησα �?ν τοῖς δεσμοῖς, Ὀνήσιμον, 11 τόν
Chapter 1 [Hebrews 1:5] 23
, Υἱός μου εἶ σ�?, �?γὼ σήμε�?ον γεγ�*ννηκά σε; καὶ πάλιν, Ἐγὼ ἔσομαι α�?τῷ
Chapter 5 [Hebrews 5:5] 24
, Υἱός μου εἶ σ�?, �?γὼ σήμε�?ον γεγ�*ννηκά σε· 6 καθὼς καὶ �?ν ἑτ�*�?ῳ λ�*γει,
Chapter 11A (2) [Hebrews 11:12] 25
�?παγγειλάμενον. 12 διὸ καὶ ἀφ᾽ ἑνὸς �?γεννήθησαν, καὶ ταῦτα νενεκ�?ωμ�*νου, καθὼς τὰ
Chapter 2 [2 Peter 2:12] 26
κ�?ίσιν. 12 οὗτοι δὲ ὡς ἄλογα ζῷα γεγεννημ�*να φυσικὰ εἰς ἅλωσιν καὶ φθο�?ὰν �?ν
Chapter 2 [1 John 2:29] 27
�? ποιῶν τὴν δικαιοσ�?νην �?ξ α�?τοῦ γεγ�*ννηται.
Chapter 3A (2) [1 John 3:9] 28
λ�?σῃ τὰ ἔ�?γα τοῦ διαβόλου. 9 �*ᾶς �? γεγεννημ�*νος �?κ τοῦ θεοῦ �?μα�?τίαν ο�? ποιεῖ
Chapter 4 [1 John 4:7] 29
�?στιν, καὶ πᾶς �? ἀγαπῶν �?κ τοῦ θεοῦ γεγ�*ννηται καὶ γινώσκει τὸν θεόν. 8 �? μὴ ἀγαπῶν
Chapter 5A (6) [1 John 5:1] 30
Ἰησοῦς �?στιν �? Χ�?ιστός, �?κ τοῦ θεοῦ γεγ�*ννηται, καὶ πᾶς �? ἀγαπῶν τὸν γεννήσαντα"

JW:
Note that the root word "γεννάω" (begat/gave birth to) is a relatively common word in the Christian Bible with 97 uses above. An examination of the above references indicate that "γεννάω" is most often used to describe an immediate physical birth. It is sometimes used in a figurative sense to describe a metaphysical relationship. It is never used in the Christian Bible to describe a physical birth that skips a generation/generations.

Now let's take a look at what the Early Church Fathers (you know, the guys that Christianity relies on to tell them what is the Christian Bible in the first place) had to say or didn't have to say about the possibility of "Matthew's" genealogy containing any Type of omission, unintentional or intentional:

http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-03/anf0...#P9609_2636820

"There is, first of all, Matthew, that most faithful chronicler305 of the Gospel, because the companion of the Lord; for no other reason in the world than to show us clearly the fleshly original306 of Christ, he thus begins his Gospel: "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham."307 With a nature issuing from such fountal sources, and an order gradually descending to the birth of Christ, what else have we here described than the very flesh of Abraham and of David conveying itself down, step after step, to the very virgin, and at last introducing Christ,-nay, producing Christ Himself of the virgin?"

Note Tertullian's "what else have we here described than the very flesh of Abraham and of David conveying itself down, step after step, to the very virgin" implying his understanding was a '''complete''' genealogy.

http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-06/anf06-48.htm

"I.-The Epistle to Aristides.
I.
[Africanus ON The Genealogy IN The Holy Gospels.]1 -Some indeed incorrectly allege that this discrepant enumeration and mixing of the names both of priestly men, as they think, and royal, was made properly,2 in order that Christ might be shown rightfully to be both Priest and King; as if any one disbelieved this, or had any other hope than this, that Christ is the High Priest of His Father, who presents our prayers to Him, and a supramundane King, who rules by the Spirit those whom He has delivered, a cooperator in the government of all things. And this is announced to us not by the catalogue of the tribes, nor by the mixing of the registered generations, but by the patriarchs and prophets. Let us not therefore descend to such religious trifling as to establish the kingship and priesthood of Christ by the interchanges of the names. For the priestly tribe of Levi, too, was allied with the kingly tribe of Juda, through the circumstance that Aaron married Elizabeth the l sister of Naasson,3 and that Eleazar again married the daughter of Phatiel,4 and begat children. The evangelists, therefore, would thus have spoken falsely, affirming what was not truth, but a fictitious commendation. And for this reason the one traced the pedigree of Jacob the father of Joseph from David through Solomon; the other traced that of Heli also, though in a different way, the father of Joseph, from Nathan the son of David. And they ought not indeed to have been ignorant that both orders of the ancestors enumerated are the generation of David, the royal tribe of Juda.5 For if Nathan was a prophet, so also was Solomon, and so too the father of both of them; and there were prophets belonging to many of the tribes, but priests belonging to none of the tribes, save the Levites only. To no purpose, then, is this fabrication of theirs. Nor shall an assertion of this kind prevail in the Church of Christ against the exact truth, so as that a lie should be contrived for the praise and glory of Christ. For who does not know that most holy word of the apostle also, who, when he was preaching and proclaiming the resurrection of our Saviour, and confidently affirming the truth, said with great fear, "If any say that Christ is not risen, and we assert and have believed this, and both hope for and preach that very thing, we are false witnesses of God, in alleging that He raised up Christ, whom He raised not up? "6 And if he who glorifies God the Father is thus afraid lest he should seem a false witness in narrating a marvellous fact, how should not he be justly afraid, who tries to establish the truth by a false statement, preparing an untrue opinion? For if the generations are different, and trace down no genuine seed to Joseph, and if all has been stated only with the view of establishing the position of Him who was to be born-to confirm the truth, namely, that He who was to be would be king and priest, there being at the same tune no proof given, but the dignity of the words being brought down to a feeble hymn,-it is evident that no praise accrues to God from that, since it is a falsehood, but rather judgment returns on him who asserts it, because he vaunts an unreality as though it were reality. Therefore, that we may expose the ignorance also of him who speaks thus, and prevent any one from stumbling at this folly, I shall set forth the true history of these matters.]"

JW:
Note that Africanus in trying to reconcile the genealogies of "Matthew" and "Luke" and clearly willing to accept as truth whatever explanation supports both genealogies as being true, never mentions "omissions" either as his explanation or anyone else's.

As far as I know no known Early Church Father considered "omissions" a possible defense against claimed error here.

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1602204.htm

"The Harmony of the Gospels
BY ST. AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO

CHAP. IV.--OF THE REASON WHY FORTY GENERATIONS (NOT INCLUDING CHRIST HIMSELF) ARE FOUND IN MATTHEW, ALTHOUGH HE DIVIDES THEM INTO THREE SUCCESSIONS OF FOURTEEN EACH."

JW:
Fast forwarding to the famous Apologist Augustine I think it's clear that he considered "Matthew's" generations complete and also never mentions the possibility of omissions. It would appear then that any supposed defense here of intended omissions is a modern invention and not supported by any "Church Tradition".

The definition of γεννάω from BDAG:

"γεννάω fut. γεννήσω; 1 aor. �?γ�*ννησα; pf. γεγ�*ννηκα. Pass.: fut. pl. γεννηθήσεσθε Sir 41:9; 1 aor. �?γεννήθην; pf. γεγ�*ννημαι (Pind., Hdt.+).—See ARahlfs, Genesis 1926, 39. Gener., to cause someth. to come into existence, primarily through procreation or parturition.
�* become the parent of, beget
�? by procreation (oft. LXX, fr. Gen 4:18 on) Mt 1:2–20 (cp. Diod. S. 4, 67, 2–68, 6, the genealogy of the Aeolians: 67, 4 Ἄ�?νη �?γ�*ννησεν Αἰόλον κ. Βοιωτόν; 67, 7 Ἱππάλκιμος �?γ�*ννησε �*ην�*λεων; 68:1 Σαλμωνεὺς �?γ�*ννησε θυγατ�*�?α … Τυ�?ώ; 68, 3 �*οσειδῶν �?γ�*ννησε �*ελίαν κ. �?ηλ�*α; 68, 6 �?ηλεὺς παῖδας �?γ�*ννησε δώδεκα. Interchanged with �?γ�*ννησε are �?τ�*κνωσε, ἦν υἱός, παῖδες �?γ�*νοντο, etc.; cp. PMich 155, 7. The continuity is not formalized to the degree in Mt, but in Diod. S. 4, 69, 1–3 �?γ�*ννησε is repeated six times in a short space, and 4, 75, 4f �?γ�*ννησε occurs four times with the names of fathers and sons; Did., Gen. 144, 27); Ac 7:8, 29. �?κ w. gen. of the mother (Hdt. 1, 108, 2; Diod. S. 4, 2, 1; 4, 62, 1; Palaeph. 44; PLond V, 1730, 10 οἱ �?ξ α�?τῆς γεννηθ�*ντες υἱοί; Tob 1:9; 2 Esdr 10:44; Demetr.: 722 Fgm. 2, 2 Jac.; TestJob 1:6; Jos, Ant. 12, 189) Mt 1:3, 5f.—Pass. be fathered (Orig., C. Cels. 8, 66, 23) �?κ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ σά�?κα w. the slave-woman, according to the flesh (i.e. in line with human devising; opp. δι᾽ �?παγγελίας) Gal 4:23. �? κατὰ σά�?κα γεννηθείς he that was fathered by human design, opp. �? κατὰ πνεῦμα he that was fathered by the Spirit’s design, i.e. in keeping with the divine promise, vs. 23) vs. 29. τὸ �?ν α�?τῇ γεννηθὲν �?κ πνε�?ματός �?στιν that which is conceived in her is of the Spirit Mt 1:20 (τὸ γεννηθ�*ν of that which is yet unborn: Diod. S. 17, 77, 3). Here the male principle is introduced by �?κ (Lucian, Dial. Deor. 20, 14 �?κ κ�?κνου γεγεννημ�*νη; Phlegon: 257 Fgm. 36, 2, 4 Jac.; Ps-Callisth. 1, 30, 3 �?ξ Ἄμμωνος �?γεννήθη; TestSim 2:2) as J 1:13 (�?γενήθ. P75et al.); but in 3:6 the imagery is complex, involving a maternal aspect in vs. 4. W. ἀπό (En 15:8 οἱ γίγαντες οἱ γεννηθ�*ντες ἀπὸ τ. πνευμάτων κ. σα�?κός) ἀφ᾽ ἑνὸς �?γεννήθησαν they were fathered by one man Hb 11:12 (numerous edd. �?γενήθησαν). �?κ πο�?νείας ο�? γεγεννήμεθα (v.l. �?γεννήθημεν) J 8:41 (cp. StudPal XX, 4, 30 �?ξ ἀγ�?άφων γάμων γεγεννῆσθαι). �?ν �?μα�?τίαις σὺ �?γεννήθης ὅλος you’re a born sinner, totally! 9:34.—Lk 1:35 (where mng. 2 is also prob. [as in τὸ γεννώμενον Philo, Plant. 15]. S. AFridrichsen, SymbOsl 6, 1928, 33–36; HAlmqvist, Plut. u. d. NT ’46, 60f).
ⓑ by exercising the role of a parental figure, ext. of 1a (Philo, Leg. ad Gai. 58 μᾶλλον α�?τὸν τῶν γον�*ων γεγ�*ννηκα), of a teacher on pupils �?ν Χ. Ἰ. διὰ τοῦ ε�?αγγελίου ὑμᾶς �?γ�*ννησα I became your father as Christians through the gospel 1 Cor 4:15; Phlm 10 (s. Ltzm. and JWeiss on 1 Cor 4:15; ADieterich, Mithraslit. 1903, 146ff).—Pass. �?κ (τοῦ) θεοῦ γεννᾶσθαι J 1:13 (on the rdg. of the Lat. ms. b, s. JPryor, NovT 27, ’85, 296–318); 1J 2:29; 3:9; 4:7; 5:1, 4, 18. On γεννᾶσθαι �?ξ ὕδατος κ. πνε�?ματος J 3:5 cp. 1QS 4:20–22 and s. YYadin, JBL 74, ’55, 40–43. Also ἄνωθεν γ. J 3:3, 7. πᾶς �? ἀγαπῶν τὸν γεννήσαντα ἀγαπᾷ τὸν γεγεννημ�*νον �?ξ α�?τοῦ everyone who loves the father (=God) loves the child (=Christ or one’s fellow Christian) 1J 5:1 (on γεννᾶσθαι �?κ θεοῦ s. Hdb. on J 3:3 and 1J 3:9 and the sources and lit. listed there; s. also παλιγγενεσία). Cp. σήμε�?ον γεγ�*ννηκά σε (Ps 2:7) 1 Cl 36:4; GEb 18, 37; Ac 13:33 (held by some to have been the orig. rdg. Lk 3:22 v.l.; s. JHillmann, Die Kindheitsgesch. Jesu nach Lucas: Jahrbücher f. Protestantische Theologie 17/2, 1891, 192–261; HUsener, D. Weihnachtsfest2 1911, 38ff); Hb 1:5; 5:5.
② to give birth to, bear (Aeschyl., Suppl. 48; X., De Rep. Lac. 1, 3; Lucian, Sacrif. 6; Plut., Mor., 3c; Ps.-Callisth. 1, 9, 2 �?κ θεοῦ γεννήσασα παῖδα=a woman who has borne a child to a god; BGU 132 II, 5; Judg 11:1 B; Is 66:9; 4 Macc 10:2) Lk 1:13, 57; 23:29; J 16:21 w. τίκτειν; AcPl Ha 8, 28 εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα who bears children for slavery Gal 4:24. Pass. be born (�?κ πα�?θ�*νου Did., Gen. 96, 13) �?γεννήθη Μωϋσῆς Ac 7:20; cp. Hb 11:23. γεγεννημ�*νος �?ν Τα�?σῷ Ac 22:3; μήπω … γεννηθ�*ντων Ro 9:11; π�?ὶν ἡμᾶς γεννηθῆναι before we were born 1 Cl 38:3. εἰς τὸν κόσμον come into the world J 16:21; Mt 2:1, 4; 19:12; 26:24 (=1 Cl 46:8); Mk 14:21 (cp. En 38:2); Lk 1:35 (1a is also prob.; a v.l. adds �?κ σοῦ, which can be rendered ‘the child to whom you give birth’). �?κ Μα�?ίας �?γεννήθη AcPlCor 1:14; 2:5 (cp. Mt 1:16); J 3:4; 9:2, 19f, 32; IEph 18:2; ITr 11:2; ἀληθῶς γ. be in fact born (in opp. to Docetism) 9:1. γεγεννημ�*να (v.l. γεγενημ�*να) εἰς ἅλωσιν 2 Pt 2:12. εἰς τοῦτο for this purpose J 18:37. διάλεκτος �?ν ᾑ �?γεννήθημεν the language in which we were born i.e., which we have spoken fr. infancy Ac 2:8. �?γὼ δὲ καὶ γεγ�*ννημαι but I was actually born a Roman citizen 22:28. οὗτος �?γεννήθη βασιλε�?ς born a king GJs 20:4 codd. γεννῶνται και γεννῶσιν Lk 20:34 v.l.
③ to cause someth. to happen, bring forth, produce, cause, fig. of various kinds of production (Pla. et al.; Polyb. 1, 67, 2 στάσις �?γεννᾶτο; Philo, De Jos. 254; Jos., Ant. 6, 144) 2 Ti 2:23.—γ. κα�?πόν produce fruit (Philo, Op. M. 113) ITr 11:1. Forged writing γεγεννημ�*νον for γεγενημ�*νον GJs 24:3.—B. 280. DELG s.v. γίγνομαι p. 222. M-M. TW."

Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. 2000. A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature. "Based on Walter Bauer's Griechisch-deutsches Wr̲terbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der frhüchristlichen [sic] Literatur, sixth edition, ed. Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, with Viktor Reichmann and on previous English editions by W.F. Arndt, F.W. Gingrich, and F.W. Danker." (3rd ed.) . University of Chicago Press: Chicago

JW:
Note that the priMary definition from BDAG is '''immediate parent procreation''' and this is how BDAG has classified Matthew 1.2-20. I don't believe there is a single example above of γεννάω being used with "telescoping" (deliberate omissions) of generations.

The definition of γεννάω from LSJ:

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin...3A1999.01.0155

γενν-άω , fut. Med. γεννήσομαι in pass. sense, D.S.19.2 (but

A. -ηθήσομαι Id.4.9 ): ( [γ�*ννα] ):--causal of γίγνομαι (cf. γείνομαι), mostly of the father,
beget, �? γεννήσας πατή�? S.El. 1412 ; οἱ γεννήσαντ�*ς σε your parents, X.Mem. 2.1.27; τὸ γεννώμενον ἔκ
τινος Hdt.1.108 , etc.; ὅθεν γεγενναμ�*νοι sprung, Pi.P.5.74; of the mother, bring forth, bear,
A.Supp.48, Arist.GA716a22, X. Lac.1.3, etc.:--Med., produce from oneself, create, Pl. Ti.34b, Mx.
238a.

2. produce, grow, get, κἂν σω̂μα γεννήσῃ μ�*γα S.Aj.1077 .

3. metaph., engender, produce, λήθη τω̂ν ἰδίων κακω̂ν θ�?ασ�?τητα γεννᾳ̂ Democr.196 ;
παντοίαν ἀ�?ετήν Pl.Smp.209e ; διανοήματά τε καὶ δόξας Id.R.496a , etc.; γεννω̂σι τὸν ο�?�?ανὸν [οἱ
φιλόσοφοι] call it into existence, Arist.Cael.283b31; �? �?ξ ἀσωμάτου γεννω̂ν λόγος ib.305a16, cf.
Plot.6.6.9; of numbers, produce a total, Ph. 1.347.

JW:
Again,priMary definition of '''immediate parent procreation'''

Note that "Matthew" himself distinguishes between "son of" which can mean skipped generations and "begat" which means immediate generation:

1:1-2 (RSV)
"The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.
Abraham was the father of Isaac, and Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers,"

Note that "father of" above is the word in question here "�?γ�*ννησεν".

Here's famed Internet Apologist JP Holding's defense against the original abbreviated version of my claimed error (apparently he's reading this and was alerted to the problem at his site):

http://www.tektonics.org/uz/wally01.html

"Same dip, different day. See #5 above. Normal stuff, not an error."

JP Holding refers to a defense that the omission was intentional and an accepted literary convention of the time. In order for this supposed general defense to have any weight here, JP must present such an example in the '''Greek''' rather than Akkadieane or Hagarithic or Errorithmatic.

So in Summary, the evidence that "Matthew's" identification of Abiud as a son of Zerubbabel at 1:13 is an Error, ranked by weight of evidence is:

1) According to the Christian Bible itself Abiud was not one of the sons of Zerubbabel per 1 Chronicles 3:19.

2) Conjugations of the root "γεννάω" (begat/gave birth to) of the word used by "Matthew", "�?γ�*ννησεν", is a relatively common word in the Christian Bible with 97 uses above. It is never used in the Christian Bible to describe a physical birth that skips a generation/generations.

3) BDAG and LSJ Lexicons give a primary meaning to "�?γ�*ννησεν" of immediate biological parent. BDAG specifically classifies the use in 1:2-20 as this meaning and neither show an example of "�?γ�*ννησεν" with skipped generations.

4) "Matthew" himself distinguishes between "son of" which can mean skipped generations and "begat" which means immediate generation.

5) There are many more examples of "Matthew's" problems with names in the genealogy.

1:4 "Aram" instead of "Ram".

1:5 Use of Rachab with an impossible chronology.

1:7 "Asaph" instead of "Asa".

1:8 Omission of "Ahaziah", "Joash", and "Amaziah".

1:10 "Amos" instead of "Amon".

1:11 Omission of "Jehoiakim".

6) The specific wording at the start and end of the genealogy and explict use of "14" indicates the Reader would understand that a complete Genealogy was being presented.

7) The necessity of transliteration of no longer used Hebrew names and resultant spelling variation and similar names would make it easier for names to be omitted unintentionally or intentionally.

8) The likely best parallel to compare "Matthew's" Genealogy too, Chronicles, appears to have intended to present a complete listing for the Davidic line.

9) We have no evidence that such omissions in Greek writings were the Rule rather than the exception.

10) Origen confesses to us that in his time the Greek manuscripts were filled with errors regarding Hebrew names. This would have been well before any extant manuscripts.

11) The Early Church Fathers make no mention of an intentional or even unintentional omission in "Matthew's" genealogy.

The evidence that "Matthew's" identification of Abiud as a son of Zerubbabel at 1:13 is not an Error, ranked by weight of evidence is:

1) Because JP Holding says so.

In my opinion, the weight of the Evidence above is that "Matthew's" identification of Abiud as a son of Zerubbabel at 1:13 is an '''Error'''. Let me also point out something for the benefit of Fundamentalists here. If you want to believe JP Holding that there is no error here than "Matthew's" use of a name at this point in the genealogy that was supported by Chronicles would still have been a better choice and therefore, the existing genealogy by "Matthew" is not "perfect".

Joseph

BIRTH, n.
The first and direst of all disasters. As to the nature of it there appears to be no uniformity. Castor and Pollux were born from the egg. Pallas came out of a skull. Galatea was once a block of stone. Peresilis, who wrote in the tenth century, avers that he grew up out of the ground where a priest had spilled holy water. It is known that Arimaxus was derived from a hole in the earth, made by a stroke of lightning. Leucomedon was the son of a cavern in Mount Aetna, and I have myself seen a man come out of a wine cellar.

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

11-05-2005, 05:49 PM	#1
JoeWallack Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Nazareth Posts: 2,357	"And Error Begat Error" JW: Peter Kirby has created a new site: http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page primarily to cut down on my posts here but also for polite determination of whether there are Errors In The Bible. I present to the Unfaithful here my own Ram offering of Potential Error in the Christian Bible. Everyone is welcome to critique except for Harvey Dubish. Enjoy!: Matthew 1:13 "and Zerubbabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;" (ASV) According to the Jewish Bible, 1 Chronicles 3:19: "And the sons of Pedaiah: Zerubbabel, and Shimei. And the sons of Zerubbabel: Meshullam, and Hananiah; and Shelomith was their sister; and Hashubah, and Ohel, and Berechiah, and Hasadiah, Jushab-hesed, five." Abiud was not one of the eight children of Zerubbabel. The Greek Matthew1:13: "Ζο�?οβαβὲλ δὲ �?γ�ννησεν τὸν Ἀβιο�?δ Ἀβιοὺδ δὲ �?γ�ννησεν τὸν Ἐλιακίμ Ἐλιακὶμ δὲ �?γ�ννησεν τὸν Ἀζώ�?" "Ἀβιο�?δ" (Abiud), fifth Greek word from the left. The Greek 1 Chronicles 3:19: "καὶ υἱοὶ Σαλαθιηλ Ζο�?οβαβελ καὶ Σεμει καὶ υἱοὶ Ζο�?οβαβελ Μοσολλαμος καὶ Ανανια καὶ Σαλωμιθ ἀδελφὴ α�?τῶν 20 καὶ Ασουβε καὶ Οολ καὶ Βα�?αχια καὶ Ασαδια καὶ Ασοβαεσδ π�ντε" Don't see it. An apologist defense here again is that "Matthew" intentionally skipped a generation so Abiud was a descendant of Zerubbabel and not an immediate son. Let's take a closer look at the Greek: NESTLE-ALAND GREEK NEW TESTAMENT 27TH EDITION with GRAMCORD™ Greek New Testament Alpha Morphological Database and the McReynolds English Interlinear Former Editions edited by Kurt Aland, Matthew Black, Carlo M. Martini Bruce M. Metzger, and Allen Wikgren Fourth Revised Edition edited by Barbara Aland, Kurt Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlo M. Martini, and Bruce M. Metzger in cooperation with the Institute for New Testament Textual Research, Münster/Westphalia DEUTSCHE BIBELGESELLSCHAFT UNITED BIBLE SOCIETIES Aland, B., Aland, K., Black, M., Martini, C. M., Metzger, B. M., & Wikgren, A. 1993, c1979. The Greek New Testament (4th ed.). United Bible Societies: Federal Republic of Germany "13 Ζο�?οβαβὲλ δὲ �?γ�ννησεν τὸν Ἀβιο�?δ, Ἀβιοὺδ δὲ �?γ�ννησεν τὸν Ἐλιακίμ, Ἐλιακὶμ δὲ �?γ�ννησεν τὸν Ἀζώ�?," "�?γ�ννησεν" (begat). Now a search of the use of this word in the Christian Bible: "Search Results {el}"γεννάω"{/} 46 Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, 27th Ed., With GRAMCORD(TM) Greek New Testament Alpha Morphological Database and McReynolds English Interlinear (97 occurrences in 30 articles) Chapter 1A (41) [Matthew 1:2] 1 υἱοῦ Δαυὶδ υἱοῦ Ἀβ�?αάμ. 2 Ἀβ�?αὰμ �?γ�ννησεν τὸν Ἰσαάκ, Ἰσαὰκ δὲ �?γ�ννησεν Chapter 2A (2) [Matthew 2:1] 2 2 Τοῦ δὲ Ἰησοῦ γεννηθ�ντος �?ν Βηθλ�εμ τῆς Ἰουδαίας �?ν ἡμ��?αις Ἡ�?ῴδου τοῦ Chapter 19 [Matthew 19:12] 3 ε�?νοῦχοι οἵτινες �?κ κοιλίας μητ�?ὸς �?γεννήθησαν οὕτως, καὶ εἰσὶν ε�?νοῦχοι οἵτινες Chapter 26 [Matthew 26:24] 4 πα�?αδίδοται· καλὸν ἦν α�?τῷ εἰ ο�?κ �?γεννήθη �? ἄνθ�?ωπος �?κεῖνος. 25 ἀποκ�?ιθεὶς Chapter 14 [Mark 14:21] 5 ἀνθ�?ώπου πα�?αδίδοται· καλὸν α�?τῷ εἰ ο�?κ �?γεννήθη �? ἄνθ�?ωπος �?κεῖνος. 22 Καὶ �?σθιόντων Chapter 1A (3) [Luke 1:13] 6 δ�ησίς σου, καὶ ἡ γυνή σου Ἐλισάβετ γεννήσει υἱόν σοι καὶ καλ�σεις τὸ ὄνομα α�?τοῦ Chapter 23 [Luke 23:29] 7 αἱ στεῖ�?αι καὶ αἱ κοιλίαι αἳ ο�?κ �?γ�ννησαν καὶ μαστοὶ οἳ ο�?κ ἔθ�?εψαν. 30 τότε Chapter 1 [John 1:13] 8 �?κ θελήματος ἀνδ�?ὸς ἀλλ᾽ �?κ θεοῦ �?γεννήθησαν. 14 Καὶ �? λόγος σὰ�?ξ �?γ�νετο καὶ Chapter 3A (8) [John 3:3] 9 Ἀμὴν ἀμὴν λ�γω σοι, �?ὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν, ο�? δ�?ναται ἰδεῖν τὴν βασιλείαν Chapter 8 [John 8:41] 10 οὖν] α�?τῷ, Ἡμεῖς �?κ πο�?νείας ο�? γεγεννήμεθα· ἕνα πατ��?α ἔχομεν τὸν θεόν. 42 Chapter 9A (5) [John 9:2] 11 ἢ οἱ γονεῖς α�?τοῦ, ἵνα τυφλὸς γεννηθῇ; 3 ἀπεκ�?ίθη Ἰησοῦς, Οὔτε οὗτος ἥμα�?τεν Chapter 16A (2) [John 16:21] 12 ὅτι ἦλθεν ἡ ὥ�?α α�?τῆς· ὅταν δὲ γεννήσῃ τὸ παιδίον, ο�?κ�τι μνημονε�?ει τῆς Chapter 18 [John 18:37] 13 ὅτι βασιλε�?ς εἰμι. �?γὼ εἰς τοῦτο γεγ�ννημαι καὶ εἰς τοῦτο �?λήλυθα εἰς τὸν κόσμον Chapter 2 [Acts 2:8] 14 τῇ ἰδίᾳ διαλ�κτῳ ἡμῶν �?ν ᾗ �?γεννήθημεν; 9 �ά�?θοι καὶ Μῆδοι καὶ Ἐλαμῖται Chapter 7A (3) [Acts 7:8] 15 α�?τῷ διαθήκην πε�?ιτομῆς· καὶ οὕτως �?γ�ννησεν τὸν Ἰσαὰκ καὶ πε�?ι�τεμεν α�?τὸν Chapter 13 [Acts 13:33] 16 , Υἱός μου εἶ σ�?, �?γὼ σήμε�?ον γεγ�ννηκά σε. 34 ὅτι δὲ ἀν�στησεν α�?τὸν �?κ Chapter 22A (2) [Acts 22:3] 17 φησίν, 3 Ἐγώ εἰμι ἀνὴ�? Ἰουδαῖος, γεγεννημ�νος �?ν Τα�?σῷ τῆς Κιλικίας, ἀνατεθ�?αμμ�νος Chapter 9 [Romans 9:11] 18 Ἰσαὰκ τοῦ πατ�?ὸς ἡμῶν· 11 μήπω γὰ�? γεννηθ�ντων μηδὲ π�?αξάντων τι ἀγαθὸν ἢ φαῦλον Chapter 4 [1 Corinthians 4:15] 19 Ἰησοῦ διὰ τοῦ ε�?αγγελίου �?γὼ ὑμᾶς �?γ�ννησα. 16 πα�?ακαλῶ οὖν ὑμᾶς, μιμηταί μου Chapter 4A (3) [Galatians 4:23] 20 �? μὲν �?κ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ σά�?κα γεγ�ννηται, �? δὲ �?κ τῆς �?λευθ��?ας δι᾽ �?παγγελίας Chapter 2 [2 Timothy 2:23] 21 ἀπαιδε�?τους ζητήσεις πα�?αιτοῦ, εἰδὼς ὅτι γεννῶσιν μάχας· 24 δοῦλον δὲ κυ�?ίου ο�? δεῖ �ΡΟΣ ΘΙΛΗΜΟ�?Α [Philemon 10] 22 πα�?ακαλῶ σε πε�?ὶ τοῦ �?μοῦ τ�κνου, ὃν �?γ�ννησα �?ν τοῖς δεσμοῖς, Ὀνήσιμον, 11 τόν Chapter 1 [Hebrews 1:5] 23 , Υἱός μου εἶ σ�?, �?γὼ σήμε�?ον γεγ�ννηκά σε; καὶ πάλιν, Ἐγὼ ἔσομαι α�?τῷ Chapter 5 [Hebrews 5:5] 24 , Υἱός μου εἶ σ�?, �?γὼ σήμε�?ον γεγ�ννηκά σε· 6 καθὼς καὶ �?ν ἑτ��?ῳ λ�γει, Chapter 11A (2) [Hebrews 11:12] 25 �?παγγειλάμενον. 12 διὸ καὶ ἀφ᾽ ἑνὸς �?γεννήθησαν, καὶ ταῦτα νενεκ�?ωμ�νου, καθὼς τὰ Chapter 2 [2 Peter 2:12] 26 κ�?ίσιν. 12 οὗτοι δὲ ὡς ἄλογα ζῷα γεγεννημ�να φυσικὰ εἰς ἅλωσιν καὶ φθο�?ὰν �?ν Chapter 2 [1 John 2:29] 27 �? ποιῶν τὴν δικαιοσ�?νην �?ξ α�?τοῦ γεγ�ννηται. Chapter 3A (2) [1 John 3:9] 28 λ�?σῃ τὰ ἔ�?γα τοῦ διαβόλου. 9 �ᾶς �? γεγεννημ�νος �?κ τοῦ θεοῦ �?μα�?τίαν ο�? ποιεῖ Chapter 4 [1 John 4:7] 29 �?στιν, καὶ πᾶς �? ἀγαπῶν �?κ τοῦ θεοῦ γεγ�ννηται καὶ γινώσκει τὸν θεόν. 8 �? μὴ ἀγαπῶν Chapter 5A (6) [1 John 5:1] 30 Ἰησοῦς �?στιν �? Χ�?ιστός, �?κ τοῦ θεοῦ γεγ�ννηται, καὶ πᾶς �? ἀγαπῶν τὸν γεννήσαντα" JW: Note that the root word "γεννάω" (begat/gave birth to) is a relatively common word in the Christian Bible with 97 uses above. An examination of the above references indicate that "γεννάω" is most often used to describe an immediate physical birth. It is sometimes used in a figurative sense to describe a metaphysical relationship. It is never used in the Christian Bible to describe a physical birth that skips a generation/generations. Now let's take a look at what the Early Church Fathers (you know, the guys that Christianity relies on to tell them what is the Christian Bible in the first place) had to say or didn't have to say about the possibility of "Matthew's" genealogy containing any Type of omission, unintentional or intentional: http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-03/anf0...#P9609_2636820 "There is, first of all, Matthew, that most faithful chronicler305 of the Gospel, because the companion of the Lord; for no other reason in the world than to show us clearly the fleshly original306 of Christ, he thus begins his Gospel: "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham."307 With a nature issuing from such fountal sources, and an order gradually descending to the birth of Christ, what else have we here described than the very flesh of Abraham and of David conveying itself down, step after step, to the very virgin, and at last introducing Christ,-nay, producing Christ Himself of the virgin?" Note Tertullian's "what else have we here described than the very flesh of Abraham and of David conveying itself down, step after step, to the very virgin" implying his understanding was a '''complete''' genealogy. http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-06/anf06-48.htm "I.-The Epistle to Aristides. I. [Africanus ON The Genealogy IN The Holy Gospels.]1 -Some indeed incorrectly allege that this discrepant enumeration and mixing of the names both of priestly men, as they think, and royal, was made properly,2 in order that Christ might be shown rightfully to be both Priest and King; as if any one disbelieved this, or had any other hope than this, that Christ is the High Priest of His Father, who presents our prayers to Him, and a supramundane King, who rules by the Spirit those whom He has delivered, a cooperator in the government of all things. And this is announced to us not by the catalogue of the tribes, nor by the mixing of the registered generations, but by the patriarchs and prophets. Let us not therefore descend to such religious trifling as to establish the kingship and priesthood of Christ by the interchanges of the names. For the priestly tribe of Levi, too, was allied with the kingly tribe of Juda, through the circumstance that Aaron married Elizabeth the l sister of Naasson,3 and that Eleazar again married the daughter of Phatiel,4 and begat children. The evangelists, therefore, would thus have spoken falsely, affirming what was not truth, but a fictitious commendation. And for this reason the one traced the pedigree of Jacob the father of Joseph from David through Solomon; the other traced that of Heli also, though in a different way, the father of Joseph, from Nathan the son of David. And they ought not indeed to have been ignorant that both orders of the ancestors enumerated are the generation of David, the royal tribe of Juda.5 For if Nathan was a prophet, so also was Solomon, and so too the father of both of them; and there were prophets belonging to many of the tribes, but priests belonging to none of the tribes, save the Levites only. To no purpose, then, is this fabrication of theirs. Nor shall an assertion of this kind prevail in the Church of Christ against the exact truth, so as that a lie should be contrived for the praise and glory of Christ. For who does not know that most holy word of the apostle also, who, when he was preaching and proclaiming the resurrection of our Saviour, and confidently affirming the truth, said with great fear, "If any say that Christ is not risen, and we assert and have believed this, and both hope for and preach that very thing, we are false witnesses of God, in alleging that He raised up Christ, whom He raised not up? "6 And if he who glorifies God the Father is thus afraid lest he should seem a false witness in narrating a marvellous fact, how should not he be justly afraid, who tries to establish the truth by a false statement, preparing an untrue opinion? For if the generations are different, and trace down no genuine seed to Joseph, and if all has been stated only with the view of establishing the position of Him who was to be born-to confirm the truth, namely, that He who was to be would be king and priest, there being at the same tune no proof given, but the dignity of the words being brought down to a feeble hymn,-it is evident that no praise accrues to God from that, since it is a falsehood, but rather judgment returns on him who asserts it, because he vaunts an unreality as though it were reality. Therefore, that we may expose the ignorance also of him who speaks thus, and prevent any one from stumbling at this folly, I shall set forth the true history of these matters.]" JW: Note that Africanus in trying to reconcile the genealogies of "Matthew" and "Luke" and clearly willing to accept as truth whatever explanation supports both genealogies as being true, never mentions "omissions" either as his explanation or anyone else's. As far as I know no known Early Church Father considered "omissions" a possible defense against claimed error here. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1602204.htm "The Harmony of the Gospels BY ST. AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO CHAP. IV.--OF THE REASON WHY FORTY GENERATIONS (NOT INCLUDING CHRIST HIMSELF) ARE FOUND IN MATTHEW, ALTHOUGH HE DIVIDES THEM INTO THREE SUCCESSIONS OF FOURTEEN EACH." JW: Fast forwarding to the famous Apologist Augustine I think it's clear that he considered "Matthew's" generations complete and also never mentions the possibility of omissions. It would appear then that any supposed defense here of intended omissions is a modern invention and not supported by any "Church Tradition". The definition of γεννάω from BDAG: "γεννάω fut. γεννήσω; 1 aor. �?γ�ννησα; pf. γεγ�ννηκα. Pass.: fut. pl. γεννηθήσεσθε Sir 41:9; 1 aor. �?γεννήθην; pf. γεγ�ννημαι (Pind., Hdt.+).—See ARahlfs, Genesis 1926, 39. Gener., to cause someth. to come into existence, primarily through procreation or parturition. �* become the parent of, beget �? by procreation (oft. LXX, fr. Gen 4:18 on) Mt 1:2–20 (cp. Diod. S. 4, 67, 2–68, 6, the genealogy of the Aeolians: 67, 4 Ἄ�?νη �?γ�ννησεν Αἰόλον κ. Βοιωτόν; 67, 7 Ἱππάλκιμος �?γ�ννησε �ην�λεων; 68:1 Σαλμωνεὺς �?γ�ννησε θυγατ��?α … Τυ�?ώ; 68, 3 �οσειδῶν �?γ�ννησε �ελίαν κ. �?ηλ�α; 68, 6 �?ηλεὺς παῖδας �?γ�ννησε δώδεκα. Interchanged with �?γ�ννησε are �?τ�κνωσε, ἦν υἱός, παῖδες �?γ�νοντο, etc.; cp. PMich 155, 7. The continuity is not formalized to the degree in Mt, but in Diod. S. 4, 69, 1–3 �?γ�ννησε is repeated six times in a short space, and 4, 75, 4f �?γ�ννησε occurs four times with the names of fathers and sons; Did., Gen. 144, 27); Ac 7:8, 29. �?κ w. gen. of the mother (Hdt. 1, 108, 2; Diod. S. 4, 2, 1; 4, 62, 1; Palaeph. 44; PLond V, 1730, 10 οἱ �?ξ α�?τῆς γεννηθ�ντες υἱοί; Tob 1:9; 2 Esdr 10:44; Demetr.: 722 Fgm. 2, 2 Jac.; TestJob 1:6; Jos, Ant. 12, 189) Mt 1:3, 5f.—Pass. be fathered (Orig., C. Cels. 8, 66, 23) �?κ τῆς παιδίσκης κατὰ σά�?κα w. the slave-woman, according to the flesh (i.e. in line with human devising; opp. δι᾽ �?παγγελίας) Gal 4:23. �? κατὰ σά�?κα γεννηθείς he that was fathered by human design, opp. �? κατὰ πνεῦμα he that was fathered by the Spirit’s design, i.e. in keeping with the divine promise, vs. 23) vs. 29. τὸ �?ν α�?τῇ γεννηθὲν �?κ πνε�?ματός �?στιν that which is conceived in her is of the Spirit Mt 1:20 (τὸ γεννηθ�ν of that which is yet unborn: Diod. S. 17, 77, 3). Here the male principle is introduced by �?κ (Lucian, Dial. Deor. 20, 14 �?κ κ�?κνου γεγεννημ�νη; Phlegon: 257 Fgm. 36, 2, 4 Jac.; Ps-Callisth. 1, 30, 3 �?ξ Ἄμμωνος �?γεννήθη; TestSim 2:2) as J 1:13 (�?γενήθ. P75et al.); but in 3:6 the imagery is complex, involving a maternal aspect in vs. 4. W. ἀπό (En 15:8 οἱ γίγαντες οἱ γεννηθ�ντες ἀπὸ τ. πνευμάτων κ. σα�?κός) ἀφ᾽ ἑνὸς �?γεννήθησαν they were fathered by one man Hb 11:12 (numerous edd. �?γενήθησαν). �?κ πο�?νείας ο�? γεγεννήμεθα (v.l. �?γεννήθημεν) J 8:41 (cp. StudPal XX, 4, 30 �?ξ ἀγ�?άφων γάμων γεγεννῆσθαι). �?ν �?μα�?τίαις σὺ �?γεννήθης ὅλος you’re a born sinner, totally! 9:34.—Lk 1:35 (where mng. 2 is also prob. [as in τὸ γεννώμενον Philo, Plant. 15]. S. AFridrichsen, SymbOsl 6, 1928, 33–36; HAlmqvist, Plut. u. d. NT ’46, 60f). ⓑ by exercising the role of a parental figure, ext. of 1a (Philo, Leg. ad Gai. 58 μᾶλλον α�?τὸν τῶν γον�ων γεγ�ννηκα), of a teacher on pupils �?ν Χ. Ἰ. διὰ τοῦ ε�?αγγελίου ὑμᾶς �?γ�ννησα I became your father as Christians through the gospel 1 Cor 4:15; Phlm 10 (s. Ltzm. and JWeiss on 1 Cor 4:15; ADieterich, Mithraslit. 1903, 146ff).—Pass. �?κ (τοῦ) θεοῦ γεννᾶσθαι J 1:13 (on the rdg. of the Lat. ms. b, s. JPryor, NovT 27, ’85, 296–318); 1J 2:29; 3:9; 4:7; 5:1, 4, 18. On γεννᾶσθαι �?ξ ὕδατος κ. πνε�?ματος J 3:5 cp. 1QS 4:20–22 and s. YYadin, JBL 74, ’55, 40–43. Also ἄνωθεν γ. J 3:3, 7. πᾶς �? ἀγαπῶν τὸν γεννήσαντα ἀγαπᾷ τὸν γεγεννημ�νον �?ξ α�?τοῦ everyone who loves the father (=God) loves the child (=Christ or one’s fellow Christian) 1J 5:1 (on γεννᾶσθαι �?κ θεοῦ s. Hdb. on J 3:3 and 1J 3:9 and the sources and lit. listed there; s. also παλιγγενεσία). Cp. σήμε�?ον γεγ�ννηκά σε (Ps 2:7) 1 Cl 36:4; GEb 18, 37; Ac 13:33 (held by some to have been the orig. rdg. Lk 3:22 v.l.; s. JHillmann, Die Kindheitsgesch. Jesu nach Lucas: Jahrbücher f. Protestantische Theologie 17/2, 1891, 192–261; HUsener, D. Weihnachtsfest2 1911, 38ff); Hb 1:5; 5:5. ② to give birth to, bear (Aeschyl., Suppl. 48; X., De Rep. Lac. 1, 3; Lucian, Sacrif. 6; Plut., Mor., 3c; Ps.-Callisth. 1, 9, 2 �?κ θεοῦ γεννήσασα παῖδα=a woman who has borne a child to a god; BGU 132 II, 5; Judg 11:1 B; Is 66:9; 4 Macc 10:2) Lk 1:13, 57; 23:29; J 16:21 w. τίκτειν; AcPl Ha 8, 28 εἰς δουλείαν γεννῶσα who bears children for slavery Gal 4:24. Pass. be born (�?κ πα�?θ�νου Did., Gen. 96, 13) �?γεννήθη Μωϋσῆς Ac 7:20; cp. Hb 11:23. γεγεννημ�νος �?ν Τα�?σῷ Ac 22:3; μήπω … γεννηθ�ντων Ro 9:11; π�?ὶν ἡμᾶς γεννηθῆναι before we were born 1 Cl 38:3. εἰς τὸν κόσμον come into the world J 16:21; Mt 2:1, 4; 19:12; 26:24 (=1 Cl 46:8); Mk 14:21 (cp. En 38:2); Lk 1:35 (1a is also prob.; a v.l. adds �?κ σοῦ, which can be rendered ‘the child to whom you give birth’). �?κ Μα�?ίας �?γεννήθη AcPlCor 1:14; 2:5 (cp. Mt 1:16); J 3:4; 9:2, 19f, 32; IEph 18:2; ITr 11:2; ἀληθῶς γ. be in fact born (in opp. to Docetism) 9:1. γεγεννημ�να (v.l. γεγενημ�να) εἰς ἅλωσιν 2 Pt 2:12. εἰς τοῦτο for this purpose J 18:37. διάλεκτος �?ν ᾑ �?γεννήθημεν the language in which we were born i.e., which we have spoken fr. infancy Ac 2:8. �?γὼ δὲ καὶ γεγ�ννημαι but I was actually born a Roman citizen 22:28. οὗτος �?γεννήθη βασιλε�?ς born a king GJs 20:4 codd. γεννῶνται και γεννῶσιν Lk 20:34 v.l. ③ to cause someth. to happen, bring forth, produce, cause, fig. of various kinds of production (Pla. et al.; Polyb. 1, 67, 2 στάσις �?γεννᾶτο; Philo, De Jos. 254; Jos., Ant. 6, 144) 2 Ti 2:23.—γ. κα�?πόν produce fruit (Philo, Op. M. 113) ITr 11:1. Forged writing γεγεννημ�νον for γεγενημ�νον GJs 24:3.—B. 280. DELG s.v. γίγνομαι p. 222. M-M. TW." Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. 2000. A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature. "Based on Walter Bauer's Griechisch-deutsches Wr̲terbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der frhüchristlichen [sic] Literatur, sixth edition, ed. Kurt Aland and Barbara Aland, with Viktor Reichmann and on previous English editions by W.F. Arndt, F.W. Gingrich, and F.W. Danker." (3rd ed.) . University of Chicago Press: Chicago JW: Note that the priMary definition from BDAG is '''immediate parent procreation''' and this is how BDAG has classified Matthew 1.2-20. I don't believe there is a single example above of γεννάω being used with "telescoping" (deliberate omissions) of generations. The definition of γεννάω from LSJ: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin...3A1999.01.0155 γενν-άω , fut. Med. γεννήσομαι in pass. sense, D.S.19.2 (but A. -ηθήσομαι Id.4.9 ): ( [γ�ννα] ):--causal of γίγνομαι (cf. γείνομαι), mostly of the father, beget, �? γεννήσας πατή�? S.El. 1412 ; οἱ γεννήσαντ�ς σε your parents, X.Mem. 2.1.27; τὸ γεννώμενον ἔκ τινος Hdt.1.108 , etc.; ὅθεν γεγενναμ�νοι sprung, Pi.P.5.74; of the mother, bring forth, bear, A.Supp.48, Arist.GA716a22, X. Lac.1.3, etc.:--Med., produce from oneself, create, Pl. Ti.34b, Mx. 238a. 2. produce, grow, get, κἂν σω̂μα γεννήσῃ μ�γα S.Aj.1077 . 3. metaph., engender, produce, λήθη τω̂ν ἰδίων κακω̂ν θ�?ασ�?τητα γεννᾳ̂ Democr.196 ; παντοίαν ἀ�?ετήν Pl.Smp.209e ; διανοήματά τε καὶ δόξας Id.R.496a , etc.; γεννω̂σι τὸν ο�?�?ανὸν [οἱ φιλόσοφοι] call it into existence, Arist.Cael.283b31; �? �?ξ ἀσωμάτου γεννω̂ν λόγος ib.305a16, cf. Plot.6.6.9; of numbers, produce a total, Ph. 1.347. JW: Again,priMary definition of '''immediate parent procreation''' Note that "Matthew" himself distinguishes between "son of" which can mean skipped generations and "begat" which means immediate generation: 1:1-2 (RSV) "The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. Abraham was the father of Isaac, and Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers," Note that "father of" above is the word in question here "�?γ�ννησεν". Here's famed Internet Apologist JP Holding's defense against the original abbreviated version of my claimed error (apparently he's reading this and was alerted to the problem at his site): http://www.tektonics.org/uz/wally01.html "Same dip, different day. See #5 above. Normal stuff, not an error." JP Holding refers to a defense that the omission was intentional and an accepted literary convention of the time. In order for this supposed general defense to have any weight here, JP must present such an example in the '''Greek''' rather than Akkadieane or Hagarithic or Errorithmatic. So in Summary, the evidence that "Matthew's" identification of Abiud as a son of Zerubbabel at 1:13 is an Error, ranked by weight of evidence is: 1) According to the Christian Bible itself Abiud was not one of the sons of Zerubbabel per 1 Chronicles 3:19. 2) Conjugations of the root "γεννάω" (begat/gave birth to) of the word used by "Matthew", "�?γ�ννησεν", is a relatively common word in the Christian Bible with 97 uses above. It is never used in the Christian Bible to describe a physical birth that skips a generation/generations. 3) BDAG and LSJ Lexicons give a primary meaning to "�?γ�ννησεν" of immediate biological parent. BDAG specifically classifies the use in 1:2-20 as this meaning and neither show an example of "�?γ�*ννησεν" with skipped generations. 4) "Matthew" himself distinguishes between "son of" which can mean skipped generations and "begat" which means immediate generation. 5) There are many more examples of "Matthew's" problems with names in the genealogy. 1:4 "Aram" instead of "Ram". 1:5 Use of Rachab with an impossible chronology. 1:7 "Asaph" instead of "Asa". 1:8 Omission of "Ahaziah", "Joash", and "Amaziah". 1:10 "Amos" instead of "Amon". 1:11 Omission of "Jehoiakim". 6) The specific wording at the start and end of the genealogy and explict use of "14" indicates the Reader would understand that a complete Genealogy was being presented. 7) The necessity of transliteration of no longer used Hebrew names and resultant spelling variation and similar names would make it easier for names to be omitted unintentionally or intentionally. 8) The likely best parallel to compare "Matthew's" Genealogy too, Chronicles, appears to have intended to present a complete listing for the Davidic line. 9) We have no evidence that such omissions in Greek writings were the Rule rather than the exception. 10) Origen confesses to us that in his time the Greek manuscripts were filled with errors regarding Hebrew names. This would have been well before any extant manuscripts. 11) The Early Church Fathers make no mention of an intentional or even unintentional omission in "Matthew's" genealogy. The evidence that "Matthew's" identification of Abiud as a son of Zerubbabel at 1:13 is not an Error, ranked by weight of evidence is: 1) Because JP Holding says so. In my opinion, the weight of the Evidence above is that "Matthew's" identification of Abiud as a son of Zerubbabel at 1:13 is an '''Error'''. Let me also point out something for the benefit of Fundamentalists here. If you want to believe JP Holding that there is no error here than "Matthew's" use of a name at this point in the genealogy that was supported by Chronicles would still have been a better choice and therefore, the existing genealogy by "Matthew" is not "perfect". Joseph BIRTH, n. The first and direst of all disasters. As to the nature of it there appears to be no uniformity. Castor and Pollux were born from the egg. Pallas came out of a skull. Galatea was once a block of stone. Peresilis, who wrote in the tenth century, avers that he grew up out of the ground where a priest had spilled holy water. It is known that Arimaxus was derived from a hole in the earth, made by a stroke of lightning. Leucomedon was the son of a cavern in Mount Aetna, and I have myself seen a man come out of a wine cellar. http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.