Abraham
Q: Is the God of the Old Testament a different being, and an evil one, compared
to the God of the New Testament?
A: This is one of the two or three teachings common to all branches of an
ancient heresy called Gnosticism. Some of their arguments were because the New
Testament repealed Old Testament dietary laws, the universe had a contrast
between the visible and invisible, and the belief that since matter was all
evil, only an evil god would create matter.
Outside of the Bible, as early as Clement of Rome (97 A.D. 1 Clement 4)
Christians affirmed that the God of the Old Testament was good. He who is a
friend of Abel and a friend of Abraham, is a friend of mine.
Theophilus (166-181 A.D.) was one of the earliest Christian writers who
mentioned Creation and explicitly said "for nothing evil was made by
god."(To Autolycus 2:16).
Tertullian effectively refuted this theory in his work Against Marcion
in 207 A.D.. Here is an incomplete condensation of what he wrote.
a. Can you find a church of apostolic origin that denied the Creator?
"But if the churches shall prove to have been corrupt from the beginning,
where shall the pure ones be found?... Show us, then, one of your churches,
tracing its descent from an apostle, and you will have gained the day."
b. Why would the good god rescue man, if he did not create him?
c. Why did the bad god prophecy the coming of Christ in the Old Testament?
The New Testament refers to these as prophesying the good Christ.
d. If the bad god prophesied a bad Christ, why did the good god prevent the
bad Christ from coming and send the good Christ in his place. The good god
should have let the bad Christ come first, instead of misleading people to
think the bad god prophesied the good Christ.
e. Why did Jesus quote from the Old Testament as authoritative?
f. Why did Marcion have to reject parts of Luke and other parts of the New
Testament to support his view?
Q: In general, how could the first five books be by Moses, if people
[allegedly] could not write back then?
A: In the mid-nineteenth century, many liberal so-called Christian teachers
taught that the Bible came through centuries of oral tradition since people
could not write in Moses' time. Since then, the first writing we have found was
1,800 years prior to Moses. 30,000 Sumerian tables have been found, including
4,000 in the city of
Even a common slave could learn from simply reading all the inscriptions on the
walls of the various temples and tombs. One might say that for people who still
cling to the oral tradition theory, they need to read the writing on the wall,
too. For more discussion, see Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties
p.51-54. For more on
Q: For Muslims, what evidence is there from their Quran that the Bible
was originally from God?
A: Muslims I have spoken with will freely acknowledge the Bible was originally
given by God, but here are reasons, from their own Quran, why they should
believe this. Two points: common prophets, and acceptance of the prophets'
words.
1. The Quran mentions many prophets and godly people in common with the
Bible.
These include: Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Job, Moses, David, Solomon, Elijah,
Elishah, Jonah, John the Baptist, Jesus, and his apostles.
Sura 8:84-85 "We gave him [to Abraham] Isaac and Jacob, all (three) We
guided; and before him we guided Noah and among his progeny David, Solomon,
Job, Joseph, Moses, and Aaron; Thus do we reward those who do good; And
Zakariya and John [the Baptist] and Jesus and Elias [Elijah] all in the ranks
of the righteous."
Sura 32:23 "We did indeed aforetime give the book to Moses. Be not then in
doubt of its reaching (thee): and We made it a guide to the children of
Sura 6:91 "No just estimate of Allah do they make when they say: 'Nothing
doth Allah send down to man (by way of revelation)': say 'Who then sent down
the book which Moses brought? - a light and guidance to man;..."
2. The Quran says Allah gave His words to these prophets
Sura 4:150-151 "Those who deny Allah and his messengers, and wish to
separate between Allah and his messengers, Saying: 'We believe in some but
reject others': and wish to take a course midway, (151) They are in truth
unbelievers;..."
Sura 3:48 says, "And Allah will teach him [Jesus] the book and Wisdom, the
Torah, and the Gospel.
Sura 29:46 shows you should believe in the Bible: "...'We believe in the revelation
which has come down to us and in that which came down to you..."
Q: In Gen 11:27 and Gen 17:5, what is the etymology of the names
"Abram" and "Abraham"?
According to the New Bible Dictionary (1962) p.5, the origin of the name
is uncertain. It is a West Semitic name, and probably means "the father is
exalted" or "exalted father". The name "Abraham"
means, "father of multitudes" or "father of a multitude".
Q: In Gen 11:28, was Abram from the city of Ur, or was he from the town of
A: Abram was originally from
Q: Why does Gen 11:28 mention
A: The Chaldeans and Sumerians of Iraq were assimilated in Moses' time, and
Moses mentioned the land of modern-day
Q: In Gen 12:1, 28:10-15; 32:22-32, why did God choose the Jews instead of the
Chinese or someone else?
A: First of all, God has the right to choose whomever He wishes, but God did
not yet choose a people, but rather one man, Abraham. Later the covenant and
offspring were reckoned through Isaac in Genesis 17:21 and 21:12. Later Jacob
was chosen in Genesis 26:23-24. Abraham was willing to leave his culture and
city (
Today, Romans 10:12 and Galatians 3:24 teach there is no difference to God in
Jews and non-Jews.
Q: In Gen 12:1, is there any evidence, outside of the Bible, of the true God
revealing Himself to anyone else in Abraham's time or before?
A: Yes. First two background facts from the Bible, and then the answer.
B1. In Genesis 14:18-20, Melchizedek was a king of
B2. In Genesis 24:50, Abram's relatives in
The answer:
A1. Ugaritic texts (from the culture that was in modern-day Syria and
Lebanon, also mention, a personal God named "El", and used the phrase
"El Elyon" for God most high, as Melchizedek did. Unfortunately, for
the Ugaritic culture, syncretism was at work and they eventually only
worshipped "El" as one god among many.
A2. In
The Chinese Emperor worshipped Shang-Di by sacrificing a bull on a white marble
altar during the"Border Sacrifice" which was recorded by confucius in
the Shu Jing (Book of history), where se said Emperor Shun (2256-2205 B.C.
practiced it. It stopped in 1911. Here is part of what was said during the
sacrifice
"Of old in the beginning, there was the great chaos, without form and
dark. The five elements [planets] had not begun to revolve, nor the sun and
moon to shine. You, O Spiritual Sovereign, first divided the grosser parts from
the purer. You made heaven. You made earth. You made man. All things with their
reproducing power got their being." For more info on Shang-Di, see an
article by Ethel Nelson in Creation ex Nihilo vol.20 no.3 June-August
1998 p.50-53. See also The Notions of the Chinese Concerning God and Spirits
p.24-25 by James Legge (Hong Kong Register Office 1852), and God's Promise
to the Chinese (Read Books, 1997).
Koreans have a similar ancient tradition of a Shang-Di, whom they call Hananim.
A Korean Tan-gun tradition said that Hananim had a Son who desired to live
among people. You can read more about Shang-Di, Hananim, and other early
revelations that were apparently of the true God in the book Eternity in
Their Hearts by Don Richardson. Regal Books. Revised 1984.
In Gen 12, could Abraham have written what the Mormons view as scripture,
called The Book of Abraham?
A: No. First some background on the Mormon "Book of Abraham", and the
importance of the fraud, and then proof that it is a fraud. This material was
taken from previously written material on Mormonism.
Background:
The Mormon Book of Abraham is a part of the Mormon Scripture the Pearl of Great
Price. It is the basis for the Mormon anti-black doctrine, that kept blacks
from ever getting the Mormon priesthood. The anti-black doctrine was altered
(by the Mormon god?) in 1978.
The Mormon Book of Abraham was written from ancient Egyptian scrolls
Joseph Smith obtained in July 1835, which he stated contained the writings of
Abraham and Joseph. He did not know ancient Egyptian, which few could read at
that time. He proclaimed that God divinely inspired him to translate some of
these scrolls into English, and this is how The Book of Abraham came to
be.
These Egyptian scrolls were once thought lost and destroyed, but eleven of them
were found in the
Importance of the fraud:
The Book of Mormon was said to be translated from the same language as the Book
of Abraham. If Joseph Smith could not translate the one then he did not
translate the other, and none of his scripture can be trusted. Moreover, if the
scroll is a pagan scripture to an idol god Joseph Smith would be a Prophet,
Seer, and revelator of his guide, the idol of the scroll.
Here is what Joseph Smith stated about translating: "A Translation of some
ancient Records, that have fallen into our hands from the catacombs of
Proof of the Fraud:
There are three ways we know these are the Egyptian scrolls Joseph Smith tried
to translate.
1. Three of the four handwritten original Book of Abraham
manuscripts had the Egyptian Hieroglyphs in the margin. Of the eighty-odd Egyptian
hieroglyphs on the scroll, 20, 13, and 10 hieroglyphs were written on
manuscripts #1, #2, and #3 respectively. When there were gaps in the scroll 7,
6 and 6 restored hieroglyphs were added on the three manuscripts. From this we
can be confident this Egyptian scroll was the one Joseph used.
2. Joseph invented a language of the Egyptian language. The bound,
thirty-four page book, called the Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar, is
still in the church's possession. This language book illustrates many of the Egyptian
hieroglyphs of the scroll. A very similar English "translation" is in
the Egyptian Alphabet and Grammar as in the Book of Abraham. Some
view this as one of the more damaging facts against the inspiration Joseph
claimed to have.
3. The pictures at the beginning of both the Egyptian scroll and Smith's Book
of Abraham are the same. The only difference is a pencilled in spot on the
Egyptian picture that was filled in on the Mormon picture. Not only are the
pictures copied the same, but the captions in pictures #2 and #3 referring the
Egyptian idols are also copied into the Mormon scripture.
The Actual Translation:
Smith thought he was translating these hieroglyphs. Read the actual translation
by Dr. Klaus Baer on the next page. (Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought:
Autumn 1968 p. 119-120.)
"Osiris shall be conveyed into the Great Pool of Khons --and likewise
Osiris Hor, justified born to Tikhebyt, justified --after his arms have been
placed on his heart and the Breathing Permit (which [Isis] made and has writing
on its inside and outside) has been wrapped in royal linen and placed under his
left arm near his heart; the rest of his mummy bandages should be wrapped over
it. The man for whom this book has been copied will breathe forever as the bas
of the gods do." (bas are souls.) On p.111 Dr. Baer stated, "Joseph
Smith thought that his papyrus contained the Book of Abraham."
Smith translated thousands of English words from these hieroglyphs. Joseph said
this was the writing of Abraham and the word of his god. Actually it was a
variant of the Book of the Dead a pagan Egyptian magic book filled with heathen
gods and goddesses, often buried with mummies.
Dr. Richard Parker of
Fifty years ago Dr. A.B. Mercer said, "Any pupil of mine who would show
such absolute ignorance of Egyptian as Smith does, could not possibly expect to
get more than zero in an examination in Egyptology." (Improvement Era,
vol. 16, p 615.) This is still true today.
Dr. John A. Wilson said, "...as far as I am concerned I see pieces of two
or possibly three different papyri and every one of them looks like a
traditional Book of the Dead." (letter Jan. 5, 1968.)
Details of the Pictures
Let's look next at the three pictures in the Book of Abraham and the
accompanying captions from one of the scrolls and Times and Seasons
volume 3.
The writing and pictures are typical Egyptian funeral scenes of Egyptian idols.
Joseph taught these images represented Abraham and the Real God.
Facsimile #1:
Hor Justified son of the holder of the same titles.
Facsimile #2
Grant that the soul of Osiris Sheshonk may live
I (Min) am a copulating bull without equal.
May this tomb never be desecrated.
Facsimile #3
O gods of . . ., gods of the Caverns, gods of the south, north, west, and east,
grant well-being to Osiris Hor justified
Conclusion:
Smith's god deceived him. Joseph Smith's translation is worthless. If you seek
the Lord, dear Mormon I pray you leave the Mormon Church reject Joseph's hoax,
and give your life to the Most High God through Jesus Christ His Son.
Q: In Gen 12:4, how could Abram be 75 years old when he left the town of
In Genesis 11:26, this could mean that Terah was 70 when he started having
children, and Abram was not born until Terah was at least 130. See Bible
Difficulties and Seeming Contradictions p.136-137, Encyclopedia of Bible
Difficulties p.378, When Critics Ask p.45-46, and 1001 Bible
Questions Answered p.309-310 for more info.
Q: In Gen 12:10-20 and Gen 20:1-18 why did God condone Abram lying?
A: The Bible honestly recorded, but never approved Abram's lying because of His
lack of faith in God's protection. Even great men of God still sin, and so we
should not lose heart when we sin.
Only God is perfect. Our goal is to strive toward perfection, which we will
attain only in Heaven. See the discussion on Genesis 19:30-36. See Encyclopedia
of Bible Difficulties p.89-90, When Critics Ask p.46, and Hard
Sayings of the Bible p.118-120 for more info.
Q: In Gen 14:1-2, who are these kings?
A: This occurred around 2000 B.C., so it is not surprising we cannot find some
of these rulers. However, Elam was a major power, having conquered Abram's city
of Ur around 2004 B.C. Shinar is the word the both the Old Testament and
Egyptians used for Babylonia. Chederlaomer sounds like kudur (Elamite for
servant) and Lagamar (Elamite goddess). Cheder (=Kudur)was the first part of
the name of many Elamite kings. Tidal seems related to the Hittite name
Tudhaliya, and there were at least five later Hittite kings named Tudhaliya.
Towns of Si-da-mu (
According to John Warwick Montgomery in Evidence for Faith (Probe Books
1991) p.157, people formerly identified Amraphel with Hammurabi, but this is
incorrect. He also says that Arioch is preferred over Ariochu, because Arioch
was a common name of that time. It was a Hurrian name, also a name of a king of
Mari (about 1750 B.C.), and in the tablets at the city of
In summary, these names are very strange; the names were generally never
used, - except during this narrow time period. It is highly unlikely anyone
would have gotten these names, unless they had accurate knowledge of history at
this time.
Q: In Gen 14:14, how could Abram and his allies, only 318 men, defeat an
alliance of 4 great kings?
A: Genesis 14:15 suggests this was not a pitched battle, but a quick night raid
on an unprepared army.
Q: In Gen 14:18-19, how could Melchizedek, presumably a cursed Canaanite, be in
a position to bless Abraham?
A: Melchizedek is a mysterious person in the Bible. Some think Melchizedek was
pre-incarnate appearance of Christ. Others say Melchizedek was a godly man
(perhaps Canaanite or perhaps not) who was simply a type of Christ. Even if
Melchizedek was a Canaanite man, God is not restricted from teaching and
sanctifying people of any nationality. See Hard Sayings of the Bible
p.120-121 for more info.
Q: In Gen 15:12, was Abraham wrong not to cut the birds in half, as Rev. Moon
teaches in the Divine Principle 5th ed. 1977 p.269,507?
A: No. Priests were never to cut birds in half in Leviticus 1:17 and 5:9.
Q: In Gen 15:16, how could the Israelites be enslaved for only four
generations, if they were enslaved for 400 years in Gen 15:13?
A: In Genesis 15:13,16, Abraham, who would likely have understood a generation
as 100 years, was told: 400 years, 4 generations. Moses for example, lived to
120.
Q: In Gen 15:16 did the Exodus occur in the fourth generation or the sixth, as
1 Chr 2:1-9 and Mt 1:3-4 imply?
A: Two points to consider
1. It all depends on how long you consider a generation. Abraham and Sarah
had Isaac when they were 101 and 91. God was speaking to Abraham here.
2. Hypothetically, there would be no error even if the Bible had said it
would have been 400 generations, if the same passage had defined a generation
here as 1 year. In actuality, "four generations" in Genesis 15:16 is
defined as being enslaved exactly "400 years" in Genesis 15:13.
See When Critics Ask p.47 and Haley p.416 for more info.
Q: In Gen 15:18, if God gave Abram's descendants all the land up to the
Euphrates River, why did they not receive the land?
A: David and Solomon's kingdoms did extend to the
Q: In Gen 16:1, since Abraham and Sarai had no children, how could Abraham have
more children after Isaac? (a Muslim asked this)
A: Genesis 16:1 shows it was Sarai, not Abraham, who was sterile. Abraham had
more children, but Sarai did not. See When Critics Ask p.54 for more
info.
Q: In Gen 16:1-4, did Abraham commit adultery with Hagar?
A: No, Ishmael was not the product of adultery. Polygamy was permitted in the
Old Testament, and Sarah gave Hagar to Abraham as a concubine. So what Abraham
did was "legal" compared to both God had revealed to Him and later
Mosaic Law.
Furthermore this is not so unusual as it might seem to some modern readers.
According to Hard Sayings of the Bible p.121-122, similar examples of a
maidservant standing in for a barren wife are found in the laws of the Code of
Hammurabi, the Nuzi Tablets, the Alalakh Tablets, and the Mari Tablets.
However, if something is both commonly practiced and "legal", that
does not necessarily mean it pleases God. Genesis 16:4-5 shows that Sarah soon
regretted her action.
Q: In Gen 16:1-8, since Hagar was a slave, was Abraham's sexual union with her
forced rape, like Muslims are permitted by their religion to do? (See Bukhari
Hadiths 3:113,432)
A: Genesis 16:4 says Hagar became Abram's wife, and she apparently did not
object. In fact, Hagar was proud of her pregnancy and taunted Sarai. (Genesis
16:4,5) In the Old Testament, while marrying a captive was OK, nowhere was sex
outside of marriage justified as anything but wicked immorality.
Q: In Gen 17:17 and Gen 18:12, did Abraham and Sarah laugh with disbelief, or
did Sarah laugh with joy in Gen 21:6?
A: Both. They laughed with disbelief before Isaac was conceived, and Sarah
laughed again with joy when Isaac was born.
Q: In Gen 17:17 and Gen 18:12-15, why did God rebuke Sarah for laughing and not
Abraham?
A: Laughing in surprise the first time you learn of something is different from
laughing in skepticism in subsequent times after you have already been told.
See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.122-123 for more info.
Q: In Gen 18:2, since Abraham bowed before kings, does this support the
Catholic and Orthodox practice of bowing before images?
A: No, veneration of images is unbiblical. However, regardless of a persons'
belief about veneration of images, this verse cannot be used to support bowing
to images. In contrast to images,
1. Abraham bowed to show respect to a real person.
2. Abraham was showing respect to a pagan king, there was no veneration or
any kind of religious honor.
3. Abraham did not pray to these kings. He also did not pray to God through
these kings, as Orthodox claim to pray through the images to God.
See When Cultists Ask p.28 for five additional reasons.
Q: In Gen 20 and Ex 23:31, how could the Philistines be in Israel in Abraham's
time, about 2000 B.C.?
A: The earliest levels of Ashdod were occupied back in the 17th century (H.F.
Vos, Archaeology in Bible Lands). Somebody lived in that fertile
land back then, and there is no historical evidence which says it was not the
Philistines. After the Egyptians defeated the Philistines in 1190 B.C., they
came to Palestine in force, and makes sense they would retreat to where they
already had towns. See Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.94-96, When
Critics Ask p.50 for more info.
Q: In Gen 20:12, why did Abram marry his half-sister?
A: Incest was not expressly forbidden then. Also, Abram was not necessarily a
believer when he married. See Bible Difficulties and Seeming Contradictions
p.139-141 for more info.
Q: In Gen 21:14, was Abraham right to send Hagar away?
A: Normally, it would be wrong to send Hagar and her teenage boy away alone
without protection and with little water, and this is why Sarah's request
greatly distressed Abraham in Genesis 21:11. However, in this particular case,
God told Abraham to go ahead, and that everything would be all right. God
himself gave Hagar and Ishmael water (Genesis 12:17-19), and God was with
Ishmael as he grew up (Genesis 21:20).
See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.123-124 for more info.
Q: In Gen 22:1 (KJV), how could God "tempt" Abraham, when James 1:13
says God does not tempt people?
A: The word "tempt" is only in the King James version, translated 400
years ago. Both modern translations and the Hebrew word here
(nâcâh) mean "to test or prove". The difference between
tempt and test is that God does not entice us to do evil, but God does allows
us, like Abraham and Job, to have tests of our faith. See Bible Difficulties
and Seeming Contradictions p.207-208, Now That's A Good Question
p.475-476, and Hard Sayings of the Bible p.124-125 for more info.
Q: In Gen 22, why did God encourage human sacrifice with Abraham and Isaac?
A: 1. Abraham already showed that He loved God more than His people and
culture, but God tested Abraham to see if He loved God more than his own dear
son.
2. Even in this solitary case of God commanding human sacrifice, God
stopped it from being carried out; no person died.
3. God the Father did not ask Abraham for anything that He did not do
Himself, in sacrificing Jesus for us.
4. The Ten Commandments (do not murder, etc.) were not given until Moses at
Mt. Sinai.
See The Complete Book of Bible Answers p.48-49, When Critics Ask
p.51, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.96, Difficulties in the
Bible 57-60, Hard Sayings of the Bible p.125-127, and Now That's
A Good Question p.573.
Q: In Gen 22:1-18, could the boy who Abraham almost sacrificed be Ishmael, not
Isaac, as Muslims claim?
A: No, for four reasons:
1. Genesis 22:2 says it was Isaac.
2. In Genesis 21:8-10, the day Isaac was weaned, Ishmael was sent away.
3. Genesis 22:16 call Isaac Abraham's "only son", since Ishmael
was sent away to a different place.
4. Since Ishmael was 14 when Isaac was born, Ishmael had already grown up
and married an Egyptian in Genesis 21:20, Abraham was tested "a long
time" after this in Genesis 21:34, and a "boy" was on the altar
in Genesis 22:12.
Also, while the Muslim Quran discusses this in Sura 37:99-111, no where
in the entire Quran does it say whether it was Ishmael or Isaac. See When
Critics Ask p.52 for more info.
Q: In Gen 22:2, how was Isaac Abram's "only son"?
A: While Ishmael was born first, he was sent away by this time, and Isaac was
the only son Abram still had with him. Isaac was the only heir, and only son
can also mean beloved son. Genesis 21:12 says, "though Isaac your
offspring shall be reckoned". Abraham had other sons too, but they were
born after this. While the culture of the time accepted taking concubines for
procreation, inheritance and the right of the firstborn would go to sons of
actual wives, not the sons of concubines. See Bible Difficulties and Seeming
Contradictions p.141 for more info.
Q: In Gen 22:2, does the Holy Spirit ever lead people to disobey what has been
revealed in the Bible?
A: No. Three points to consider in the answer.
1. Of course, God did not lead Abraham to do anything against revealed
Scripture, since no Scripture was written down in Abraham's time.
2. Since scripture has been revealed, God does not tell anyone to do things
contrary to His revealed commands. Even when the Holy Spirit also drove Jesus
out into the wilderness, where Jesus was tempted by Satan, the Holy Spirit did
not tempt Jesus or tell Jesus to do anything wrong.
3. God does not desire anyone to perform actions contrary to His desires.
Even when God commanded Abraham to take Isaac as a sacrifice, God did not
permit Abraham to carry through killing Isaac.
See Now That's A Good Question p.67-69 for more info.
Q: In Gen 22:12, when God said "Now I know that you fear God", did
God not know what Abram would do?
A: Of course God knew, but the expression means that it was at this point in
time that Abraham proved what he would do. See When Critics Ask p.52 for
more info.
Q: In Gen 23:5, why did the Hittites consider Abraham a mighty prince among
them?
A: Abraham was very great in wealth. Abraham also had apparently cultivated
close relations with them and they counted him as not only a friend, but also
one of their own.
Q: In Gen 25:6, how many wives and concubines did Abraham have?
A: While it does not really matter, we do not know the exact number. After
Sarah died, Abrahm had Keturah as wives in Genesis 25:1. Hagar was one of his
concubines, but Genesis 25:6 indicates that Abraham had more than one
concubine. See Today's Handbook for Solving Bible Difficulties p.284 for
more info.
Q: In Gen 25:8,17 and Gen 49:33, Abraham and Jacob were "gathered to his
people", so how could there be life after death?
A: This is an expression meaning the person died, and it sounds much better
than "kicked the bucket". See the previous question, Encyclopedia
of Bible Difficulties p.98-99, and Hard Sayings of the Bible
p.127-129 for more info.
Q: In Gen 26:3-5, Gen 12:1; Gen 17:1, 9-14; and Gen 22:16 did God bless Abraham
because of Abraham's works?
A: For either Abraham or people in general, there are two distinct issues here:
salvation and blessings.
Salvation: Abraham's works were not important, in the sense that they did
not get him to Heaven. Abraham's works were very important in being the visible
expression of his faith in God, and inseparable from his faith in God.
Blessings: Because of works, both Abraham and us often receive both
blessings this life and rewards in the next.
God's covenant had both an invariant element and a conditional element.
Leviticus 26:44-45 shows that even if God's people fail on the conditional
element, the invariant element still stands. See Hard Sayings of the Bible
p.129-130 for more info.
Q: In Gen 26:33, did Abraham or Isaac name Beersheba?
A: In Genesis 21:31, it was called Beersheba in Abraham's time because of the
oath between Abraham and the Abimelech. Isaac certainly knew this from living
in Beersheba with his father in Genesis 22:19. In order to remind Abimelech,
who was probably the son of Abimelech in Abraham's time of the previous
covenant, he named a new well a similar name, "Shibah". See When
Critics Ask p.55-56 for more info.
Q: In Gen 33:18-19 and Josh 24:32, did Jacob purchase the land at Shechem, or
did Abraham purchase it as Acts 7:15-16 and Gen 23:16-20 say?
A: There are two possible answers.
1. Jacob and Abraham bought it: Both Joshua 24:32 and Genesis 33:18-19 say
Jacob, Abraham's grandson, was the person who purchased the land near Shechem.
Regardless of whether Abraham came to witness the purchase of the land with the
money he passed on to Isaac or not, one could say that the clan of Abraham
purchased the land. Even today, a teenager, with his father's consent, can buy
a car in his father's name.
2. Since Jacob purchased the land his sons were buried on, yet Jacob
himself was buried at Mamre with Abraham, Stephen might have been accidentally
combined these two separate events. Even if Stephen was mistaken, the Bible
would still be inerrant. The Bible simply recorded, inerrantly, what Stephen
said, mistake and all.
See Bible Difficulties and Seeming Contradictions p.142-145, 1001
Bible Questions Answered p.309, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties
379-381, and the discussion on Genesis 50:13 for more info.
Q: In Gen 50:13, was Jacob buried in the cave that Abraham bought near Mamre,
or were some of the Patriarchs buried near Shechem as Acts 7:15-16 implies?
A: First three points related to the answer, and then two possible answers.
First, The two were distinct places, as the distance between Mamre and
Shechem was roughly 45 miles (72 kilometers).
Prior to the Exodus, Genesis 50:13 says that Jacob was buried near Mamre.
Genesis 50:24-26, says Joseph's body was embalmed and stored in a coffin in
Egypt, with the anticipation that it would later be buried in the Promised
Land.
After the Exodus, over 477 years later, Jacob's sons were buried near
Shechem as Acts 7:15-16 says. Joshua 24:32 also adds that Joseph's bones were
buried in the tract of land near Shechem.
Here are two separate answers.
1. "they": Acts 7:15 says "both he [Jacob] and our fathers
died." (NIV) "They" in Acts 7:16 refers to the twelve sons of
Jacob (our fathers) who were buried after the Exodus, and not Jacob, who was
buried over 477 years earlier.
2. Stephen's mistake: If Stephen had incorrectly "merged" these
two events as one when he spoke, then Acts 7:15-16 is still inerrant. Acts
7:15-16 inerrantly records a trivial mistake that Stephen made. Nothing
indicates Stephen had to be inerrant in all that He spoke. However, given
Stephen's track record on other things in Acts 7, one might favor the first
answer.
However, even if the second answer is the correct one, there is a lesson for
us. When believers today are in the center of God's will, and speaking to
others as God wants us to, God has not promised that all our words and
doctrines are inerrant, either. But that is OK. God works in us despite our
mistakes, and even through our mistakes to get out His truth.
Regardless of whether Stephen did not use modern precision with his pronouns or
whether Stephen was mistaken on a small point of history, God's message is not
whether Jacob was included in the "they" buried at Shechem or not.
God's message is that God guided the Israelites in a Covenant relationship with
Him, and God used the Israelites for thousands of years to set the background
for the greatest event of all time, the coming of God's own Son, Jesus Christ.
See also the discussion on Genesis 33:18-19 and Bible Difficulties and
Seeming Contradictions p.142-145 for more info, and 1001 Bible Questions
Answered p.309 for more on the cave of Machpelah..
Q: In Gen 8, Counting the years in the genealogies, the flood would have ended
292 years before Abram, around 2440 B.C. How can this be if the primitive
Chinese, Egyptian, Canaanite, and Sumerian civilizations started roughly 2500,
3000, 3000, and 3500 B.C. respectively? Genesis also mentions 31 Mideast cities
and towns and six other nations by Abraham and Isaac's time. It is estimated
that Ur, in Abram's time, had 100K-180K people. Archaeologists can date
Mesopotamian sites back to 2500 B.C., even without using radiocarbon dating.
A: 1. Christians who are recent Creationists believe there were small
gaps in the genealogies that make the date slightly older. Also, people had
many children.
2. Old-earth Creationists and other Christians believe there are large gaps
in the genealogies, since son can mean descendent and father can mean ancestor.
Q: Prior to Ex 6:3, why do 197 passages use the name "Yahweh", when
Ex 6:3 says God did not reveal Himself by that name to Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob?
A: a) True facts, which are not a part of the answer.
a1. Since Moses wrote Genesis in his time, not Jacob's, Moses could use
whatever name he wished. For example, people correctly write that Columbus
discovered America, even though Columbus did not know the name
"America." See When Critics Ask p.68-69 for more info. This
alone explains all but 53 places, which are direct quotes or similar.
a2. Comparison of the Septuagint and Massoretic text shows scribes were
somewhat free in changing names for God. Julius Wellhausen admitted this was
the biggest weakness of his documentary hypothesis.
a3. God's name was known to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, but God was not
primarily known as Yahweh. God was revealing a meaning to Moses that God did
not reveal to the three men.
b) The answer is within Exodus 6:3 itself.
b1. Exodus 6:3 does not say revealed "before Moses' time". It
only says, "to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob".
(This eliminates 5 of the 53 passages.)
b2. Exodus does not say they were unaware of God's divine name. It only
says "I appeared ... but by my name Yahweh I never made
myself known to them." While God spoke or appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob at least (8, 1, 6) 15 times, God never appeared to these men in a special
way associated with His divine name as God appeared to Moses. In fact, when Jacob
asked for a name after wrestling in Genesis 32:29, Jacob pointedly was not
answered.
See also the next question and Haley p.421.
Q: If Ex 6:3, means God never personally revealed Himself as Yahweh to Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob, what about where God called Himself Yahweh in the following?
Gen 15:7 "I am Yahweh who brought you out of Ur" Gen 18:14 "Is
anything too hard for Yahweh?" Gen 28:13 "I am Yahweh, the God of
your father..."
A: These are probably later scribal changes. In all three cases in the Greek
Septuagint, the word God (theos) is used, not the Greek word for "I
Am" in Exodus 3:14 (o W v), or the
Greek word in Exodus 6:3 (Kurios). See also the previous.
Q: In Lev 1:17 and Lev 5:9, why can't the priest cut the bird in half?
A: Scripture only says that God wants it this way. In Genesis 15:10, Abraham
was not supposed to cut the birds in two in his sacrifice either.
Q: In Dt 7:6, why did God choose the Israelites?
A: Part of the answer is given in Deuteronomy 7:7-9. It was not because they
were a powerful or wonderful people. Rather it was because of God's love and
choosing of Abraham, and then Isaac and Jacob. Many times people have good
consequences because of what others before them have done. Will other people
have good consequences because things you do?
Q: In Dt 21:15-16, if a father cannot give his inheritance to a younger son and
slight the older son, why did Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob do that? Why did David
make Solomon the next King, and not Adonijah?
A: As for Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the command in Deuteronomy 21:15-16 came
after they had died. People are not responsible to keep a command God had not
given yet.
As for David, the law applied to personal property, and a Kingdom is not
personal property. (Though some Emperors and Kings in history might have
thought so)
Q: In 1 Sam 1:2; Gen 16:2; 25:1; 29:23-24;28-29, 2 Sam 20:3, etc., why did God
permit polygamy (many wives) for Abraham, Jacob, and David and others?
A: Five points to consider in the answer
1. Polygamy was never God's perfect will, as implied when He made Adam and
Eve. He said the two (not many) shall become one flesh.
2. God permitted many things, such as divorce (Matthew 5:31-32; Mark
10:2-12), being that their hearts were hard.
3. Some things, such as polygamy and rash vows, God left for people to
figure out were not good.
4. Even in Old Testament times, polygamy was not necessarily the norm. Hard
Sayings of the Bible p.223 points out that there were only fifteen examples
in the Old Testament until Solomon's time. There were only four or five after
that time.
5. Ever since the time of Paul, and today, godly elders and deacons are not
to have more than one wife (1 Tim 3:2,12; Titus 1:6).
Q: In 1 Ki 12:29, why did Jeroboam choose Bethel and Dan to place the golden
calves?
A: There were probably two reasons.
Geographic: Bethel was in the southern part of the northern kingdom. Dan
was in the far north. This would be more convenient for the people, and
Jeroboam probably reasoned this would help hold the nation together.
Traditional: Today's Handbook for Solving Bible Difficulties p.270-271
points out that there had been a shrine at Dan for 300 years, longer than the
Israelites had been in Jerusalem. Abraham himself had built an altar at Bethel.
Thus, Jeroboam selected two places that had a longer tradition of Israelite
religious worship than Jerusalem. For many, tradition is more important than
obeying the true God.
Q: In Isa 53:10, since it says "he shall see His seed", does that
mean Jesus was married and had children, as some Mormons teach?
A: No. Seed means spiritual offspring here, not biological offspring. For
example, all believers can consider Abraham their father. As a concrete
example, Romans 4:16 and Galatians 3:7 both say that Abraham is the father of
all who believe, and we can consider ourselves his seed. Jobn the Baptist in
Matthew 3:9 and Luke 3:8 said that God could even raise up children of Abraham
even from the stones.
Q: In Mal 2:15, what is the correct translation?
A: The NIV translates this as "Has not the Lord made them one? In flesh
and spirit they are his. And why one? Because he was seeking godly
offspring...." But in the footnote it gives as an alternate "But the
one who is our father did not do this, not as long as life remained in him. And
what was he seeking? An offspring from God."
It refers to our father Abraham, according to An Exegetical Commentary :
Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi by Eugene H. Merrill p.421.
The Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties p.305-306 mentions that this is a
difficult passage to translate since Hebrew has no case endings; the KJV
translators cannot be criticized too harshly for making a mistake here.
Q: Why does the genealogy of Luke go back to Adam, while the genealogy of
Matthew only go back to Abraham?
A: Scripture does not say, but we have a guess. Luke's emphasis was on Jesus as
the Son of man, while Matthew's emphasis was on Jesus the promised Jewish
Messiah.
Q: In Mk 10:23-24, is it impossible for prosperous people to go to Jesus?
A: There is only one answer, but it has two parts.
No. People who have wealth can always come to God. Abraham was very
wealthy, both by ancient standards and modern. However, wealthy people need to
be willing at any time to give up for God. Whatever is most precious to them
-like Abraham did with his son Isaac.
Yes: If your possessions or wealth possess you, and your love money more
than God, you have to choose one or the other, and your eternal destiny depends
on your choice.
Q: In Mk 12:24, why did Jesus tell the Sadducees they did not know the
Scriptures nor the power of God?
A: Jesus was correct in both a general sense and a specific sense He could
demonstrate to them.
General: They did not accept any of the Old Testament as Scripture except
the first five books of the Law. They did not believe in afterlife or
resurrection.
Specific: As Jesus showed, even what they did accept as Scripture (The
Torah) they did not really believe, about God still being the God of
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Q: In Heb 11:8, how did Abraham (=Abram) depart not knowing where he was going,
when Gen 12:5 says Abram departed to go to the land of Canaan?
A: Abram was specifically not told he was going to Canaan when God called him
in Gen 12:1. In hindsight, Genesis 12:5, written much later than Abraham, tells
us that God had Abram leave to go to Canaan.
In our lives we can obey God without any idea what the result will be. While it
can be uncertain to us at that time, looking back years later, we can see how
things worked out so well in God's plan. See When Critics Ask p.522 for
more info.
Q: In Acts 7:4, how was Abraham 75 years old when he left the town of Haran?
A: See the discussion on Genesis 12:4.
Q: In Rom 4:1, how was Abraham Paul's father as pertaining to the flesh?
A: The word for father was also used for ancestor, and since Paul was a Jew,
Abraham was his ancestor.
Q: In Rom 4:8,22, if God did not impute sin to Abraham, was God fair to those
He does impute sin?
A: Yes. Romans 4:23-24 says that imputing righteousness instead of sin to
Abraham was not a solitary case. The same is true for us, if we believe on God.
However, for those who trust in their own righteousness instead of God's, they
will be judged on what they did and did not do. (Revelation 20:12; Matthew
25:32-46)
Q: In Rom 4:17,18, how was Abraham the father of many nations?
A: Abraham was the ancestor of the Israelites, Edomites, Midianites, but that
is not the main intent of this verse. Rather, Abraham was the father of all who
believe (Romans 4:11) both Jew and Gentiles from all nations.
Q: In Rom 10:14-15, can anyone go to Heaven if they never heard the Gospel?
A: -People have. As proof, Enoch, Abraham, Job, and the believers in the Old
Testament followed what God revealed to them, but they did not hear what to
them was the mystery of the New Testament Gospel. Remember, it is ultimately
God who saves, not the Gospel, and not our response to the Gospel. See also the
next question.
Q: In Gal 3:16 (and Acts 3:25) vs. Gen 12:7, etc, "seed" is a
collective singular noun, (as is the word "people"), yet Paul says it
could not refer to many.
A: The point here is that Paul is reminding the Jews that their scriptures (the
Old Testament) taught that the promises made to Abraham's descendants would
come through the Messiah, which both the Jews and Christians acknowledged as
one person.
Q: In Eph 2:12-13, in Old Testament times, were all non-citizens of Israel
doomed to Hell, with no chance to be saved?
A: No. Job, Abraham and Isaac were not Israelites, and they demonstrate that
God can reveal Himself however He pleases. Even after the Law was given to
Moses, Rahab and Ruth were non-Israelites who were still saved. However, all
who are saved, even in Old Testament times, are saved through Jesus Christ. (1
Corinthians 10:4; 1 John 2:2; Hebrews 2:9; 1 Timothy 2:6) As long as a person
rejects the real Jesus, Peter in Acts 2:37-40 shows they have no other
possibility to be saved.
Q: In 1 Tim 6:9 and Jms 5:1-6, should Christians [not be adverse to / want /
lustfully crave] getting rich?
A: Riches themselves are not evil, and Abraham, whom both Paul and James gave
as an example of a godly man, was very wealthy. There are three points of
caution, though.
1. The craving after wealth is both evil and a source of evil. We should be
perfectly content to be a Christian of modest means. If a Christian is wealthy,
and God changed the situation where he or she lost the wealth, they should be
content in all circumstances (Philippians 4:12).
2. Every Christian who has wealth should be wary of the temptation of
wanting to hold on to that wealth tightly, and valuing it as much as he or she
values God and other people. By the way, compared to the average economic
standard of the world, nearly every Christian in North America, Singapore,
Japan, and most of Western Europe has wealth.
3. People who do not have wealth are not exempt from greed either.
Sometimes people think they can only be happy, and they will be happy, if they
are wealthy.
See Now That's a Good Question p.434-436 for more info.
Q: In Heb 7:1-11, what does this mean?
A: While the direct observations are straightforward, it is the relationship to
the author's point that is interesting.
1. Abraham, giving a tithe of the spoils to Melchizedek, a non-Hebrew
priest of the Most High God, proves it was possible to be a priest without
being from the order of Aaron.
2. Furthermore, the fact that Abraham, ancestor of Levi, gave a tithe to
Melchizedek demonstrates that Melchizedek's priesthood is greater than the
Aaronic priesthood.
Q: In Heb 11:19 (KJV), how did Abraham receive Isaac "in figure"?
A: This King James Version expression means that Abraham, figuratively
speaking, did receive Isaac back from the dead. See also the next question.
Q: In Heb 11:19, how did Abraham received Isaac back from the dead,
figuratively?
A: Abram was about to kill Isaac as a sacrifice. However, God stopped him, and
Isaac remained alive, as Genesis 22:1-18.
Q: In Jms 2:5-7, why does James make such stereotypes of the rich and poor?
A: James is not against all rich people, because we mentioned with great
admiration Abraham (James 2:20-23), and Abraham was very wealthy, both by
ancient standards and ours.
The point of this is that at that time, it was very hard to be both rich and
honest. Many had to give and take bribes, and extort others to get their wealth
and maintain it. Unfortunately, this is also the situation in some developing
countries today.
Q: In Jms 2:14-25, how are we justified by works as well as by faith, and not
by faith apart from works as Paul said in Eph 2:8-9?
A: A sound theology should not just be able to explain both these verses, a
sound theology should require both these verses. Even Martin Luther, known for
his stand on faith, said "It is impossible, indeed, to separate works from
faith, just as it is impossible to separate heat and light from fire."
Three points about both Paul and James.
1. Both said nothing to minimize the role of faith as the means of God
applying Christ's justification to us.
2. Both said nothing to minimize the role works in the daily life of a
Christian.
3. Neither said that we can merit God's grace and mercy, either by all the
works in the world or the greatest faith in the world.
4. Both show that works were an inseparable outward expression of faith. If
people do not want to do good works for God, that is evidence they do not have
faith and are not saved.
5. Just as God used different Gospels to accent different parts of Christ's
character, God used Paul and James to accent different aspects of
justification. Paul emphasized more that we cannot merit any part of our
salvation, we can only call upon the Lord in faith. James emphasized more that
true faith is not mere intellectual assent, but a life-trusting decision that
is accompanied by works.
In summary, works have no role in meriting our salvation, but works have an
essential role in expressing the faith through which we are saved.
Historically, outside of the Bible the first instance we can find this view
is in the letter of Clement to the Corinthians, confidently dated 96/98 A.D.)
Chapter 31 speaks of why Abraham was justified. Chapter 32 says, in part
"And we, too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified
by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works
which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which,
from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men;' to whom be glory for
even and ever. Amen.
What shall we do, then, brethren? Shall we become slothful in well-doing, and
cease from the practice of love? God forbid that any such course should be
followed by us! ..." (Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1 (Roberts &
Donaldson eds. 1994) p.13)
It is kind of neat to see that this theology, (of not saved by serving but
saved to serve), was echoed and taught as Biblical truth by the early
Christians even before the book of Revelation was written and the New Testament
was completed. See Hard Sayings of the Bible p.696-699 and The
Complete Book of Bible Answers p.188-189 for more info.
Q: In Jms 2:21, was Abraham saved by works, or justified by faith in Rom 4:1-4
and Rom 3:28?
A: To loosely paraphrase the quote from Martin Luther in the previous
questions, just as you cannot separate heat from fire, you cannot separate
works from faith.
James 2:21 only says that "Was not Abraham justified by works".
Abraham's works demonstrated to the world, and all of Heaven and Hell, that
Abraham was justified by God. However, it was still God who justified Abraham,
not Abraham himself. See Bible Difficulties and Seeming Contradictions
p.241-242 and When Critics Ask p.527-528 for more info.
Clement of Rome, writing to the Corinthians in 97 A.D., said about Abraham,
"For what reason was our father Abraham Blessed? Was it not because he
wrought righteousness and truth through faith?" (Ante-Nicene Fathers
Volume 1 (Roberts & Donaldson eds. 1994) p.13) See The Complete Book
of Bible Answers p.189-190 and When Cultists Ask p.289 for more
info.
Q: In Jms 5:1-6, does God hate wealthy people?
A: No. Abraham was very wealthy, and James mentions him approvingly as a
righteous man in God's eyes in James 2:20-23. God is not expressing hate here,
but a strict warning toward those who love wealth. See Hard Sayings of the
Bible p.701-704 for more info.
Q: In 1 Pet 3:21, in what sense does water baptism save us?
A: It is obvious that Peter was not using the second half of 1 Peter 3:21 to
contradict the first half of 1 Peter 3:21. It is Jesus who saves us, not the
water. Since water cannot take the place of Jesus rising for us, what did Peter
mean? 1 Peter 3:21 itself gives us our answer in two parts.
A. From our perspective, water baptism has no value as a ceremonial
washing. Rather, water baptism is of great value as "the pledge of a good
conscience toward God."
B. From God's perspective, water baptism has no saving value. Rather, water
baptism is of great value as your identification that "saves you by the
resurrection of Jesus Christ." (See also Colossians 3:12).
In addition, here are four other key doctrines about water baptism.
1. All believers, without exception, are commanded to be baptized. (Acts
2:38)
2. The command to be baptized was never taken away. (See Matthew 28:19-20).
3. If a true believer dies before being baptized, God can still send them
to be with Jesus. After all, all who have the Holy Spirit are sons of God.
(Romans 8:10-11).
4. God can save people and give them the Holy Spirit prior to them being
baptized (Acts 10:44-48).
Baptism is a type of circumcision, and as Romans 4:10-11, shows, Abraham's
faith was counted as righteousness before he was circumcised, and that baptism
was a seal of righteousness.
In summary, baptism is not the cause of a new life in Christ. It is a
believer's pledge to God of a new life in Christ.
See also Hard Sayings of the Bible p.716-718 When Cultists Ask
p.221-222 for more info on water baptism not being a condition of salvation.
For
more info please contact Christian Debater™ P.O. Box 144441 Austin, TX
78714 www.BibleQuery.org
by Steven M. Morrison, PhD.
by Steven M. Morrison, PhD.