1001 Errors in the Christian Bible
Home
Dedication
Matthew
Mark
Luke
John
Acts
Contact Us
Acts -- Errors 657-663
#657
Acts 2 (KJV)
21 “And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the
name of the Lord shall be saved.”
Compare to Matthew 7: (KJV)
21 “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter
into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which
is in heaven.”
According to “Luke” all you have to do to be saved is ask/demand
to be saved. According to “Matthew” that’s not enough.
We see the transition of Christian theology here from the “Matthew”/Jewish
position that deeds must be done in order for reward to the “Luke”/Pagan
position that all you have to do is ask “god” to wave a magic
wand and you’ll be saved. This type of huge difference in basic doctrine
is excellent evidence that the supposed acts of the apostles were never
the historical acts of the apostles but the imagination of subsequent
Christianity as to what the acts of the apostles should have been.
# 658
Acts 2 (KJV)
25 “For David speaketh concerning him, I foresaw the Lord always
before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved:”
Here’s the applicable Psalm:
Psalms (JPS)
16:1 “Michtam of David. Keep me, O God; for I have taken refuge
in Thee.
16:2 I have said unto the Lord: 'Thou art my L-rd; I have no good but
in Thee';
16:3 As for the holy that are in the earth, they are the excellent in
whom is all my delight.
16:4 Let the idols of them be multiplied that make suit unto another;
their drink-offerings of blood will I not offer, nor take their names
upon my lips.”
Turns out David did speak of Jesus here, “their drink-offerings of
blood will I not offer, nor take their names upon my lips”, but David
associates the drink offering of blood of Jesus and the replacement of
God’s name with Jesus’ as Evil.
# 659
Acts 2 (KJV)
30 “Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn
with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the
flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;”
Compare to Luke 1: (KJV)
34 “Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I
know not a man?
35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come
upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore
also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son
of God.”
KJV has dishonestly added “Christ” to 2:30 where no christ exists
in the Greek (kind of says it all). The implication of 2:30 is that Jesus
was from the seed of David but Luke 1:34 explains that Jesus was not from
anyone’s seed. Nice evidence that the original Gospel stories such
as “Luke” were closer to Judaism having a natural birth for
Jesus as the heir of David and were subsequently changed in a Pagan direction
exchanging a natural birth for a supernatural one. In “Luke”
and “Matthew”, after the infancy narratives claiming supernatural
births, which don’t agree, and is very good evidence that there was
no supernatural birth, the rest of the stories have no reference to a
supernatural birth. This observation is consistent with the theory that
the original stories had no supernatural births. The Reader is also invited
to consider that “Mark”, the original Gospel, and “John”,
have no reference to a supernatural birth and that this could mean that
neither author believed Jesus had a supernatural birth.
# 660
Acts 2 (KJV)
34 “For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself,
The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,”
Here is the quote from Psalm110: (JPS)
1 “A Psalm of David. HaShem saith unto my lord: 'Sit thou at My
right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.”
There are not two “Lord’s” in the Hebrew. The Hebrew word
translated as “HaShem” above is used to refer exclusively to
God. The following Hebrew word translated above as “lord” (adonai)
is a title and could refer to God or a person. The Greek uses the same
word for both, “kurios”, which is a title and means “lord”.
The first use of kurios here in the Greek is a misquote of the Hebrew
since the Greek word for God “Theon” should have been used.
Either the original Greek author or a later editor used “kurios”
in both places to deceptively try and equate Jesus with God. Most moderns
now put the first use of kurios in capital letters “LORD” to
reflect the meaning of the underlying Hebrew. The KJV still uses the exact
same word for both to maintain the deception but the NJKV has corrected
the error and now uses “LORD” for the first word. Seeing as
how KJV has now corrected its own error I’m still waiting for KJV
inerrantists to explain how this was not an error in the original KJV.
# 661
Acts 2 (KJV)
38 “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one
of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall
receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”
Compare to Matthew 28: (KJV)
19 “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:”
In Acts Peter, speaking to Israel, says to be baptized in Jesus’
name. “Matthew’s” Jesus says to be baptized in the name
of Jesus, God and holy spirit. Based on the testimony of Church Fathers
it’s likely that “Matthew” originally agreed with “Luke”
and was later changed by Trinitarians but the manuscript evidence supports
the trinitarian formula. Ironically, Israel in these end days being primarily
Jewish with some Muslims and as the Brits would say, “Not at all
Christian.” doesn’t have anyone being baptized in Jesus’
name. Maybe it’s because Peter didn’t start his speech with
“Simon says”.
# 662
Acts 2 (KJV)
6 “Then Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but such as I
have give I thee: In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and
walk.”
The Greek is “the Nazarene” and not “of Nazareth”.
In “Luke’s” time Jesus may have been referred to as “the
Nazarene” and later Christianity thought, “the Nazarene”,
“what the hell does that mean?”
# 663
Acts 3 (KJV)
18 “But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth
of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled.”
I think we’d all agree (except for the unknown author of “Luke”
of course) that no one could demonstrate that every prophet from the Tanakh
prophesied that the Messiah would suffer.