"Mr. Knowitall" Explains how the New Testament can’t be believed!

Here are a list of five “challenges” to the New Testament which the author, I will call “Mr. Knowitall”, offers "to prove the New Testament cannot be trusted", and that the Messiah Yeshua is not the Messiah.

Mr. Knowitall would have been ignored due to his rather obvious ignorance and bias if it were not that his challenge was directed straight at us in a public forum!  So listed here are the five challenges, in red, just as he stated them, corrected only for poor grammar and some emphasis added to help the reader see his point.  Below his challenges are my responses.  

Charge 1. Yeshua distanced himself from the law if he wrote it saying “their” law? And in the Greek it says  “Their Law”? And it is really a psalm about David’s life (Psalms 69:4)!

John 15:25 But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause.

Reply:  Mr. Knowitall, I’m guessing you don’t know the first thing about reading scripture.  Sorry, but it seems to be true since you clearly don’t understand the context of the verse you cited.  Simply comprehending the context of John 15 renders your charge impotent.   

Since you can’t see it, here’s what’s going on:

The word “their” in John 15:25, which you have apparently assumed as derogatory - implying that “their” [Jewish Torah] is not Yeshua’s Torah - is not referring at all to “the Jewish Torah” in that vein.  It is referring to those who are persecuting Him (or are about to persecute Him).  Read the context!  Go back (at least verse 18), and see who Yeshua is talking about:

18. And if the world hates you, know that it hated me before you.  19. And if you are of the world, the world would love its own.  But you are not of the world for I have chosen you from the world.  Because of this, the world hates you.  20. Remember the word which I have spoken to you.  That there is no servant who is greater than his master.  If they persecute me, they will also persecute you.  And if they keep my word, they will also keep yours.  21. But all these things they will do to you because of my name, for they do not know He who sent me.  22. If I had not come and spoken to them, they would have no sin, but now they have no holocaust [sacrifice] upon the face of their sin.  23. Whoever hates me also hates my Father.   24. And if I had not done works before their eyes that no other man has done, they would have no sin.  But now they have both seen and hated both me and even my Father.  25. That the Word might be fulfilled which is written in their Torah that ‘They hated me without reason.’  (AENT)

Yeshua is CLEARLY not "distancing" Himself from Torah as you accuse!  He is only describing those who are “in-charge”, the ones who will go against Him, those who will use their authority, i.e., “their Torah” to go against Him.  My gosh!  Read all of John 15 and see how many times Yeshua praises YHWH, and how much He elevates YHWH and YHWH’s Word [Torah]!  But instead you can only dismiss Yeshua as Messiah because YOU don’t like the way the word “their” was used in a single verse which you did not comprehend.  Oy!

Charge 2. Joseph had two different fathers

Matthew 1:15 And Eli’ud begat Elea’zar; and Elea’zar begat Mat’than; and Mat’than begat Jacob; 16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Yehoshuah, who is called Messiah.

Luke 3:23 And Yeshua himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli, 24 Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi,

Reply:  Oh brother, the old “Joseph had two fathers” nonsense!  Sorry, Mr. Knowitall, but it truly is nonsense.   Again, you have failed to understand scripture.  But this time, at least you are not alone.  Most everyone has mistaken the genealogy in Matthew as that of Joseph, while the genealogy in Luke is taken as that of Mary.  But this usual understanding is backwards!   The genealogy in Matthew is of Mary and Luke’s is of Joseph, Mary’s husband!  

I’m sure you, Mr. Knowitall, will not want to agree, or even bother to understand, but please read this and try to understand!  Please try!  Matthew 1:16, does not read “Joseph the husband of Mary” as your poor translation says, rather it is: “Joseph, the guardian of Mary.”  What's happening here is that the Greek translators failed to understand the Aramaic “gowra”, meaning “guardian” in the context, and instead translated it as “husband”, the error of which is simply carried forward in English.  This means that the “Joseph” in Matthew 1:16 is the name of the guardian of Mary, not the “Joseph” who became her husband, who simply had the same name!  Indeed, if you just keep reading in Matthew 1, Matthew goes on to say: “But Yosip [Joseph], her husband was just and did not desire to expose her, yet he was thinking in secret that he would dismiss her.”  Even Matthew understood that in verse 19 he needed to clarify that there he was talking about “Joseph”, Mary’s husband, rather than “Joseph”, Mary’s guardian he was naming in verse 16, son of Jacob!  By simply understanding the two genealogies, your charge if rendered false.  

But there is more proof this is the correct interpretation if only you would care to set aside your misunderstanding long enough to see it!  Yeshua HAD to come from the line of David through Solomon!  You see this in Matthew 1:6.  But if you insist that the genealogy in Luke is the genealogy of Mary, then you would incorrectly cause the birth line of Yeshua to come from Natan, not Solomon!  (See Luke 3:31).  But Luke 3:23, is very clear that Luke here is addressing the line of JOSEPH, Mary’s husband, of whom Yeshua is rightfully claimed as “his [Joseph’s] son” because Joseph did marry Yeshua’s mother!

So your claim to deny Yeshua on grounds that Joseph had “two fathers” is groundless, and silly.  

Charge 3. I CAN TELL WHEN TWO DIFFERENT STATEMENTS DO NOT LINE UP!

Romans 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: 27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.

Isaiah 59:20 And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith YHWH. 21 As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith YHWH; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith YHWH, from henceforth and forever.

Reply:  Despite yelling, you were not clear, Mr. Knowitall, just what is bothering you here so I will assume you are bothered by the phrasing of Romans 11:26 which you quote:  “There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob”, because it does not match exactly the phrasing of the prophecy in Isaiah 59:20 which says:  “And the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob”.  Or perhaps it is the difference in the wording of Romans 11:27 vs Isaiah 59:21?  Whatever your objection, it is clear you do not understand what is going on in Romans 11.

In Romans 11, the author, Paul, is simply referencing the prophecy of Isaiah, as you quoted.  PAUL is paraphrasing the Tanach making the connection of Isaiah’s prophesied  redeemer and that redeemer being fulfilled by Yeshua who was sent to those who turn form their sin!  All Biblical scholars recognize Paul was paraphrasing Isaiah, and not one of them, ever, tried to deny the validity of Paul’s writing by trying to claim that the “DIFFERENT STATEMENTS DO NOT LINE UP”.   If you are so concerned, Mr. Knowitall, that scripture must “line up” as you require, then you need to throw away ALL your English versions of the Tanach, because I assure you that THEY DO NOT LINE UP with the Hebrew or Greek!  And throw away your Hebrew Bible because it does not line up with the much, much older LXX!  Toss! Toss! Toss!

All Paul was trying to say in Romans 11 is that Gentiles needed to understand the gift that was given to them by YHWH.  He implored them understand their obligation in accepting the gift, the obligation to turn from their sins.  So in Romans 11:26-27 he quotes Isaiah’s prophecy and connects the prophecy to Yeshua as deliverer/redeemer who had that power to give them that gift.  I am sorry that the way Paul described it was not to your liking.

Charge 4. Why does Yeshua use a prayer from the life of David to say it was prophecy? And David Himself said he sinned against God. Did Yeshua sin against God?

John 13:18 I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.

...Making it a point to fulfill scripture, but that scripture is by a man who’s plea is because he is full of sin. “but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.”

Psalms 41:4 I said, YHWH, be merciful unto me: heal my soul; for I have sinned against thee … …9 Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me.

Reply: You have accused Yeshua of “using” a prayer of David as a prophecy.   What?  Yeshua quotes from a prayer of David, and you criticize Him?  Why is it different when, say, the Prophet Micah quotes from a prayer of David, for example Micah 7:8 (quoting David's Psalm 25:2)?  Have you dismissed Micah because of this?  No?  Why not?  But since you desire so strongly to deny Yeshua as the Messiah, you have become blind as to just what was happening in John 13, and thus you can't see why Yeshua would mention the situation in Psalm 41 at all! 

The entire Hebrew Bible is prophecy is it not?  Doesn’t it describe events and tie them to future events?  Don’t you find statements in the Prophets referring to events in the Pentateuch yet they draw prophecy from them?  Don’t rabbis read scripture and glean from them deeper meaning than the “plain” meaning?  But here you are complaining that Yeshua is doing the same thing – and He is an acknowledged Jewish Rabbi!  

Again, you do not understand what was going on in John 13, so here it is for you:  Yeshua was using Psalm 41 to direct a veiled revelation to his betrayer, Judas that He, Yeshua, knew of his planned deceit!  (Do you know enough that Yeshua spoke in parables? His talmidim recognized this, and they even asked Him why he did that! In a nutshell it's so ignorant people will not understand.)  Yeshua, quoting from Psalm 41 here is more of a parable than a prophecy.  Yeshua was revealing something very clearly, yet was just veiled enough to not be clear - till later.  What’s more, the talmidim would have known Psalm 41, and Judas, to whom the statement was directed, would have been mortified because he [Judas] would have known what the rest of the psalm said!  I mean he would have known the part which says "David’s enemies spoke insincerely" (41:6), and that "they would say the worst about David" (41:5) - both exactly what Judas was doing!  The whole event was Yeshua’s way of telling Judas that He knew what Judas was going to do.  You really should go back and read the rest of John 13 and try to understand what happened after verse 18.

So Yeshua's comment had nothing to do with the sins of David, i.e., the verse you quoted, Psalm 41:4, as that was not the point!  Of course David was a sinner! And David knew it, repented for it, and lamented his crimes against YHWH in many of the Psalms.  But Yeshua is not the sinner, and David was not the object of Psalm 41:9 - it was David's enemies, so your question “Did Yeshua sin against God?” by your comparison to David in Psalm 41 has no merit!

Charge 5. Would a perfect God give us a perfect Hebrew Bible, then give us an imperfect Greek Bible, and tell us if we can’t believe the imperfect Greek Bible, we will burn in hell???? Jesus sure seemed to get angry to the people who did not accept it, according to scripture! THERE IS MORE GOING ON HERE!!!!!!!

Reply:  Is your Hebrew Bible really perfect?  What makes you think that?  The Hebrew Bible you accept as "perfect" is a compilation of many ancient sources of which the sages had to make changes/corrections to try to make them uniform!  And since the actual, original, complete Hebrew text is actually lost, your Hebrew Bible today includes much text largely RETRANSLATED from the Septuagint – which was Greek!   And before you trust your English translations of the Hebrew Bible, you better learn some Hebrew because the English translation is not always representative of the intended meaning of the Hebrew, and the rabbis added vowel points which did not exist in the old Hebrew aleph-bet thus forcing their understanding on us all!  So please, trust the Bible to get to know and understand YHWH, but don’t go around assuming the Hebrew Bible is "perfect" and authoritative while denying the Brit Chadahsa (New Testament)!

Oh, your last comment is precious!  "THERE IS MORE GOING ON HERE!!!!!!!"  There sure is!  Too bad you are blind to it!