Bogus Biblical quotes 
By Raul Casso

In 2 nd Timothy 3:16, we are informed, “…all scripture is given by inspiration of God…” As an inspired work, the Bible is thought by many to be free of error. Is this true? Is the Bible inerrant? Let's take a look at a few examples of inspired scripture and see.

Consider what Matthew tells us about the ancient Hebrew prophet Zacharias: “…upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias , whom ye slew between the temple and the altar… (Matt. 24:35 KJV). My King James Bible provides convenient cross-references in the margins of the text. Cross referenced with Matt. 24:35 is 2 Ch. 24:20-21.

In 2 Ch. 24:20-21, however, Barachias not mentioned at all, and certainly not as the father of Zacharias. Instead, we are told that Jehoiada is the father of Zacharias. How could Matthew make such an error in quoting scripture?

This isn't the only place where Matthew misquotes scripture. For another example, Matthew tells us that Jeremiah prophesized about 30 pieces of silver (Matt. 27:9 KJV). Jeremiah, however, made no such prediction: the entire book of Jeremiah says nothing about 30 pieces of silver. Rather, it is in Zechariah where we find mention of thirty pieces of silver (Zech 11:12-13). Apparently, Matthew, or its writers, got his prophets wrong.

St. Mark was not above similar gaffs. Consider for example what Mark tells us about David eating the “shewbread.” Mark says, “…David…went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest, and did eat the shewbread…” (Mk 2:25-26 KJV).

Referring again to cross-references in the margins of the biblical text, the Old Testament verses cross-referenced with Mk 3:25-26 are 1 Sa.21:1, and 2 Sa. 8:17. Turning to those verses, however, we find that Abiathar was not the high priest at the time in question. The high priest, according to Samuel, was Ahimelech , the father of Abiathar. (See also 1 Sa.22:20). Mark and Matthew must have attended the same bible school.

When it comes to Old Testament misquotes, however, one of the biggest mistakes was committed by Luke and Matthew in their respective genealogies of Christ.

The genealogies, found in Matt. 1:1-17 and Lk. 3:23-38, are remarkable for how well they demonstrate their author's propensity to goof things up. One would think that Luke and Matthew, two disciples of Jesus, no less, and writing while under the influence of the Holy Spirit, would know Old Testament scripture like the backs of their hands. Their treatment of Jesus' genealogies, however, proves otherwise. Here's the problem:

Both genealogies include Zorobabel and Salathiel in the lineage (Matt. 1:12; Lk. 3:27). In 1 Chro. 3:16-19, we are told that Zorobabel and Salathiel are both descendants of Jehoiakim—and that's the problem. Jehoiakim was an ancient king of Judah who greatly displeased God. Of Jehoiakim, God said, “…no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah,” and, “…Jehoiakim king of Judah; He shall have none to sit upon the throne of David: and his dead body shall be cast out in the day to the heat, and in the night to the frost.”(Jer. 23:22-30; 36:30 KJV).

Why would Matthew and Luke include, in their respective genealogies of Jesus, any offspring of anyone about whom God said that neither that person nor his offspring would ever assume the throne of David? It makes no sense unless you consider that the writers of Matthew and Luke were not Holy Spirit inspired, but were, instead, simply men who made a mistake in the telling of their stories. Certainly, as Luke and Matthew committed their errors to papyrus, the Holy Spirit had long since departed. Their stories, then, while interesting, are genuinely man-made.