Acts 7:16's "Abraham"

[Madeline]

A few of my commentaries from E-Sword states that "Jacob" should have been named instead of "Abraham" in Acts 7:16 and this made me wonder why since God's Word is infallible.

Acts 7:16 (King James Version)

16And were carried over into Sychem, and laid in the sepulchre that Abraham bought for a sum of money of the sons of Emmor the father of Sychem.

Which Abraham bought (h?i ?n?sato Abraam). Hackett is sure that our present text is wrong. Hort notes some sixty ?primitive errors? in the critical text of the N.T. It is possible that this is also one. If ?Jacob? is substituted for ?Abraham' date='? the matter is cleared up. ?It is quite as likely, judging a priori, that the word producing the error escaped from some early copyist as that so glaring an error was committed by Stephen? (Hackett).[/quote']



Comments?

Love,
Madeline

[HappyChristian]

Interesting observation:

Dealing with alleged contradictions entails several different principles; one of which involves the fact that sometimes many different solutions will present themselves. In order to ?fix? the contradiction and show that the Bible is not self-negating, an exact solution does not necessarily have to be established. All that the biblical defender must do is offer a possible solution.

For instance, it has been claimed that a contradiction exists because Acts 7:16 states that Abraham bought a tomb in Shechem where the patriarchs were buried. Yet, in Joshua 24:32 the Bible plainly says that Jacob was the one who bought the plot of ground in Shechem where Joseph was buried. At first glance, these passages appear to be in opposition, but upon closer inspection several possible solutions come to light.

First, both men could have bought the field. Jacob was in the area more than 150 years after Abraham. Abraham could have bought the field, sold it back, and Jacob could have bought the field many years later. The United States has been in existence only a little over 200 years. Imagine your great grandfather buying a field before the Civil War. In order for you to gain possession of the field today, you might have to buy it. Another possibility is that Abraham bought the tomb in Shechem, but Jacob bought a field. The Bible does not say that Jacob bought a tomb, just a field (Genesis 33:19, Joshua 24:32).

Actually, no one knows for sure exactly what happened with the field, the tomb, Jacob, or Abraham. But in order to avoid the charge of a contradiction, we simply must show that there is a possibility that the two statements could be true. By using such principles as this, each alleged Bible contradiction can be answered quite adequately.

http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/1626

[Guest Guest]

"Acts 7:15-16 So Jacob went down into Egypt, and died, he, and our fathers, And were carried over into Sychem, and laid in the sepulchre that Abraham bought for a sum of money of the sons of Emmor the father of Sychem."

HappyChristians post is on the right track. This passage does not have to be read as if Abraham bought the field from "the sons of Emmor the father of Sychem", in my opinion. Rather, I think it can be read that Abraham bought the field, and Jacob was also laid in the sepulchre "for a sum of money of the sons of Emmor the father of Sychem." He had to buy it too.

Abraham first bought the field and the cave to bury Sarah his wife, and was later buried there himself as was Issac, Rebbecca, Jacob, Leah, and likely others as well.

Part of the key to understanding the Acts 7:16 passage I believe is found in Acts 7:5.

Speaking of Abraham it says:

"Acts 7:5 And he gave him none inheritance in it, no, not so much as to set his foot on: yet he promised that he would give it to him for a possession, and to his seed after him, when as yet he had no child."

Note that "he gave him none inheritance in it no, not so much as to set his foot on", yet we know that he bought the cave and the field. I think the reason for this is similar to the laws Israel had in place early on. Every family had an "inheritance" which could be sold, but after a given period of time it reverted to the family whose "inheritance" it was. Thus Abraham bought the field, and Jacob had to buy the same field again later. That it is speaking of the same burying place can be seen in this passage:

"Genesis 49:29-33 And he charged them, and said unto them, I am to be gathered unto my people: bury me with my fathers in the cave that is in the field of Ephron the Hittite, In the cave that is in the field of Machpelah, which is before Mamre, in the land of Canaan, which Abraham bought with the field of Ephron the Hittite for a possession of a buryingplace. There they buried Abraham and Sarah his wife; there they buried Isaac and Rebekah his wife; and there I buried Leah. The purchase of the field and of the cave that is therein was from the children of Heth. And when Jacob had made an end of commanding his sons, he gathered up his feet into the bed, and yielded up the ghost, and was gathered unto his people."


It is likely Jacob had to purchase the field again as he did in Genesis 33:19, before he could bury Leah there. Scripture doesn't say when she died, but earlier in that chapter is the last time she is mentioned as alive so it seems quite possible that she died during this time.