To: Solon who wrote (13702 ) 5/18/2001 10:05:34 AM From: gao seng Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486 On this point, the Bible is not contradictory. There are two burial grounds, one at Shechem purchased by Jacob and the other at Mach-pelah, purchased by Abraham. The Bible does not state that Jacob is buried in two places, only in the burial grounds purchased by Abraham. Now, if Abraham bought the land from two different people, that would confound the whole story. >>Acts 7:15-16/Gen.33:18-19 - Who bought the field at Sychem?<< The Emmor of Acts 7 is not the Hamor of Genesis 33, 34. The Emmor of Acts begats Zohar (Genesis 23:8) who is the father of Ephron the Hittite. The Hamor of Genesis 34:2 is a Hivite. The line went Emmor, Sychem, Zohar, and Ephron who were Hittites. Ephron's daughters marry into the Hivite inhabitants (Hamor) and the children of Hamor include the Shechem of Genesis 34 and 33:19 after whom the city is named-Joshua 24:32. The confounding of Emmor and Sychem (Abraham's contemporaries) with Hamor and Shechem (Jacob's contemporaries) is a little thin in view of the fact that Abraham was dead more than 100 years before Jacob met Hamor. Sychem is the name of the area named after Emmor's son, where Abraham buys his burial field for anyone called Kirjath-arbra "Hebron." As a matter of fact, that city has three different names; Mamre, in addition to Kirjath-arbra and Hebron (Gen 23:19; Josh 20:7). Stephen did not say that "our fathers" were "buried in Shechem." He says "carried over into Sychem" Acts 7:16. The original occupant of this area was a Hittite (Emmor) not a Hivite (Hamor). >>Acts 7:15-16/ Gen.50:13, 23:16-20 - Was Jacob buried in Sychem (30 miles north of Jerusalem) or in Hebron (20 miles south of Jerusalem)?<< Stephen did not say that "our fathers" were "buried in Shechem." He says "carried over into Sychem" Acts 7:16. I am sure that it is possible to have a scholarly discussion on the rest of your post without my becoming evangelical. However, the requirement of rational thought on the subject(s) appears to be absent in your case. So unless you wish to reward the thread with insights that weaken my above argument, I shall bid ado.