FarRider:-6
Where do I pace the difference between the OT and the NT? Right where it belongs, at the cross.
I am well aware of the criminals and I am well aware of the injustices of both the US and Canadian court systems. They are human constructs and as such can and do make mistakes.
Righteous judgment? Doesn't the Bible say that there are non who are righteous save God alone. It would seem to me then that we lock these folks up for the protection of society and leave the righteous judgment to God. After all that is His role and his role alone. This alows us to respect the sacredness of all life and yet protects society. Of course we have in Canada, and I suspect in the US as well, folks in prision who really could be dealt with in other ways and save the state a great deal of money.
Jesus said that non of us including himself knew when the end would come. Only the Father knew. Was the historical Jesus God? That is worth thinking about. Personally I believe that the risen Christ is Lord and part of the the problem of explaining the Holy Trinity is that we have not the linguistic or conceptualization ability to do so beyond our resort to metaphor. God is much bigger then our language or conceptualization ability is He not? Who was the historical Jesus if as a human being he did not know the timing of the end.? There are other concepts of Jesus. Non of them in any way denigrate Jesus.
All of these things, including contradictions become unimportant if we see the sacred writings through the Jewish eyes, as best we can, and consider their style of writing and interpretation as midrash. All of these internal discrepencies as well as the external simply don't effect the truths presented in the sacred scriptures. Thus the Bib le becomes for us the Word of God because God does speak to us through the Bible. All we have to do is rely on the Holy Spirit to Guiude us.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
FarRider:-6
Just imagine making those who screwed up at Enron working out in society having to pay back as best they can what they stole. That would indeed be justice and at the same time respect the sacredness of all life and not only contribute to society but perhaps in some small way pay back what they stole.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Just imagine making those who screwed up at Enron working out in society having to pay back as best they can what they stole. That would indeed be justice and at the same time respect the sacredness of all life and not only contribute to society but perhaps in some small way pay back what they stole.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
Far Rider wrote: Genisis 5:4 states that Adam begat many sons and daughters. I agree with Tela here.
Regardless, this all took place AFTER Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden of Eden, and therefore imperfect. How does that preclude what happens now when blood relations have children together??
Regardless, this all took place AFTER Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden of Eden, and therefore imperfect. How does that preclude what happens now when blood relations have children together??
[FONT=Arial Black]I hope you cherish this sweet way of life, and I hope you know that it comes with a price.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
~Darrel Worley~
[/FONT]
Bullet's trial was a farce. Can I get an AMEN?????
We won't be punished for our sins, but BY them.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
SPOT said this:
spot wrote: Allow me... who were the parents of Cain and Abel's wives?
Spot, I subscribe to the GAP THEORY. That there is a gap of time between Gen. 1:1 and Gen. 1:2. This begins to lay groundwork for the next idea. That the description of creation up to the sixth day when MAN was created speaks of "corporate man". The entire race, all subraces (colors). Then the Bible discusses God resting on the 7th day. Then we get what is mistakenly thought to be a rehash of the creation of man, again. INSTEAD, I have found another explanation which to me holds much water.
In the 6th day creation, the created is called "ADAM". MAN! In the Masorah manuscript. After God's day of rest in the supposed rehash, the Masorah says of the creation of "HaAdam". THE MAN! This is the making of the single patriarch of the line of men tracable all the way to Christ, through Noah, Abraham, etc. This is what is meant in Gen. chapter 6 about Noah being "perfect" in his generations regarding the "sons of God" taking wives of the daughters of men. Noah's bloodline was free of the "hybrid" giants (nephilim) and hence Jesus came from lineage not polluted by the sin of the fallen ones. (I know this disgresses somewhat, but I'll try to make it clear).
If therefore, man was created the 6th day, all races, and then HaAdam after, then there were people already present for Cain to go and take a wife from the land of Nod. No incest.
I again refer you to "theseason.org" and their ;links for deeper study.
d:-5
P:S:
On the punishment of death. Somewhere in the NT it is stated that "there is a sin unto death".
P:S:S:
God wants you to come to him by the path he has established through his annointed messiah Yeshua (Jesus Christ). He set up the whole thing through the family of (Ha) Adam through Noah and Abraham and the rest. He did it in the middle east. Not India or China or anywhere else. So you can accept his salvation on his terms or suffer hell (seperation from him), which is another huge topic.
Hell is not forever, either. Another huge topic.
Was it Ted who mentioned looking at the Hebrew and Greek words for truew meaning of the scriptures? Whoever it was, they are correct.
d:-5 :-5
spot wrote: Allow me... who were the parents of Cain and Abel's wives?
Spot, I subscribe to the GAP THEORY. That there is a gap of time between Gen. 1:1 and Gen. 1:2. This begins to lay groundwork for the next idea. That the description of creation up to the sixth day when MAN was created speaks of "corporate man". The entire race, all subraces (colors). Then the Bible discusses God resting on the 7th day. Then we get what is mistakenly thought to be a rehash of the creation of man, again. INSTEAD, I have found another explanation which to me holds much water.
In the 6th day creation, the created is called "ADAM". MAN! In the Masorah manuscript. After God's day of rest in the supposed rehash, the Masorah says of the creation of "HaAdam". THE MAN! This is the making of the single patriarch of the line of men tracable all the way to Christ, through Noah, Abraham, etc. This is what is meant in Gen. chapter 6 about Noah being "perfect" in his generations regarding the "sons of God" taking wives of the daughters of men. Noah's bloodline was free of the "hybrid" giants (nephilim) and hence Jesus came from lineage not polluted by the sin of the fallen ones. (I know this disgresses somewhat, but I'll try to make it clear).
If therefore, man was created the 6th day, all races, and then HaAdam after, then there were people already present for Cain to go and take a wife from the land of Nod. No incest.
I again refer you to "theseason.org" and their ;links for deeper study.
d:-5
P:S:
On the punishment of death. Somewhere in the NT it is stated that "there is a sin unto death".
P:S:S:
God wants you to come to him by the path he has established through his annointed messiah Yeshua (Jesus Christ). He set up the whole thing through the family of (Ha) Adam through Noah and Abraham and the rest. He did it in the middle east. Not India or China or anywhere else. So you can accept his salvation on his terms or suffer hell (seperation from him), which is another huge topic.
Hell is not forever, either. Another huge topic.
Was it Ted who mentioned looking at the Hebrew and Greek words for truew meaning of the scriptures? Whoever it was, they are correct.
d:-5 :-5
-
chonsigirl
- Posts: 33633
- Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 8:28 am
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag wrote:
Was it Ted who mentioned looking at the Hebrew and Greek words for truew meaning of the scriptures? Whoever it was, they are correct.
d:-5 :-5
That would be interesting to do, but maybe on a separate thread, out of respect for those who do not know Greek and Hebrew. I would be happy to participate on the new thread, as long as we don't fight about concordances!
Was it Ted who mentioned looking at the Hebrew and Greek words for truew meaning of the scriptures? Whoever it was, they are correct.
d:-5 :-5
That would be interesting to do, but maybe on a separate thread, out of respect for those who do not know Greek and Hebrew. I would be happy to participate on the new thread, as long as we don't fight about concordances!
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag wrote: If therefore, man was created the 6th day, all races, and then HaAdam after, then there were people already present for Cain to go and take a wife from the land of Nod.So we have two separate occasions when God created the first man? Once in Genesis 1, where he's implied by Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them" and once again, a second occasion, in Genesis 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
OK, that works, except that Genesis 2 goes on, if this is a second human creation, this time of "the man", to mention a second creation of all other life - Genesis 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them. The get-out that theseason.org attempts is that this second beastly creation is only of domestic animals, but Genesis 1:24's creation already had those: "And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so."
By all means say it's so, but doesn't the idea have a hint of overkill to it?
downag wrote: I again refer you to "theseason.org" and their ;links for deeper study.You know, theseason.org is a fairly vile and opinionated place. Underlined and bolded, for Genesis 2:20, is the commentary 'In the term; "..there was not found an help meet for him", indicates that God never intended for the mixing of the races.' In which case, downag, you still have the same problem of incest. If the race of Genesis 2 Adam, your second creation of man, isn't to breed with the races of Genesis 1, who were the parents of Cain and Abel's wives?
The question at this point has become somewhat sordid, I only ask since you seem to be basing your understanding of Genesis on that strange interpretation they present.
OK, that works, except that Genesis 2 goes on, if this is a second human creation, this time of "the man", to mention a second creation of all other life - Genesis 2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them. The get-out that theseason.org attempts is that this second beastly creation is only of domestic animals, but Genesis 1:24's creation already had those: "And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so."
By all means say it's so, but doesn't the idea have a hint of overkill to it?
downag wrote: I again refer you to "theseason.org" and their ;links for deeper study.You know, theseason.org is a fairly vile and opinionated place. Underlined and bolded, for Genesis 2:20, is the commentary 'In the term; "..there was not found an help meet for him", indicates that God never intended for the mixing of the races.' In which case, downag, you still have the same problem of incest. If the race of Genesis 2 Adam, your second creation of man, isn't to breed with the races of Genesis 1, who were the parents of Cain and Abel's wives?
The question at this point has become somewhat sordid, I only ask since you seem to be basing your understanding of Genesis on that strange interpretation they present.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
In the Masorah manuscript. After God's day of rest in the supposed rehash, the Masorah says of the creation of "HaAdam". THE MAN!
Where does it say this? I cannot find one Hebrew or Greek concordance or biblical entry for the word "HaAdam".
Where does it say this? I cannot find one Hebrew or Greek concordance or biblical entry for the word "HaAdam".
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag:-6
The sin unto death is the blaspheming of the Holy Spirit. That is what the writer said. If you want the chapter and verse I can give it to you.
Spot:-6
There are two obviously different creation stories in Genesis. However, when you make a statement about marrying people of another kind you are treading on the dangerous road to racism. There is enough racism in the Bible already. Let's not add more.
FarRider:-6
There are many, many Christians that would not agree with you. How can you espouse what our Lord would condemn?
Shalom
Ted:-6
The sin unto death is the blaspheming of the Holy Spirit. That is what the writer said. If you want the chapter and verse I can give it to you.
Spot:-6
There are two obviously different creation stories in Genesis. However, when you make a statement about marrying people of another kind you are treading on the dangerous road to racism. There is enough racism in the Bible already. Let's not add more.
FarRider:-6
There are many, many Christians that would not agree with you. How can you espouse what our Lord would condemn?
Shalom
Ted:-6
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
Ted wrote: There are two obviously different creation stories in Genesis. However, when you make a statement about marrying people of another kind you are treading on the dangerous road to racism. There is enough racism in the Bible already. Let's not add more.Goodness, Ted - did I not make it abundantly clear that I was quoting, with considerable disapprobation? Of *course* it was bloody racist.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
Spot:-6
Sorry about that. It was my mistake. I am finding it harder to read without missing words and punctuation marks. There is a huge blind spot in my left eye that is the good eye.
Apologies. Glad you pointed that out. Now, with a little effort I see them. I'm going to have to be much more careful.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Sorry about that. It was my mistake. I am finding it harder to read without missing words and punctuation marks. There is a huge blind spot in my left eye that is the good eye.
Apologies. Glad you pointed that out. Now, with a little effort I see them. I'm going to have to be much more careful.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
Well Ted, I don't know how to adress you anymore. You come on like an authority, but I have found you wanting.
The sin unto death is not what you said. Blaspheming the Holy Spirit is the UNFORGIVABLE SIN. 1 John 5:16 denotes the sin unto death references, which is not specific.
Capital punishment is not murder. In the Bible it is written that the SWORD is given to those in authority for the PUNISHMENT of EVIL DOERS. Pretty clear to me. They are not going to SPANK you with a SWORD. They will SLAY YOU!
If you like, the idea is that they are sending you to God. If a murderer you be, your victim will be waiting for you there, also.
d:-5
The sin unto death is not what you said. Blaspheming the Holy Spirit is the UNFORGIVABLE SIN. 1 John 5:16 denotes the sin unto death references, which is not specific.
Capital punishment is not murder. In the Bible it is written that the SWORD is given to those in authority for the PUNISHMENT of EVIL DOERS. Pretty clear to me. They are not going to SPANK you with a SWORD. They will SLAY YOU!
If you like, the idea is that they are sending you to God. If a murderer you be, your victim will be waiting for you there, also.
d:-5
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
I first did this study using an older Strong's Exhaustive Concordence which has disappeared from my library. There was a reference about HaAdam vs. just Adam, but the newer conmcordences don't carry the distinction.
Sorry.
Next.
d:-5
Sorry.
Next.
d:-5
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag wrote: Well Ted, I don't know how to adress you anymore. You come on like an authority, but I have found you wanting.
The sin unto death is not what you said. Blaspheming the Holy Spirit is the UNFORGIVABLE SIN. 1 John 5:16 denotes the sin unto death references, which is not specific.
Capital punishment is not murder. In the Bible it is written that the SWORD is given to those in authority for the PUNISHMENT of EVIL DOERS. Pretty clear to me. They are not going to SPANK you with a SWORD. They will SLAY YOU!
If you like, the idea is that they are sending you to God. If a murderer you be, your victim will be waiting for you there, also.
d:-5I think Ted's right, actually.
1 John 5:16 If any man see his brother sin a sin not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.This is John instructing us on who we can intercede for. You're not to go to God in prayer asking His forgiveness for someone who has put himself out of fellowship with the community - that would be someone who no longer has faith and no longer shows the love of Christ in his life. To reject faith and harden yourself to the love of Christ is the sin against the Holy Spirit which Mark (3:28) describes as unforgiveable - "Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation".
For those who have slipped into sin but remained in fellowship, kept faith and still love Christ, John says you may and should pray forgiveness for them and that Christ shall respond.
Where, though, is it written in the Bible that "the SWORD is given to those in authority for the PUNISHMENT of EVIL DOERS"? It was a simple matter for you to put a verse reference when you posted, but you didn't bother.
The sin unto death is not what you said. Blaspheming the Holy Spirit is the UNFORGIVABLE SIN. 1 John 5:16 denotes the sin unto death references, which is not specific.
Capital punishment is not murder. In the Bible it is written that the SWORD is given to those in authority for the PUNISHMENT of EVIL DOERS. Pretty clear to me. They are not going to SPANK you with a SWORD. They will SLAY YOU!
If you like, the idea is that they are sending you to God. If a murderer you be, your victim will be waiting for you there, also.
d:-5I think Ted's right, actually.
1 John 5:16 If any man see his brother sin a sin not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.This is John instructing us on who we can intercede for. You're not to go to God in prayer asking His forgiveness for someone who has put himself out of fellowship with the community - that would be someone who no longer has faith and no longer shows the love of Christ in his life. To reject faith and harden yourself to the love of Christ is the sin against the Holy Spirit which Mark (3:28) describes as unforgiveable - "Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme: But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation".
For those who have slipped into sin but remained in fellowship, kept faith and still love Christ, John says you may and should pray forgiveness for them and that Christ shall respond.
Where, though, is it written in the Bible that "the SWORD is given to those in authority for the PUNISHMENT of EVIL DOERS"? It was a simple matter for you to put a verse reference when you posted, but you didn't bother.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag wrote: I first did this study using an older Strong's Exhaustive Concordence which has disappeared from my library. There was a reference about HaAdam vs. just Adam, but the newer conmcordences don't carry the distinction.
Sorry.
Using the university ATHENS database I did find it.
The reason you will not find "ha-adam" in later concordances is because "ha-adam" has been known to be a mistranslation for at least ninety years.
The words “adam†and “ha-adam†are identical forms used to signify man or mankind in a collective sense; the noun for an individual man is "iysh". All through the Hebrew Bible "adam" and "ha-adam", are used as interchangeable terms for generic man; "iysh" for an individual man. Adam is never used as a proper name until the post-exilic Chronicles.
‘Linear School Bible’
Joseph Magil 1915
Next.
Next?
The Anointing at Bethany.
1. When?
2.Who's house?
Sorry.
Using the university ATHENS database I did find it.
The reason you will not find "ha-adam" in later concordances is because "ha-adam" has been known to be a mistranslation for at least ninety years.
The words “adam†and “ha-adam†are identical forms used to signify man or mankind in a collective sense; the noun for an individual man is "iysh". All through the Hebrew Bible "adam" and "ha-adam", are used as interchangeable terms for generic man; "iysh" for an individual man. Adam is never used as a proper name until the post-exilic Chronicles.
‘Linear School Bible’
Joseph Magil 1915
Next.
Next?
The Anointing at Bethany.
1. When?
2.Who's house?
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
memebias,
What is your question or what is the contradiction?
I just looked this up and it says in the house of Simon the leper. It also says a Pharisee's house. It says Judas' father. Could be one and the same. It says before Passover, before the days of unleavened bread. Before the last supper.
Quote:
1 John 5:16-If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death: There is a sin unto death: I do not sat that he shall pray for it.
KJV
d:-5
What is your question or what is the contradiction?
I just looked this up and it says in the house of Simon the leper. It also says a Pharisee's house. It says Judas' father. Could be one and the same. It says before Passover, before the days of unleavened bread. Before the last supper.
Quote:
1 John 5:16-If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death: There is a sin unto death: I do not sat that he shall pray for it.
KJV
d:-5
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag wrote: memebias,
What is your question or what is the contradiction?
Who’s house?
John – Lazarus’ house in Bethany
Mark - Simon the Leper's house in Bethany
Luke - Simon the Pharisee's house in Galilee,
And if you are going to claim the two Simon’s are one and the same, rather than two separate Simon’s, please provide some evidence that Jesus dined simultaneously in two separate regions: Galilee (Luke), Judea (Mark).
When?
Mark: 14:1-9 – Two days before Passover - Nisan 12
John: 12: 1-8 – Six days before Passover – Nisan 8
Luke: Undisclosed, but during his ministry and before his triumphal entry into Jerusalem. In the city of Nain, Galilee, - weeks, possibly months before Passover.
What is your question or what is the contradiction?
Who’s house?
John – Lazarus’ house in Bethany
Mark - Simon the Leper's house in Bethany
Luke - Simon the Pharisee's house in Galilee,
And if you are going to claim the two Simon’s are one and the same, rather than two separate Simon’s, please provide some evidence that Jesus dined simultaneously in two separate regions: Galilee (Luke), Judea (Mark).
When?
Mark: 14:1-9 – Two days before Passover - Nisan 12
John: 12: 1-8 – Six days before Passover – Nisan 8
Luke: Undisclosed, but during his ministry and before his triumphal entry into Jerusalem. In the city of Nain, Galilee, - weeks, possibly months before Passover.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag wrote: I first did this study using an older Strong's Exhaustive Concordence which has disappeared from my library. There was a reference about HaAdam vs. just Adam, but the newer conmcordences don't carry the distinction.down, I think you may be confusing Strong's with a poem by the late Ogden Nash entitled Fleas, which runs as follows:
Adam
Had'em.
This thread is a blast, and it promises to be a VERY extended one. I have not participated because I wouldn't know where to begin. Biblical errors, discrepancies and contradictions run to the hundreds, and probably thousands, and there are entire websites devoted to enumerating them.
That does not make the Bible any less special to those who understand it and its history.
Adam
Had'em.
This thread is a blast, and it promises to be a VERY extended one. I have not participated because I wouldn't know where to begin. Biblical errors, discrepancies and contradictions run to the hundreds, and probably thousands, and there are entire websites devoted to enumerating them.
That does not make the Bible any less special to those who understand it and its history.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
Memebias;
Uh, two different annointings at two different times by two different women at two different locations.
d:-5
Uh, two different annointings at two different times by two different women at two different locations.
d:-5
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag wrote: Memebias;
Uh, two different anointings at two different times by two different women at two different locations.
d:-5
If these are indeed two separate incidents recounted by eyewitnesses, why are they not mentioned as such? Why do we not hear a word in the gospels of Mark and John about a meal and anointing in Galilee? Why is the gospel of Luke utterly silent about a meal and anointing in Bethany?
And if this meal took place in Bethany, you still haven't addressed whose house, Lazarus' or Simon's - which one?
More reasonably, all three are variations of an oral tradition that became distorted prior to being written by the unknown authors of the gospels decades after the alleged event.
Uh, two different anointings at two different times by two different women at two different locations.
d:-5
If these are indeed two separate incidents recounted by eyewitnesses, why are they not mentioned as such? Why do we not hear a word in the gospels of Mark and John about a meal and anointing in Galilee? Why is the gospel of Luke utterly silent about a meal and anointing in Bethany?
And if this meal took place in Bethany, you still haven't addressed whose house, Lazarus' or Simon's - which one?
More reasonably, all three are variations of an oral tradition that became distorted prior to being written by the unknown authors of the gospels decades after the alleged event.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
So?!
My faith isn't shaken. If your's is, you might try praying more. Or is it an intellectual thing with you? You would like to destroy someone elses faith? Is that it?
The why is because that is the way it has come to us and that's it.
d:-5
My faith isn't shaken. If your's is, you might try praying more. Or is it an intellectual thing with you? You would like to destroy someone elses faith? Is that it?
The why is because that is the way it has come to us and that's it.
d:-5
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag:-6
But what does Jesus say regarding the sword?
spot:-6
Thanks.
Shalom
Ted:-6
But what does Jesus say regarding the sword?
spot:-6
Thanks.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag wrote: So?!
My faith isn't shaken. If your's is, you might try praying more. Or is it an intellectual thing with you?
My faith? Pray more? Are you serious? :wah:
You would like to destroy someone elses faith? Is that it?
If you think exploring the contradictions in the bible is an evil plot to "destroy someone elses faith?", why the hell did you start a thread inviting people to comment on the subject?
My faith isn't shaken. If your's is, you might try praying more. Or is it an intellectual thing with you?
My faith? Pray more? Are you serious? :wah:
You would like to destroy someone elses faith? Is that it?
If you think exploring the contradictions in the bible is an evil plot to "destroy someone elses faith?", why the hell did you start a thread inviting people to comment on the subject?
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
Time for another contradiction.:-6
In Matt. 1:16 we find that Joseph was the son of Jacob. Then we turn to Luke 3:23 and we find that he is the son of Heli. A neat trick if you can work it out. Can the same person have two idfferent fathers?
Shalom
Ted:-6
In Matt. 1:16 we find that Joseph was the son of Jacob. Then we turn to Luke 3:23 and we find that he is the son of Heli. A neat trick if you can work it out. Can the same person have two idfferent fathers?
Shalom
Ted:-6
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
Just for good measure here is another one.:-6
Luke's genealogy in chapter 3 there are 56 generations and in Matthew's genealogy there are only 42 generations.
Either one is a little extended or the other one is a little deficient.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Luke's genealogy in chapter 3 there are 56 generations and in Matthew's genealogy there are only 42 generations.
Either one is a little extended or the other one is a little deficient.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
Ted, thanks for two questions that can be answered together.
The geneologies are for Joseph and Mary. One naming the line through Levi (the tribe of priests) and the other of Judas (Judah) (the royal line). Making it perfectly legal for Jesus to be both High Priest and King.
Joseph by marriage is the son of Heli.
d:-5
The geneologies are for Joseph and Mary. One naming the line through Levi (the tribe of priests) and the other of Judas (Judah) (the royal line). Making it perfectly legal for Jesus to be both High Priest and King.
Joseph by marriage is the son of Heli.
d:-5
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
Ted, thanks for two questions that can be answered together.
The geneologies are for Joseph and Mary. One naming the line through Levi (the tribe of priests) and the other of Judas (Judah) (the royal line). Making it perfectly legal for Jesus to be both High Priest and King.
Joseph by marriage is the son of Heli.
1. Both gospels state explicitly that they are tracing Jesus' ancestors from Josephs side, see Matthew 1:16 (Jacob begat Joseph); Luke 3:23 (Joseph, which was the son of Heli).
Luke always refers to Joseph whenever he talks about ancestry of David:
"In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David (Luke 1:27-28); and the virgin's name was Mary."
"And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David... "(Luke 2:4)
2. If it is claimed Mary is being refered in the Matthean account, then she descended from Jeconiah (Matthew 1:11), and she then falls under the curse of that king that none of his descendants could ever sit as king upon the throne of David. (Jeremiah 22:30; 36:30).
3. If the Lukan account is used to claim the family line could go through the mother, Mary was not from a legitimate Messianic family. According to the Bible, the Messiah must be a descendent of David through his son Solomon (II Samuel 7:14; I Chronicles 17:11-14, 22:9-10, 28:4-6). The third chapter of Luke describes the lineage of David's son Nathan, not Solomon. (Luke 3:31)
4. Finally, Jews did not allow transmission of birthright by the mother - ever. Numbers 1:18; Ezra 2:59.
If you don't want to take my word for it, listen to Saint Jerome: "It is not the custom of the scriptures to count women in their genealogies."
It's a sad indication of the state of christian apologetics that this bankrupt argument is still being used 500 years after it first surfaced.
The geneologies are for Joseph and Mary. One naming the line through Levi (the tribe of priests) and the other of Judas (Judah) (the royal line). Making it perfectly legal for Jesus to be both High Priest and King.
Joseph by marriage is the son of Heli.
1. Both gospels state explicitly that they are tracing Jesus' ancestors from Josephs side, see Matthew 1:16 (Jacob begat Joseph); Luke 3:23 (Joseph, which was the son of Heli).
Luke always refers to Joseph whenever he talks about ancestry of David:
"In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David (Luke 1:27-28); and the virgin's name was Mary."
"And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David... "(Luke 2:4)
2. If it is claimed Mary is being refered in the Matthean account, then she descended from Jeconiah (Matthew 1:11), and she then falls under the curse of that king that none of his descendants could ever sit as king upon the throne of David. (Jeremiah 22:30; 36:30).
3. If the Lukan account is used to claim the family line could go through the mother, Mary was not from a legitimate Messianic family. According to the Bible, the Messiah must be a descendent of David through his son Solomon (II Samuel 7:14; I Chronicles 17:11-14, 22:9-10, 28:4-6). The third chapter of Luke describes the lineage of David's son Nathan, not Solomon. (Luke 3:31)
4. Finally, Jews did not allow transmission of birthright by the mother - ever. Numbers 1:18; Ezra 2:59.
If you don't want to take my word for it, listen to Saint Jerome: "It is not the custom of the scriptures to count women in their genealogies."
It's a sad indication of the state of christian apologetics that this bankrupt argument is still being used 500 years after it first surfaced.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
Jacob;"
Matthew 1:16 "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, Who is called Christ.
Well we have gone through this long genealogy, and now we have found that this is the genealogy of Joseph, the husband with Mary. Joseph was not the father of Christ, but the husband of Mary. Mary had already conceived by the Holy Spirit of God when Joseph married her. We know that Almighty God was the father of Jesus Christ. So we see that Joseph's genealogy has nothing to do with the pedigree of Jesus Christ, with the exception of one thing. This blood line is the adopted lineage of Jesus Christ, through His adopted father Joseph.
If you have an adopted son, you could be German, and your adopted son could be Jewish. There is no connection whatsoever, as far as bloodline is concerned. Therefore the bloodline in this first chapter has nothing to do with the bloodline of Jesus Christ.
However, when we see through this adoption, we get a better view of what Christianity is all about. Those that believe upon Christ, are automatically the stones raised [children] unto God. The actual date of Jesus birth is represented to be December 25, However this is assumed, and placed there for the convenience for the old Roman Empire. Lets go to Luke 1:5 and see what the scriptures have to say about this.
Luke 1:5 "There was in the days of Herod, the King of Judeas [a wicked king], a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth."
Zacharias was John the Baptist's father. Elisabeth had to be a full blood daughter of Aaron to be a priest's wife, this is to say, a full blood Levite. What is important in this verse is the identification of the birth of John the Baptist through the feast date that John's father [Zacharias was serving. The feast of Abia was the eighth of the ministration in the Temple [I Chronicles 24:10], and occurred twice a year.
The conception of John the Baptist was the night following the feast date, or to place that to our calendar, June 24, 5 B.C. Now lets skip on to verse thirty six, in documenting Jesus genealogy. Luke 1:36; "And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren. If Elisabeth is a full blood Levite, and Mary is her cousin, then Mary is also of the blood line of Aaron. We see also that there was a marriage, because the actual genealogy is given in Luke 3:24-38.
In Luke 3:23; "And Jesus Himself begin to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the Son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli," The phrase, "as was supposed", should read, "as reckoned by law", or in another way to put it, "to lay it down by law". If you are married, then your spouses mother is your mother in law. Do you get the point. This genealogy given in the next fifteen verses is Mary's genealogy.
There is one point that should be pointed out, because there is an error made by an Kenite scribe, and that error is because Cainan simply does not exist here in the Massorah text, Cainan was Ham's son that was cursed by Noah. In Genesis 11:13 we read, "And Arphaxad lived after he begat Salah four hundred and three years, and begat sons and daughters."
This was the custom that if there were no sons born to a family, then the lineage would be passed on to the daughters husband, in that marriage, as by law. Therefore Joseph took on the genealogy of Mary. Then through Joseph the seed, or genealogy would continue; the seed of the family. There is another thing to pay attention to here; Do you see any "begats" in this lineage? Of course not, because this is Joseph's lineage by his legal wife, it is his wife Mary's lineage. This lineage is by law, and not by siring, through the marriage. This bloodline is through the tribe of Judah.
Mary's father was of the tribe of Judah, and he married a Levite, therefore Mary was a mixture between the tribe of Levi, and Judah. So we see that Jesus was of both houses, that is to say the King line, and also of the Levitical priest line of Aaron. This is the priest line after the order of Melchizedeck, the king of the elect [just], as also given in Genesis14:18-20.
When our Lord comes as the King of kings and Lord of Lord, he carries the full title by lineage of the authority that God gave to Abraham, and passed on to Jesus Christ.
So we can see by all this that the conception of Jesus Christ on December 25, is not His birth. There is no problem with this, for this also establishes that God began to dwell with man at the time of conception. The spirit of the baby [soul] in Elisabeth [John the Baptist] was six months maturing; and when Mary entered the room following the conception of Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit, John leaped at the presence of the Christ in the womb of Mary.
Matthew 1:17 "So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations."
This genealogy is divided up into three parts. These divisions are the periods marking the times before, during and after king David's families.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Luke 3:23 "And Jesus Himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as it was supposed) the Son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,"
As you go through these many names, remember that each of them played a part in the stories of the entire Old Testament. The Bible is a story of one man, Adam, and His family. All the other nations of the earth that are part of our Bible enter by what they did to this family either for good or bad. There are no cover-up in the Scripture text, for if there are, it is by the hand of a Kenite Scribe trying to hide themselves as they came into control, and took over the duties of the scribes following the captivity of Judah in Babylon.
Ezra warned us of this fact in Ezra 8:15; when he stopped to take account of who and what was going back to Jerusalem to build the temple, and set up worship there. "And I gathered them together to the river that runneth to Ahava; and there abode we in tents three days: and I viewed the People, and the priests, and found there none of the sons of Levi."
The Levitical priesthood was completely taken over from top to bottom by these foreign men brought in for service. They are called "Nethinims"; these oriental sons of Cain called "Kenites" in I Chronicles 2:55; "And the families of the scribes which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hamath, the father of the house of Rechab." This is why we must be diligent in our studies, for there were many changes by these Kenites, to make the Word of God conform to their traditions.
So from the time of the birth of Christ, to the birth of David time was just over one thousand years. The time under the kings of Israel and Judah ran for about five hundred years until Nebuchadnezzar took Jerusalem captive about 500 B. C. David is of the king line of Judah, for this would be Mary father's blood line.
As you read these names, the term "Which was", in the Hebrew text is what we use today as "which was supposed or reckoned by law", or better know as "in-laws; father in law etc.". This is recording the in-laws of Joseph, or the bloodline of Mary's father. We know Mary's mother is of the lineage of Aaron, or Levi, as Mary and Elisabeth were cousins. Mary's mother and Elisabeth's mother were sisters, giving Jesus the lineage of both priest and king.
Luke 3:24 "Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,"
As you read through the rest of this chapter, notice that there is nothing noting that a begat took place, or these men being blood relatives of Joseph. As stated before, these men are of the lineage of Mary's father, and not Joseph's. They are relatives as by law, in-laws. It was common by law at this time, if there was no son in the family, which was the case here, the lineage passed off to the husband of the wife. So this is the reason that it states that Joseph was of Heli, when by blood Joseph was the son of Jacob. That was given to us in Matthew 1:16.
This is why Jesus became the King of kings and Lord of Lords by birth. The throne is His, and at the seventh trump He will return to take it. Revelation 19:12-19 tells us so.
Luke 3:25 "Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,"
Luke 3:26 "Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,"
Luke 3:27 "Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,"
Luke 3:28 "Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,"
Luke 3:29 "Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,"
Luke 3:30 "Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,"
Luke 3:31 "Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,"
Notice that the lineage of Christ through David was not through Solomon, but through Nathan. When we compare this lineage with Joseph's in Matthew 1 we see that Joseph's lineage came through Solomon, the son of David.
Luke 3:32 "Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naason,"
The book of Ruth is a study of this beautiful Moabitess woman and her commitment to Naomi, her mother in law. She left her homeland to return to Bethlehem-Judah, and marry the just man Booz [Boaz]. Boaz was the great grandfather of David.
Luke 3:33 "Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,"
Luke 3:34 "Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,"
The blood line of Jesus Christ from Noah to Abraham is given in Genesis 10:21-30. This is the time period following the flood, to the time Abraham left the land of Ur in the land of Chaldees.
There is an listing of the time periods in the Companion Bible, appendix 50. This chart lists this period of time from the flood to Abraham as from 2348 to 1996 B.C., a period of 452 years.
Luke 3:35 "Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,"
Luke 3:36 "Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,"
The tenth chapter of Genesis gives us the lineage from Noah through his three sons; while the lineage, or blood line of Shem is given from Genesis 11:10-32. These names given are in the Hebrew, while Luke is giving us the Greek for of the same name. In verse twenty four we read; "And Arphaxad begat Salah; and Salah begat Eber." The second witness to this is in Genesis 11:12; "And Arphaxad lived five and thirty years, and begat Salah:" Sure there was a Cainan who was the son of Enos, but a Kenite scribe entered an extra Cainan into the lineage of Jesus here in Luke 3:36. So if your trying to fit biblical numerics to the lineage of Christ, pay attention to your number count between Luke and Genesis.
Luke 3:37 "Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,"
Luke 3:38 "Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God."
It is important to notice that last birth, "Which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God." Adam was created by God, the son of God. God was the father of Christ, the only begotten child of the Father. He became the Savior to the world. The time period from the forming of Adam 4004 B.C., on the eight day of the creation period, to the flood of Noah's time in 1996 B.C as two thousand eight years. Notice that the ages of mankind 700 years to Methuselah at 969 years of age. Genesis 5:27 "And all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty and nine years: and he died."
During these two thousand years, Satan attacked the lineage of mankind by having his fallen angels come down to earth, entering this dimension of flesh man to marry the human daughters of man, and having children. This went against God's plan for this age of flesh man, born innocent, and having the right to choose God's way or Satan's path to destruction for themselves. The point to draw attention to here in the lineage Jesus Christ is in Genesis 6:9.
Genesis 6:9 "These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God."
"Generations" as given in the Hebrew text is "toledoth", meaning "family history". And the word "perfect" as referenced to "his generations"; in the Hebrew text the word is "tamim", and today we call it "as to breed or pedigree." "Tamin" was important in the use of animal sacrifices. Those people raising animals know exactly what is meant by pedigree and breeding, it is keeping the unwanted strains out of the blood line of the animal. The reason for the flood in the first place was that the entire population of the earth by the end of that two thousand year period was completely contaminated with the blood of those fallen angels, and mankind was full of all sorts of wickedness. God sent the flood on the earth to destroy those corrupted people of the earth. To protect the future blood line of our Lord and Savior that we are reading of here in Luke. This is why it become important to notice when Kenite Scribes try to taint the lineage of Christ, by adding to it or taking away from that lineage.
The progeny of the fallen angels with the daughters of Adam brought about the "Nephilim", also referred to as "Giants". "Nephilim" in the Hebrew means "fallen ones", coming from "naphal" or "to fall". These offspring of the Nephilim became know as "gibbor" meaning "heroes". Jesus warned us in Matthew 24:37-39 that it would be exactly as it was in the days of Noah at the time the flood came, at the time of our Lord's return. We know this to be true, for shortly Michael will boot Satan and his fallen angels to the earth for that final time before our Lords Return at the seventh trump.
Luke has given us the exact birth of John the Baptist, as well as Christ. He has allowed us to determine the exact time of both John the Baptist and Jesus' birth dates, which gives us fixed dates. Using both the first and the third chapters of Luke we can determine that the conception of the virgin Mary took place on December 25, and the birth of Christ on the feast of the tabernacles, nine months later. Jesus was circumcised on the eighth day, the day of atonement. This is recorded day by day in detail in Appendix 179 in the Companion Bible. This makes December 25 very special, as it is the time that God came to dwell with man. This proves the time of life within the soul of an unborn baby starts at conception. It said that the Babe within Elisabeth's womb leaped with joy. Joy is fixed to the human thinking process, and requires a soul and spirit. It is not a physical reaction but a spiritual reaction.
Its time to wake up, for most of the events of the end times are past history. The one world system is here and controlling the nations of the earth. the Jews have gone back to Jerusalem.
d:-5
Matthew 1:16 "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, Who is called Christ.
Well we have gone through this long genealogy, and now we have found that this is the genealogy of Joseph, the husband with Mary. Joseph was not the father of Christ, but the husband of Mary. Mary had already conceived by the Holy Spirit of God when Joseph married her. We know that Almighty God was the father of Jesus Christ. So we see that Joseph's genealogy has nothing to do with the pedigree of Jesus Christ, with the exception of one thing. This blood line is the adopted lineage of Jesus Christ, through His adopted father Joseph.
If you have an adopted son, you could be German, and your adopted son could be Jewish. There is no connection whatsoever, as far as bloodline is concerned. Therefore the bloodline in this first chapter has nothing to do with the bloodline of Jesus Christ.
However, when we see through this adoption, we get a better view of what Christianity is all about. Those that believe upon Christ, are automatically the stones raised [children] unto God. The actual date of Jesus birth is represented to be December 25, However this is assumed, and placed there for the convenience for the old Roman Empire. Lets go to Luke 1:5 and see what the scriptures have to say about this.
Luke 1:5 "There was in the days of Herod, the King of Judeas [a wicked king], a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth."
Zacharias was John the Baptist's father. Elisabeth had to be a full blood daughter of Aaron to be a priest's wife, this is to say, a full blood Levite. What is important in this verse is the identification of the birth of John the Baptist through the feast date that John's father [Zacharias was serving. The feast of Abia was the eighth of the ministration in the Temple [I Chronicles 24:10], and occurred twice a year.
The conception of John the Baptist was the night following the feast date, or to place that to our calendar, June 24, 5 B.C. Now lets skip on to verse thirty six, in documenting Jesus genealogy. Luke 1:36; "And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren. If Elisabeth is a full blood Levite, and Mary is her cousin, then Mary is also of the blood line of Aaron. We see also that there was a marriage, because the actual genealogy is given in Luke 3:24-38.
In Luke 3:23; "And Jesus Himself begin to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the Son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli," The phrase, "as was supposed", should read, "as reckoned by law", or in another way to put it, "to lay it down by law". If you are married, then your spouses mother is your mother in law. Do you get the point. This genealogy given in the next fifteen verses is Mary's genealogy.
There is one point that should be pointed out, because there is an error made by an Kenite scribe, and that error is because Cainan simply does not exist here in the Massorah text, Cainan was Ham's son that was cursed by Noah. In Genesis 11:13 we read, "And Arphaxad lived after he begat Salah four hundred and three years, and begat sons and daughters."
This was the custom that if there were no sons born to a family, then the lineage would be passed on to the daughters husband, in that marriage, as by law. Therefore Joseph took on the genealogy of Mary. Then through Joseph the seed, or genealogy would continue; the seed of the family. There is another thing to pay attention to here; Do you see any "begats" in this lineage? Of course not, because this is Joseph's lineage by his legal wife, it is his wife Mary's lineage. This lineage is by law, and not by siring, through the marriage. This bloodline is through the tribe of Judah.
Mary's father was of the tribe of Judah, and he married a Levite, therefore Mary was a mixture between the tribe of Levi, and Judah. So we see that Jesus was of both houses, that is to say the King line, and also of the Levitical priest line of Aaron. This is the priest line after the order of Melchizedeck, the king of the elect [just], as also given in Genesis14:18-20.
When our Lord comes as the King of kings and Lord of Lord, he carries the full title by lineage of the authority that God gave to Abraham, and passed on to Jesus Christ.
So we can see by all this that the conception of Jesus Christ on December 25, is not His birth. There is no problem with this, for this also establishes that God began to dwell with man at the time of conception. The spirit of the baby [soul] in Elisabeth [John the Baptist] was six months maturing; and when Mary entered the room following the conception of Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit, John leaped at the presence of the Christ in the womb of Mary.
Matthew 1:17 "So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations."
This genealogy is divided up into three parts. These divisions are the periods marking the times before, during and after king David's families.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Luke 3:23 "And Jesus Himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as it was supposed) the Son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,"
As you go through these many names, remember that each of them played a part in the stories of the entire Old Testament. The Bible is a story of one man, Adam, and His family. All the other nations of the earth that are part of our Bible enter by what they did to this family either for good or bad. There are no cover-up in the Scripture text, for if there are, it is by the hand of a Kenite Scribe trying to hide themselves as they came into control, and took over the duties of the scribes following the captivity of Judah in Babylon.
Ezra warned us of this fact in Ezra 8:15; when he stopped to take account of who and what was going back to Jerusalem to build the temple, and set up worship there. "And I gathered them together to the river that runneth to Ahava; and there abode we in tents three days: and I viewed the People, and the priests, and found there none of the sons of Levi."
The Levitical priesthood was completely taken over from top to bottom by these foreign men brought in for service. They are called "Nethinims"; these oriental sons of Cain called "Kenites" in I Chronicles 2:55; "And the families of the scribes which dwelt at Jabez; the Tirathites, the Shimeathites, and Suchathites. These are the Kenites that came of Hamath, the father of the house of Rechab." This is why we must be diligent in our studies, for there were many changes by these Kenites, to make the Word of God conform to their traditions.
So from the time of the birth of Christ, to the birth of David time was just over one thousand years. The time under the kings of Israel and Judah ran for about five hundred years until Nebuchadnezzar took Jerusalem captive about 500 B. C. David is of the king line of Judah, for this would be Mary father's blood line.
As you read these names, the term "Which was", in the Hebrew text is what we use today as "which was supposed or reckoned by law", or better know as "in-laws; father in law etc.". This is recording the in-laws of Joseph, or the bloodline of Mary's father. We know Mary's mother is of the lineage of Aaron, or Levi, as Mary and Elisabeth were cousins. Mary's mother and Elisabeth's mother were sisters, giving Jesus the lineage of both priest and king.
Luke 3:24 "Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,"
As you read through the rest of this chapter, notice that there is nothing noting that a begat took place, or these men being blood relatives of Joseph. As stated before, these men are of the lineage of Mary's father, and not Joseph's. They are relatives as by law, in-laws. It was common by law at this time, if there was no son in the family, which was the case here, the lineage passed off to the husband of the wife. So this is the reason that it states that Joseph was of Heli, when by blood Joseph was the son of Jacob. That was given to us in Matthew 1:16.
This is why Jesus became the King of kings and Lord of Lords by birth. The throne is His, and at the seventh trump He will return to take it. Revelation 19:12-19 tells us so.
Luke 3:25 "Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,"
Luke 3:26 "Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,"
Luke 3:27 "Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,"
Luke 3:28 "Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,"
Luke 3:29 "Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,"
Luke 3:30 "Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,"
Luke 3:31 "Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,"
Notice that the lineage of Christ through David was not through Solomon, but through Nathan. When we compare this lineage with Joseph's in Matthew 1 we see that Joseph's lineage came through Solomon, the son of David.
Luke 3:32 "Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naason,"
The book of Ruth is a study of this beautiful Moabitess woman and her commitment to Naomi, her mother in law. She left her homeland to return to Bethlehem-Judah, and marry the just man Booz [Boaz]. Boaz was the great grandfather of David.
Luke 3:33 "Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,"
Luke 3:34 "Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,"
The blood line of Jesus Christ from Noah to Abraham is given in Genesis 10:21-30. This is the time period following the flood, to the time Abraham left the land of Ur in the land of Chaldees.
There is an listing of the time periods in the Companion Bible, appendix 50. This chart lists this period of time from the flood to Abraham as from 2348 to 1996 B.C., a period of 452 years.
Luke 3:35 "Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,"
Luke 3:36 "Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,"
The tenth chapter of Genesis gives us the lineage from Noah through his three sons; while the lineage, or blood line of Shem is given from Genesis 11:10-32. These names given are in the Hebrew, while Luke is giving us the Greek for of the same name. In verse twenty four we read; "And Arphaxad begat Salah; and Salah begat Eber." The second witness to this is in Genesis 11:12; "And Arphaxad lived five and thirty years, and begat Salah:" Sure there was a Cainan who was the son of Enos, but a Kenite scribe entered an extra Cainan into the lineage of Jesus here in Luke 3:36. So if your trying to fit biblical numerics to the lineage of Christ, pay attention to your number count between Luke and Genesis.
Luke 3:37 "Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,"
Luke 3:38 "Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God."
It is important to notice that last birth, "Which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God." Adam was created by God, the son of God. God was the father of Christ, the only begotten child of the Father. He became the Savior to the world. The time period from the forming of Adam 4004 B.C., on the eight day of the creation period, to the flood of Noah's time in 1996 B.C as two thousand eight years. Notice that the ages of mankind 700 years to Methuselah at 969 years of age. Genesis 5:27 "And all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty and nine years: and he died."
During these two thousand years, Satan attacked the lineage of mankind by having his fallen angels come down to earth, entering this dimension of flesh man to marry the human daughters of man, and having children. This went against God's plan for this age of flesh man, born innocent, and having the right to choose God's way or Satan's path to destruction for themselves. The point to draw attention to here in the lineage Jesus Christ is in Genesis 6:9.
Genesis 6:9 "These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God."
"Generations" as given in the Hebrew text is "toledoth", meaning "family history". And the word "perfect" as referenced to "his generations"; in the Hebrew text the word is "tamim", and today we call it "as to breed or pedigree." "Tamin" was important in the use of animal sacrifices. Those people raising animals know exactly what is meant by pedigree and breeding, it is keeping the unwanted strains out of the blood line of the animal. The reason for the flood in the first place was that the entire population of the earth by the end of that two thousand year period was completely contaminated with the blood of those fallen angels, and mankind was full of all sorts of wickedness. God sent the flood on the earth to destroy those corrupted people of the earth. To protect the future blood line of our Lord and Savior that we are reading of here in Luke. This is why it become important to notice when Kenite Scribes try to taint the lineage of Christ, by adding to it or taking away from that lineage.
The progeny of the fallen angels with the daughters of Adam brought about the "Nephilim", also referred to as "Giants". "Nephilim" in the Hebrew means "fallen ones", coming from "naphal" or "to fall". These offspring of the Nephilim became know as "gibbor" meaning "heroes". Jesus warned us in Matthew 24:37-39 that it would be exactly as it was in the days of Noah at the time the flood came, at the time of our Lord's return. We know this to be true, for shortly Michael will boot Satan and his fallen angels to the earth for that final time before our Lords Return at the seventh trump.
Luke has given us the exact birth of John the Baptist, as well as Christ. He has allowed us to determine the exact time of both John the Baptist and Jesus' birth dates, which gives us fixed dates. Using both the first and the third chapters of Luke we can determine that the conception of the virgin Mary took place on December 25, and the birth of Christ on the feast of the tabernacles, nine months later. Jesus was circumcised on the eighth day, the day of atonement. This is recorded day by day in detail in Appendix 179 in the Companion Bible. This makes December 25 very special, as it is the time that God came to dwell with man. This proves the time of life within the soul of an unborn baby starts at conception. It said that the Babe within Elisabeth's womb leaped with joy. Joy is fixed to the human thinking process, and requires a soul and spirit. It is not a physical reaction but a spiritual reaction.
Its time to wake up, for most of the events of the end times are past history. The one world system is here and controlling the nations of the earth. the Jews have gone back to Jerusalem.
d:-5
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag wrote:
If therefore, man was created the 6th day, all races, and then HaAdam after, then there were people already present for Cain to go and take a wife from the land of Nod. No incest.
But surely, If Cain took his wife from these "other" people, either all the children of all the people were perfect or Cain's children were "polluted" by mixing with the "impure"?
If therefore, man was created the 6th day, all races, and then HaAdam after, then there were people already present for Cain to go and take a wife from the land of Nod. No incest.
But surely, If Cain took his wife from these "other" people, either all the children of all the people were perfect or Cain's children were "polluted" by mixing with the "impure"?
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
This was the custom that if there were no sons born to a family, then the lineage would be passed on to the daughters husband, in that marriage, as by law.
Its time to wake up, for most of the events of the end times are past history. The one world system is here and controlling the nations of the earth. the Jews have gone back to Jerusalem.
I’ll make it simple. Luke’s genealogy means Jesus cannot be the messiah because it comes through Nathan. Matthew’s genealogy means Jesus cannot be the messiah because it comes through Jechoniah.
No amount of wild speculation about the custom of Levirate, no groundless apologetic based on the unhistorical and unknown practice of passing Davidic birthright through the mother’s family is going to change this.
Didn’t you ever wonder why Jew’s reject Jesus as the messiah? Because he failed to fulfil prophesy and he did not come from the line of David.
Its time to wake up, for most of the events of the end times are past history. The one world system is here and controlling the nations of the earth. the Jews have gone back to Jerusalem.
I’ll make it simple. Luke’s genealogy means Jesus cannot be the messiah because it comes through Nathan. Matthew’s genealogy means Jesus cannot be the messiah because it comes through Jechoniah.
No amount of wild speculation about the custom of Levirate, no groundless apologetic based on the unhistorical and unknown practice of passing Davidic birthright through the mother’s family is going to change this.
Didn’t you ever wonder why Jew’s reject Jesus as the messiah? Because he failed to fulfil prophesy and he did not come from the line of David.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag wrote: [...] Its time to wake up [...]downag my son, it's considered good form, when copying an entire chapter of someone else's writing, to acknowledge the source rather than to imply by omission that it's all your own work. Besides, it lets you reference text by URL and then make your own point, rather than cluttering everyone else's screens with the accumulated detritus of the Internet.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
Sweet spot, it isn't my work, neither did I claim it as such. I claim free use and have repeatedly referred others to theseason.org from whence it cometh.
As for good form, thou shouldst practis:-5 e what thou preacheth, my son.:-5
d
As for good form, thou shouldst practis:-5 e what thou preacheth, my son.:-5
d
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
Sweet spot, it isn't my work, neither did I claim it as such. I claim free use and have repeatedly referred others to theseason.org from whence it cometh. Additionally, that was by no means the entire work on that chapter of Matt. nor was it the entire work for Luke. Rather, it was only the portion which addressed the verses as posted. The entire work on the chapters would have taken the better part of a morning to read.
As for good form, thou shouldst practis:-5 e what thou preacheth, my son.:-5
d
As for good form, thou shouldst practis:-5 e what thou preacheth, my son.:-5
d
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag wrote: Sweet spot, it isn't my work, neither did I claim it as such. I claim free use and have repeatedly referred others to theseason.org from whence it cometh.The default assumption, as you well know, is that one writes what's not cited, and one cites what one didn't write.
downag wrote: As for good form, thou shouldst practis:-5 e what thou preacheth, my son.:-5Me and the Archangel Gabriel are so close that half the time you'd think we were mating. Butter has never melted in my mouth.
downag wrote: As for good form, thou shouldst practis:-5 e what thou preacheth, my son.:-5Me and the Archangel Gabriel are so close that half the time you'd think we were mating. Butter has never melted in my mouth.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
Cold hearted, eh?
I should have known that this would turn into an exercise in futility.
I should have known that this would turn into an exercise in futility.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag wrote: I should have known that this would turn into an exercise in futility.Perhaps God hasn't shown you any more extra-Biblical truth recently, then.
You haven't said yet which translation the "threw himself" or "cliff" came from, in http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showp ... stcount=18 and you seem to have left dangling the question of unmingled racial purity in http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showp ... stcount=58 as regards incest.
You haven't said yet which translation the "threw himself" or "cliff" came from, in http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showp ... stcount=18 and you seem to have left dangling the question of unmingled racial purity in http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showp ... stcount=58 as regards incest.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
All for your edification, spotty ole son.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag wrote: All for your edification, spotty ole son.A somewhat gnomic or unedifying reply, you might agree. Have you switched off, tuned out or merely dropped in?
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
ILLIGITIMI NON CARBORUNDUM
d:-5
d:-5
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag wrote: ILLIGITIMI NON CARBORUNDUM
d:-5
That's hardly a polite reply Sir!
d:-5
That's hardly a polite reply Sir!
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
It's nonsense Bryn;
Just as I asked for to keep this thread simple, which degenerated.
Sir?-!
d:-5
Just as I asked for to keep this thread simple, which degenerated.
Sir?-!
d:-5
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag wrote: It's nonsense Bryn;
Just as I asked for to keep this thread simple, which degenerated.You'll pardon my saying so, but the thread is doing quite well, will carry on for months yet, and the only silly posts I've seen have had poster-font latin tags.
Wash your head under a tap, stop posting more than a screen-full of quote per message - ever, it's seriously bad style - and have a shot at closing down http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showp ... stcount=89
Just as I asked for to keep this thread simple, which degenerated.You'll pardon my saying so, but the thread is doing quite well, will carry on for months yet, and the only silly posts I've seen have had poster-font latin tags.
Wash your head under a tap, stop posting more than a screen-full of quote per message - ever, it's seriously bad style - and have a shot at closing down http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showp ... stcount=89
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
It is interesting to see the creative dancing and writing that one will go through to make the irreconcilable reconcilable.
As for the rest? What can you do?
Shalom
Ted:-6
As for the rest? What can you do?
Shalom
Ted:-6
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
Indeed, this thread would have degenerated if questions had not been raised. The truth of the matter is that there are some 22 000 Christian denominations around the world. Many of them but not all claim to have the only complete grasp of the truth which of course is complete nonsense.
There is and has always been differences of opinion concerning not only the Christian faith but the others in the world as well.
I wonder ????
Shalom
Ted:-6
There is and has always been differences of opinion concerning not only the Christian faith but the others in the world as well.
I wonder ????
Shalom
Ted:-6
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
Interesting idea Ted.
Here is a thing that I've found upsets certain of the people to no end.
As you no doubt are aware, in 1947, a shepherd found what have come to be called the Dead Sea Scrolls. Certain of the writings discovered have been attributed to none other than John the Baptist. His interpretation of certain of the Psalms has some in knots regarding their content. For years the great minds of the church supposed that the writer of the Psalms (David?) was writing of himself. But according to the DSS, John showed that the writer of certain of the Psalms was referring to one yet to come, in the last of the last days. He elaborated that a "Teacher of Righteousness" would appear in the person of one of the "two witnesses" of Revelation chapter 11 fame, specifically, an Elijah figure. He goes on to say that this person will have all knowledge and understanding of the writings of "his (God's) servants the prophets" (or words to that effect).
Other things derived from the scrolls indicate that John the Baptist was possibly a/the leader of the Essene sect, hence a better explanation of his infamy among the leader class of the time. It was of great concern to Herod to have the leader of the Essenes calling for him to repent of him having his (was this it?) daughter-in-law, etc. (Off with his head!).
The things of the DSS added to the already explosive scenarios of Revelation/Daniel/Ezekiel etc. will make for very interesting times in the not too distant future. And not one of the so-called "spirit filled" ravers of evangelicalism saw him (the teacher of righteousness) coming.
What they do expound endlessly is the imminent "rapture" of the church, which cannot be found anywhere in the scripture. Not one single article can be found where this is the subject! Yet they rely dangerously upon it. They go so far as to teach some that the OT is for the Jews and the church (people of) wont be here when things get hot.
Clearly, it takes favor from God to have eyes to see and ears to hear.
I just thought you'd be interested.
d:-5
Here is a thing that I've found upsets certain of the people to no end.
As you no doubt are aware, in 1947, a shepherd found what have come to be called the Dead Sea Scrolls. Certain of the writings discovered have been attributed to none other than John the Baptist. His interpretation of certain of the Psalms has some in knots regarding their content. For years the great minds of the church supposed that the writer of the Psalms (David?) was writing of himself. But according to the DSS, John showed that the writer of certain of the Psalms was referring to one yet to come, in the last of the last days. He elaborated that a "Teacher of Righteousness" would appear in the person of one of the "two witnesses" of Revelation chapter 11 fame, specifically, an Elijah figure. He goes on to say that this person will have all knowledge and understanding of the writings of "his (God's) servants the prophets" (or words to that effect).
Other things derived from the scrolls indicate that John the Baptist was possibly a/the leader of the Essene sect, hence a better explanation of his infamy among the leader class of the time. It was of great concern to Herod to have the leader of the Essenes calling for him to repent of him having his (was this it?) daughter-in-law, etc. (Off with his head!).
The things of the DSS added to the already explosive scenarios of Revelation/Daniel/Ezekiel etc. will make for very interesting times in the not too distant future. And not one of the so-called "spirit filled" ravers of evangelicalism saw him (the teacher of righteousness) coming.
What they do expound endlessly is the imminent "rapture" of the church, which cannot be found anywhere in the scripture. Not one single article can be found where this is the subject! Yet they rely dangerously upon it. They go so far as to teach some that the OT is for the Jews and the church (people of) wont be here when things get hot.
Clearly, it takes favor from God to have eyes to see and ears to hear.
I just thought you'd be interested.
d:-5
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag:-6
Geza Vermes is the acknowledged expert on the DSS. To quote from his book "The Dead Sea Scrolls" p 38 "Only writers upholding the most unlikely Christian identification of the Community claim to be better informed, but disagree among themselves. J. L. Teicher thought the Teacher was Jesus. For Barbara Thiering Jesus was the Wicked Priest, John the Baptist the Teacher; R. H. Eisenmanrejects both and prefers James the Just, 'the brother of the Lord', as the Teacher of Righteousness."
Quoting from the same book p xxxiii "Qumran manuscripts of Scripture and even more of the Community Rules and the War Scroll, indicates that diversity, not uniformity, reigned there and then, and that redactor-copyists felt free to inprove the composition which they were reproducing."
Vermes makes no claim that John the Baptist wrote anything in the DSS.
I can only conclude that some Christians see in the DSS what they want to see and not what is there. The same goes for some of the Christian archaeologists such as Albright regarding Jericho. He has been shown to be in error on that place.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Geza Vermes is the acknowledged expert on the DSS. To quote from his book "The Dead Sea Scrolls" p 38 "Only writers upholding the most unlikely Christian identification of the Community claim to be better informed, but disagree among themselves. J. L. Teicher thought the Teacher was Jesus. For Barbara Thiering Jesus was the Wicked Priest, John the Baptist the Teacher; R. H. Eisenmanrejects both and prefers James the Just, 'the brother of the Lord', as the Teacher of Righteousness."
Quoting from the same book p xxxiii "Qumran manuscripts of Scripture and even more of the Community Rules and the War Scroll, indicates that diversity, not uniformity, reigned there and then, and that redactor-copyists felt free to inprove the composition which they were reproducing."
Vermes makes no claim that John the Baptist wrote anything in the DSS.
I can only conclude that some Christians see in the DSS what they want to see and not what is there. The same goes for some of the Christian archaeologists such as Albright regarding Jericho. He has been shown to be in error on that place.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Contradictions in the Bible? Find one, post it here.
downag:-6
Is it not a disservice to God to suggest that He plays favourites? That would suggest that if God likes you then it is OK but if you have committed a misdemeanor then forget the unconditional love and grace of God.
Shalom
Ted:-6
Is it not a disservice to God to suggest that He plays favourites? That would suggest that if God likes you then it is OK but if you have committed a misdemeanor then forget the unconditional love and grace of God.
Shalom
Ted:-6