Discussion with a Fundie about The OT
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-10-2015, 02:31 PM
RE: Discussion with a Fundie about The OT
GWG:
The genealogies of Jesus present a particularly embarrassing example of why the gospel writers are not reliable historians.
ALLA:
You don't know how reliable they were. (we don't have original texts).
Good news:
1) Salvation of men does NOT depend on accurate historical accounts.
2) God sends His prophets to correct errors which lead away from salvation of men. .


GWG:
Matthew gives a genealogy of Jesus consisting of 28 names from David down to Joseph. Luke gives a reverse genealogy of Jesus consisting up 43 names from Joseph back to David. They each purport to prove that Jesus is of royal blood, though neither of them explains why Joseph genealogy is even relevant if he was not Jesus' father: remember, according to the story Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary and the Holy Ghost. Matthew's line goes from David's son Solomon, while Luke's goes from David's son Nathan. The two genealogies could not have been the same person.
ALLA:
I will tell you why it is relevant. If you had accurate accounts you would know that Joseph would have been crowned king if Judah had been free and independent nation, ruled by her rightful sovereign and Jesus would have been Joseph's lawful successor of the throne.
Mother of Jesus was from house of David. Jesus was descendant of David through His mother.

GWG:
Another problem is that Luke's genealogy of Jesus goes through Nathan, which was not the royal line. Nor could Matthew's genealogy be the Royal line after Jeconiah because the divine prophecy says of Jeconiah that "no man of his seed shall prosper sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling anymore in Judah." (Jeremiah 22:30)
ALLA:
About Jeremiah 22:30.
1) GWG, most of the prophecies are conditional. In the beginning of this chapter Lord says that if kings will not hear His words then certain things will happen to them. Then we read what kind of things will happen. When people repent Lord forgives them.
2)We can say that this prophecy was fulfilled. Jesus could not claim His crown and throne. Joseph could not claim his crown and throne. Even though they had royal blood and they would be kings if Judah was free nation.

GWG:
Even if Luke's line is truly through Mary, Luke reports that Mary was a cousin to Elizabeth, who was of the tribe of Levi, not the royal line.
ALLA:
So, Jacob is father of Mary and not of Joseph. Jacob is descendant of David. It makes Mary descendant of David. It makes Jesus Christ descendant of David. Who cares if cousin of Mary had some ancestors from tribe of Levi? She also could have ancestors from different tribes - tribe of Judah, for example. I also don't believe that there is such thing as pure Jew or pure Levi.


GWG:
According to Christian teachings, Jesus had only a human Jewish mother, and was not related to Joseph. A human Jewish father, however is essential for anyone to be a legitimate heir to the throne of David, which the real messiah will be.
ALLA:
Yes, but Joseph became Jesus's father. Jesus would be lawful successor of throne if Joseph was king if Judah was free nation.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2015, 02:48 PM
RE: Discussion with a Fundie about The OT
This is GREAT stuff. Apologies for not getting the fundie's arguements - I got Wellhausen AND Archer this weekend and am going through them with a (Pelikan Fountain Pen highlighter, which makes everything pop....) and will post his arguments as soon as I can! Meanwhile, keep this going! It is music to my heart to call out BS when you see it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2015, 02:57 PM
RE: Discussion with a Fundie about The OT
GWG:
It should be noted that both Catholic and Protestant traditions hold that whereas Matthew’s genealogy is that of Joseph, Luke’s genealogy is of Mary. Although this tradition is nowhere to be found in the New Testament, it was a necessary doctrine for the Church to adopt.
ALLA:
They are wrong. Of course, they don't have prophets of God, they don't have revelations from God today. How would they know?
Jacob is father of Mary. Heli is father of Joseph.
God knows better. I am sure you agree with this statement. Kiss

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2015, 03:30 PM
RE: Discussion with a Fundie about The OT
(31-10-2015 02:57 PM)Alla Wrote:  GWG:
It should be noted that both Catholic and Protestant traditions hold that whereas Matthew’s genealogy is that of Joseph, Luke’s genealogy is of Mary. Although this tradition is nowhere to be found in the New Testament, it was a necessary doctrine for the Church to adopt.
ALLA:
They are wrong. Of course, they don't have prophets of God, they don't have revelations from God today. How would they know?
Jacob is father of Mary. Heli is father of Joseph.
God knows better. I am sure you agree with this statement. Kiss

Well it was fun as usual to read your plethora of knowledge claims, based on faith, dogma, and church propaganda. As usual, you have god on speed dial on your cell phone and can translate the inner workings of god's plan through your faith....this equals a faith claim, and is no way indicative of truth, or validity.

Nothing new here, thanks for participating though Smile

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2015, 03:37 PM
RE: Discussion with a Fundie about The OT
(31-10-2015 03:30 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Nothing new here, thanks for participating though Smile
You're welcome. It is always a pleasure to participate in conversation with you. Smile

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Alla's post
31-10-2015, 07:41 PM
RE: Discussion with a Fundie about The OT
(31-10-2015 02:57 PM)Alla Wrote:  GWG:
It should be noted that both Catholic and Protestant traditions hold that whereas Matthew’s genealogy is that of Joseph, Luke’s genealogy is of Mary. Although this tradition is nowhere to be found in the New Testament, it was a necessary doctrine for the Church to adopt.
ALLA:
They are wrong. Of course, they don't have prophets of God, they don't have revelations from God today. How would they know?
Jacob is father of Mary. Heli is father of Joseph.
God knows better. I am sure you agree with this statement. Kiss

Amazing. You make up shit, and actually believe your own nonsense. Why are YOU so special ? Why wouldn't your god give them revelations ?
It doesn't matter who is the father of Mary.
They screwed up the genealogy when they made up the whole story.
You're so full of crap, Alla. You would be flunked out of ANY academic religion program.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
31-10-2015, 08:57 PM
RE: Discussion with a Fundie about The OT
(31-10-2015 02:57 PM)Alla Wrote:  GWG:
It should be noted that both Catholic and Protestant traditions hold that whereas Matthew’s genealogy is that of Joseph, Luke’s genealogy is of Mary. Although this tradition is nowhere to be found in the New Testament, it was a necessary doctrine for the Church to adopt.
ALLA:
They are wrong. Of course, they don't have prophets of God, they don't have revelations from God today. How would they know?
Jacob is father of Mary. Heli is father of Joseph.
God knows better. I am sure you agree with this statement. Kiss

Speaking of G-d knows best, the first chapter in Numbers tells us that we're to count our males according to the houses of their fathers. It doesn't say anything about women being counted according to their fathers.

It also says in Genesis that Chava (Eve) would be the mother of all humanity [male and female], but it doesn't say that Adam would be a father to all.

We know from the bible that there is some link between mother and both children, and from father to only sons. How interesting it is that the DNA that we inherit from our parents follows a similar trend. Mothers pass down their mtDNA to both children, while fathers only pass down their y-chromosome to their sons.

Think of the rules of determining one's house to be similar to the Y-chromosome that father's physically pass down to their biological children. If the house line follows the father, as it clearly states in Numbers, and we know that houses DO NOT go through mothers, then why would Mary's lineage be relevant at all?

Joseph's lineage is also irrelevant because the NT insists that he's not Jesus's father. It's almost as if the writers of the NT didn't understand Jewish law or Jewish expectations for Messiah.

... and by the way, as I noted Bucky mentioning, both lineages listed were faulty anyway. Neither line can produce the messiah.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Aliza's post
01-11-2015, 07:05 AM
RE: Discussion with a Fundie about The OT
(30-10-2015 12:18 PM)Alla Wrote:  
(24-10-2015 09:16 PM)Aliza Wrote:  Prior to chapter 53, Isaiah directly identifies at least ten times who the servant is that he’s writing about.
The servant in those verses is man Jacob whom God gave another name "Israel" and NOT house of Israel in those verses as you say or whoever says.
But let's say you(and they) are correct and Isaiah speaks about house of Israel and not about Christ(Messiah).
Then I have some questions. I hope you have answers.

what does it mean that house of Israel "borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows"?
who are those people whose "sorrows and grief" house of Israel borne and carried?
what are the examples how house of Israel did it?

what does it mean "to lay on house of Israel the iniquity of all us? who are "us"? how does house of Israel lay iniquity of all us? please, examples.
what does it mean that house of Israel "made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death BECAUSE he has done no violence, neither was ANY DECEIT in his mouth"?

Wait a minute! House of Israel has done NO violence?!!! House of Israel did NOT have DECEIT in his mouth?
Then why did God chase house of Israel many, many times?

Another question: "verse 10: he(meaning house of Israel according to you and whoever) made HIS SOUL an offering for sin"?
please examples: how did house of Israel offer his SOUL for sin?
what does it mean "to offer SOUL for sin"?

Thank you in advance for all your answers.

Before I answer your questions, I just wanted to give a little preamble. I will answer your questions in another post.

Isaiah was not some random stranger who wrote his works, and handed them off to the leaders of the Jewish world before riding off into the sunset, never to be heard from or seen again. Isaiah was a part of the Jewish community. He was a Torah scholar in his own right, and he was well learned in Jewish studies, culture and tradition. When Isaiah handed the scrolls over to the Jewish sages, they were discussed at length. Those traditions were passed down and were eventually recorded at the onset of the very exile that is predicted in Isaiah's writings.

Christians often forget that these texts were written by Jews, and for Jews. They use language and analogies that are common in the bible, and they assume that the reader has a comprehensive understanding of Judaic studies. The key to understanding them is to first understand the mindset of the Jewish people. The second key to understanding them is to learn what we have written in the Talmud, because this represents the unbroken chain of communication that extends directly back to Isaiah himself.

The Servant Songs are broken up into four parts. The chapter breaks and verses are not original to the text; they were added in by Christians, and the Jews adopted them. The reason that I’m mentioning this is because the chapter breaks sometimes don’t make sense with the change in perspective in the songs. For example, the fourth servant song that includes Isaiah 53 actually starts with Isaiah 52:13 (to my mind, this reflects a profound lack of understanding on the part of the Christians who divided the text up into chapters.)

The servant songs are messianic in nature, but they are focusing on the messianic era, and the time immediately preceding the messianic era, and not so much on the messiah himself. They tell a story about how Israel’s suffering will come to an end, and the kings of the nations will gape in horror when they realize how much suffering they put the Jews through. Keep in mind when reading this that this is a Jewish story written about Jews, and directed to Jews, so the way that the Jewish people view themselves will be very important in understanding these songs.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Aliza's post
01-11-2015, 05:08 PM
RE: Discussion with a Fundie about The OT
(31-10-2015 02:31 PM)Alla Wrote:  Matthew's line goes from David's son Solomon, while Luke's goes from David's son Nathan. The two genealogies could not have been the same person.

They weren't of the same person. Matthew gives Joseph's genealogy; Luke gives Mary's. Matthew was writing to Jews; they would want to know whether Jesus was the rightful heir to the throne. Luke was written to Gentiles; they cared nothing about whether Jesus was king of the Jews but would have been interested in his biological relatives.

https://clydeherrin.wordpress.com/2014/0...-of-jesus/

Quote:Nor could Matthew's genealogy be the Royal line after Jeconiah because the divine prophecy says of Jeconiah that "no man of his seed shall prosper sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling anymore in Judah." (Jeremiah 22:30)

Joseph was legally his father because he was the husband of Mary when Jesus was born and therefore Jesus was the heir to the throne. Because Joseph wasn't his biological father he didn't inherit the curse.

https://clydeherrin.wordpress.com/2015/0...ng-joseph/

The information in ancient libraries came from real minds of real people. The far more complex information in cells came from the far more intelligent mind of God.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2015, 05:31 PM
RE: Discussion with a Fundie about The OT
(01-11-2015 05:08 PM)theophilus Wrote:  Nor could Matthew's genealogy be the Royal line after Jeconiah because the divine prophecy says of Jeconiah that "no man of his seed shall prosper sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling anymore in Judah." (Jeremiah 22:30)

Joseph was legally his father because he was the husband of Mary when Jesus was born and therefore Jesus was the heir to the throne. Because Joseph wasn't his biological father he didn't inherit the curse.

I don't usually agree with Christians on theological matters, but I can definitely agree with you on this. Jesus did not inherit the curse of Jeconia from Joseph. Well spotted, Theo!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: