Fucked up Jesus genealogy
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-04-2015, 04:41 PM
Fucked up Jesus genealogy
Hahaha. So I'm having an online discussion about, what else, christian evidence (there's a misnomer if I ever heard one) and the subject of Jesus' genealogy came up. So I listed the genealogy from Matthew and Luke which are completely different except for the first and last names. Then I bring up the subject of Joseph. Why is he even on the list? Even if I believed all this shit I would ask.....did he have sex with Mary or not and why is his dna in the genealogical picture at all. What am I missing?

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2015, 05:54 PM
RE: Fucked up Jesus genealogy
Joseph is on the list to show that Jesus was genealogically linked (via adoption) to David. The biblical authors needed to add this in to *make it work* that Jesus was who they said he was. It needed to fulfill the Old Testament passages like this one: "I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them; he will tend them and be their shepherd. 24 I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them. I the Lord have spoken." (Ezekiel 34:23-24).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like jennybee's post
24-04-2015, 05:56 PM
RE: Fucked up Jesus genealogy
(24-04-2015 04:41 PM)dancefortwo Wrote:  Hahaha. So I'm having an online discussion about, what else, christian evidence (there's a misnomer if I ever heard one) and the subject of Jesus' genealogy came up. So I listed the genealogy from Matthew and Luke which are completely different except for the first and last names. Then I bring up the subject of Joseph. Why is he even on the list? Even if I believed all this shit I would ask.....did he have sex with Mary or not and why is his dna in the genealogical picture at all. What am I missing?

hehe one of my fav bits of the bible...this whole two distinctly different genealogies, both of which have joseph.......but wait a min, I thought it was the "immaculate conception"? lol

"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
[+] 1 user Likes goodwithoutgod's post
24-04-2015, 06:49 PM
RE: Fucked up Jesus genealogy
(24-04-2015 05:54 PM)jennybee Wrote:  Joseph is on the list to show that Jesus was genealogically linked (via adoption) to David. The biblical authors needed to add this in to *make it work* that Jesus was who they said he was. It needed to fulfill the Old Testament passages like this one: "I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them; he will tend them and be their shepherd. 24 I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them. I the Lord have spoken." (Ezekiel 34:23-24).

But....but.....Blush this doesn't make any sense at ALLLLL. How can Jesus be related to David if........I mean.........what......who........Hobo there's no blood connection....no dna going on here if god impregnates a little Jewish girl and Joe's not the daddy. How do religious nuts get around this?


I'm so confused. Knights who say NI!

Shakespeare's Comedy of Errors.... on Donald J. Trump:

He is deformed, crooked, old, and sere,
Ill-fac’d, worse bodied, shapeless every where;
Vicious, ungentle, foolish, blunt, unkind,
Stigmatical in making, worse in mind.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like dancefortwo's post
24-04-2015, 06:56 PM
RE: Fucked up Jesus genealogy
(24-04-2015 06:49 PM)dancefortwo Wrote:  
(24-04-2015 05:54 PM)jennybee Wrote:  Joseph is on the list to show that Jesus was genealogically linked (via adoption) to David. The biblical authors needed to add this in to *make it work* that Jesus was who they said he was. It needed to fulfill the Old Testament passages like this one: "I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them; he will tend them and be their shepherd. 24 I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them. I the Lord have spoken." (Ezekiel 34:23-24).

But....but.....Blush this doesn't make any sense at ALLLLL. How can Jesus be related to David if........I mean.........what......who........Hobo there's no blood connection....no dna going on here if god impregnates a little Jewish girl and Joe's not the daddy. How do religious nuts get around this?


I'm so confused. Knights who say NI!

The same way they get around the dead saints rising from their tombs, a worldwide flood, the earth being created in 7 days, etc.

What you are saying is exactly right--it makes no sense. Joseph's David genealogical line is one of the reasons why Jews deny Jesus as the messiah.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2015, 07:04 PM
RE: Fucked up Jesus genealogy
According to the Bible, Jesus has no paternal genealogy. Ironically, Matthew goes into great lengths on paternal genealogies. Yet, further along in the holy writings, they say Jesus was fathered by God, not by Joseph.

So, there you have it. Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-04-2015, 07:42 PM
RE: Fucked up Jesus genealogy
Joseph = The Holy Cuckold.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Minimalist's post
24-04-2015, 08:06 PM
RE: Fucked up Jesus genealogy
Matthew opened his Gospel with a genealogy of Jesus that included King David. This put Jesus into a royal lineage by making him a

“...son of David” (Matt. 1:1.)

Yet this lineage was probably fabricated. David, if he ever existed, had been dead for about a thousand years, and records were not that well kept. What is more, it was claimed to be the genealogy of Joseph, who Matthew explained was not Jesus’ father, because Mary was

“...found to be with child through the Holy Spirit” (Matt. 1:18, NJB.)

So Jesus became the Son of God, which meant he couldn’t be the messiah, who had to be a son of David.

Jesus could not be the son of both God and David, a fact that the definitive edition of Matthew tries to ignore.

Luke’s lineage for Joseph (3:23–38) extended back to Adam, (yes, the one from Genesis, the world’s fictional first man) covering seventy-five or so generations, yet it was completely different from that in Matthew. Some Christians claim that Luke was giving Mary’s lineage, (despite him specifically saying that it was Joseph’s) however the mother’s family tree was rarely recorded in those times, as it was not considered particularly important.

The original authors of the Gospels intended the genealogies to be literally believed as factual. We now know the human race has existed for at least one hundred thousand years, and maybe double that, so Luke was about five to ten thousand generations short. In the second century no one knew any better.

Luke also claimed the Holy Spirit impregnated Mary. Mary, if she ever existed, knew the real identity of Jesus’ father (assuming she was not raped by strangers or did not have multiple partners.)

If Mary thought a ghost had done the deed, she did not advertise the fact, because Mark and John say nothing about the Holy Spirit being Jesus’ father, nor do any other books in the New Testament.

Most educated people of the Roman Empire knew that stories of gods partnering women were allegorical, but the early Christians promoted this particular fiction as fact.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Mark Fulton's post
24-04-2015, 08:26 PM
RE: Fucked up Jesus genealogy
(24-04-2015 05:56 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  I thought it was the "immaculate conception"? lol

The immaculate conception was Mary, not Jesus. I remember very little of Catholic CCD (too young and never paid much attention) but I do remember that bit.
Cool

Not that that makes the Joseph genealogies any less ridiculous. That's the trouble with making shit up; you forget which lie you told and to whom.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
24-04-2015, 09:33 PM (This post was last modified: 24-04-2015 09:37 PM by WillHopp.)
RE: Fucked up Jesus genealogy
I once got into it with someone on FB about this, and he said adoption was perfectly fine in genealogies of the day. I find that to be just hilarious, even if it's true.

Check out my now-defunct atheism blog. It's just a blog, no ads, no revenue, no gods.
----
Atheism promotes critical thinking; theism promotes hypocritical thinking. -- Me
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: