Total Posts:37|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Genealogies in the Bible

Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
POPOO5560
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 12:34:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

God is his father and he isnt there, Joseph souldnt to be there and he is there, and jesus is a man without genealogy...
Never fart near dog
Gentorev
Posts: 2,909
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 5:11:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

The genealogy in Matthew is that of Joseph who married the already pregnant Mary.
That Joseph is not directly connected genetically to Jesus, as he had no sexual contact with Mary until she had given birth to Jesus her first born son.

This Joseph, is the son of Jacob and the 24th descendant of King Solomon, who was the biological son of King David and Bathsheba.

Remembering that Joseph, was and still is, a very common name in Israel, The Joseph who is recorded in the genealogy in Luke, is the son of Alexander Helios or "HELI," who had also fathered Mary.

It is this Joseph, the half brother to Mary, who is the biological father of Jesus, and this Joseph, is about the 40th descendant of Nathan the prophet, who was the biological son of Bathsheba and Uriah the Hittite, who became a member of the tribe of Levi by his marriage to Bathsheba the daughter of Ammiel, the son of Oded-edom, who was a descendant of Moses from the house of Levi, by his second wife Jepunniah, who was the widow of a man from the tribe of Judah, and the mother of Caleb, who, at the age of forty, became the adopted son of Moses, and Jepunniah was the daughter of Hobab the Kennite, one of the two fathers-in-law to Moses, see Judges 4: 11.

The Talmud states, "Whoever brings up an orphan in his home is regarded...as though the child had been born to him." (Sanhedrin 119b)." In other words, the adopted child is to be treated as a child born to the father of that house, which means, that Heli and his descendants, who were born from the genetic line of Nathan "the prophet," who was the adopted son of King David, were legitimate heirs to the throne of David.

Heli, who died in 13 BC, by order of Herod the Great, in the pogroms which saw the demise of many of the Davidian princes, had previously sired a son who we know by the name "Joseph," and Heli was to later sire the child Mary to Hanna the daughter of Yehoshua III, who was the high priest in Jerusalem from 36 to 23 BC.

It is said that after the death of her father (Heli) "a father of renown," Mary was taken north into the land of Galilee where she was raised under the protection of the Jewish zealots whose aim it was, to throw off the yoke of Roman rule and establish a descendant of King David, back on the throne of Israel.
bulproof
Posts: 25,227
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 5:22:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 5:11:08 PM, Gentorev wrote:
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

The genealogy in Matthew is that of Joseph who married the already pregnant Mary.
That Joseph is not directly connected genetically to Jesus, as he had no sexual contact with Mary until she had given birth to Jesus her first born son.

This Joseph, is the son of Jacob and the 24th descendant of King Solomon, who was the biological son of King David and Bathsheba.

Remembering that Joseph, was and still is, a very common name in Israel, The Joseph who is recorded in the genealogy in Luke, is the son of Alexander Helios or "HELI," who had also fathered Mary.

It is this Joseph, the half brother to Mary, who is the biological father of Jesus, and this Joseph, is about the 40th descendant of Nathan the prophet, who was the biological son of Bathsheba and Uriah the Hittite, who became a member of the tribe of Levi by his marriage to Bathsheba the daughter of Ammiel, the son of Oded-edom, who was a descendant of Moses from the house of Levi, by his second wife Jepunniah, who was the widow of a man from the tribe of Judah, and the mother of Caleb, who, at the age of forty, became the adopted son of Moses, and Jepunniah was the daughter of Hobab the Kennite, one of the two fathers-in-law to Moses, see Judges 4: 11.

The Talmud states, "Whoever brings up an orphan in his home is regarded...as though the child had been born to him." (Sanhedrin 119b)." In other words, the adopted child is to be treated as a child born to the father of that house, which means, that Heli and his descendants, who were born from the genetic line of Nathan "the prophet," who was the adopted son of King David, were legitimate heirs to the throne of David.

Heli, who died in 13 BC, by order of Herod the Great, in the pogroms which saw the demise of many of the Davidian princes, had previously sired a son who we know by the name "Joseph," and Heli was to later sire the child Mary to Hanna the daughter of Yehoshua III, who was the high priest in Jerusalem from 36 to 23 BC.

It is said that after the death of her father (Heli) "a father of renown," Mary was taken north into the land of Galilee where she was raised under the protection of the Jewish zealots whose aim it was, to throw off the yoke of Roman rule and establish a descendant of King David, back on the throne of Israel.

So your jesus is the bastard of an incestuous relationship.
Got it.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Gentorev
Posts: 2,909
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 5:44:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 5:22:57 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 12/6/2014 5:11:08 PM, Gentorev wrote:
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

The genealogy in Matthew is that of Joseph who married the already pregnant Mary.
That Joseph is not directly connected genetically to Jesus, as he had no sexual contact with Mary until she had given birth to Jesus her first born son.

This Joseph, is the son of Jacob and the 24th descendant of King Solomon, who was the biological son of King David and Bathsheba.

Remembering that Joseph, was and still is, a very common name in Israel, The Joseph who is recorded in the genealogy in Luke, is the son of Alexander Helios or "HELI," who had also fathered Mary.

It is this Joseph, the half brother to Mary, who is the biological father of Jesus, and this Joseph, is about the 40th descendant of Nathan the prophet, who was the biological son of Bathsheba and Uriah the Hittite, who became a member of the tribe of Levi by his marriage to Bathsheba the daughter of Ammiel, the son of Oded-edom, who was a descendant of Moses from the house of Levi, by his second wife Jepunniah, who was the widow of a man from the tribe of Judah, and the mother of Caleb, who, at the age of forty, became the adopted son of Moses, and Jepunniah was the daughter of Hobab the Kennite, one of the two fathers-in-law to Moses, see Judges 4: 11.

The Talmud states, "Whoever brings up an orphan in his home is regarded...as though the child had been born to him." (Sanhedrin 119b)." In other words, the adopted child is to be treated as a child born to the father of that house, which means, that Heli and his descendants, who were born from the genetic line of Nathan "the prophet," who was the adopted son of King David, were legitimate heirs to the throne of David.

Heli, who died in 13 BC, by order of Herod the Great, in the pogroms which saw the demise of many of the Davidian princes, had previously sired a son who we know by the name "Joseph," and Heli was to later sire the child Mary to Hanna the daughter of Yehoshua III, who was the high priest in Jerusalem from 36 to 23 BC.

It is said that after the death of her father (Heli) "a father of renown," Mary was taken north into the land of Galilee where she was raised under the protection of the Jewish zealots whose aim it was, to throw off the yoke of Roman rule and establish a descendant of King David, back on the throne of Israel.

So your jesus is the bastard of an incestuous relationship.
Got it.

Correct! Isn't it marvellous, that my God (The Son of Man) has accepted a bastard, who lived a life of righteousness, as his successor.

Isaac is a prototype of Jesus and like Jesus, was born of God"s promise according to the, workings of the Holy Spirit. Both are seen as the seed that was promised to Abraham.

Isaac, the biological son Abraham, who is the son of Terah, was born according to the workings of the Holy Spirit, as was Jesus the son of Joseph, who is the son of Heli.
.
Amplified Bible Galatians 4: 29; "And just as at that time the child that was born according to the flesh (Ishmael) despised and persecuted (Isaac) who was born according to the promise and the workings of the Holy Spirit.

Both Isaac and Jesus were the sons of parents who were both sired by the one Father.

"Terah," is the father to both Abraham and Sarah by different mothers, while "Heli," is the father of both Joseph and Mary, by different mothers.

Both Mary and Sarah were informed by an angel that they would become Pregnant and bear the son of God"s promise. Isaac was offered up as a sacrifice by his physical father, Jesus was offered up by his spiritual father, who descended upon him in the form of a dove as the voice was heard to say, " you are my beloved in whom I am well pleased, TODAY I have become your Father." Or rather, "Today I have begotten thee." See the more ancient authorities of Luke 3: 22; and Isaac was offered up on the same mountain at the very spot where Jesus was crucified.

In Luke 3: 22; (In place of "Thou art my beloved son in who I am well pleased.") The following authorities of the second, third, and fourth centuries read, "This day I have begotten thee," vouched for by Codex D, and the most ancient copies of the old latin (a, b. c. ff.I), by Justin Martyr (AD 140), Clemens Alex, (AD. 190), Methodius (AD. 290), among the Greeks. And among the Latins, Lactaitius (AD 300), Hilary (AD) Juvencus (AD. 330), Faustus (AD. 400) and Augustine. All these oldest manuscripts were changed completely. They now read, "This is my son in whom I am well pleased." Whereas the original variant was, "Thou art my Son. This day I have begotten thee."
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 7:08:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 5:11:08 PM, Gentorev wrote:
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

The genealogy in Matthew is that of Joseph who married the already pregnant Mary.
That Joseph is not directly connected genetically to Jesus, as he had no sexual contact with Mary until she had given birth to Jesus her first born son.

This Joseph, is the son of Jacob and the 24th descendant of King Solomon, who was the biological son of King David and Bathsheba.

Remembering that Joseph, was and still is, a very common name in Israel, The Joseph who is recorded in the genealogy in Luke, is the son of Alexander Helios or "HELI," who had also fathered Mary.

It is this Joseph, the half brother to Mary, who is the biological father of Jesus, and this Joseph, is about the 40th descendant of Nathan the prophet, who was the biological son of Bathsheba and Uriah the Hittite, who became a member of the tribe of Levi by his marriage to Bathsheba the daughter of Ammiel, the son of Oded-edom, who was a descendant of Moses from the house of Levi, by his second wife Jepunniah, who was the widow of a man from the tribe of Judah, and the mother of Caleb, who, at the age of forty, became the adopted son of Moses, and Jepunniah was the daughter of Hobab the Kennite, one of the two fathers-in-law to Moses, see Judges 4: 11.

The Talmud states, "Whoever brings up an orphan in his home is regarded...as though the child had been born to him." (Sanhedrin 119b)." In other words, the adopted child is to be treated as a child born to the father of that house, which means, that Heli and his descendants, who were born from the genetic line of Nathan "the prophet," who was the adopted son of King David, were legitimate heirs to the throne of David.

Heli, who died in 13 BC, by order of Herod the Great, in the pogroms which saw the demise of many of the Davidian princes, had previously sired a son who we know by the name "Joseph," and Heli was to later sire the child Mary to Hanna the daughter of Yehoshua III, who was the high priest in Jerusalem from 36 to 23 BC.

It is said that after the death of her father (Heli) "a father of renown," Mary was taken north into the land of Galilee where she was raised under the protection of the Jewish zealots whose aim it was, to throw off the yoke of Roman rule and establish a descendant of King David, back on the throne of Israel.

2nd Samuel 7: 12-14

12 "When your days are fulfilled and you rest with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who will come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 I will be his Father, and he shall be My son. If he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men and with the blows of the sons of men.

The passage I listed above establishes the messiah must be a biological descendant of David. As I stated in the OP, I do not find it reasonable for one of the genealogies to be of Mary. An adopted son would not be of the body of David, i.e. his own seed, and it would make a liar out of the Biblical god.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,072
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 7:31:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

http://www.thedevineevidence.com...
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 9:01:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 7:31:08 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

http://www.thedevineevidence.com...

I'm sure you can summarize in your own words. Don't make me find your answer.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Gentorev
Posts: 2,909
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 9:02:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 7:08:07 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/6/2014 5:11:08 PM, Gentorev wrote:
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

The genealogy in Matthew is that of Joseph who married the already pregnant Mary.
That Joseph is not directly connected genetically to Jesus, as he had no sexual contact with Mary until she had given birth to Jesus her first born son.

This Joseph, is the son of Jacob and the 24th descendant of King Solomon, who was the biological son of King David and Bathsheba.

Remembering that Joseph, was and still is, a very common name in Israel, The Joseph who is recorded in the genealogy in Luke, is the son of Alexander Helios or "HELI," who had also fathered Mary.

It is this Joseph, the half brother to Mary, who is the biological father of Jesus, and this Joseph, is about the 40th descendant of Nathan the prophet, who was the biological son of Bathsheba and Uriah the Hittite, who became a member of the tribe of Levi by his marriage to Bathsheba the daughter of Ammiel, the son of Oded-edom, who was a descendant of Moses from the house of Levi, by his second wife Jepunniah, who was the widow of a man from the tribe of Judah, and the mother of Caleb, who, at the age of forty, became the adopted son of Moses, and Jepunniah was the daughter of Hobab the Kennite, one of the two fathers-in-law to Moses, see Judges 4: 11.

The Talmud states, "Whoever brings up an orphan in his home is regarded...as though the child had been born to him." (Sanhedrin 119b)." In other words, the adopted child is to be treated as a child born to the father of that house, which means, that Heli and his descendants, who were born from the genetic line of Nathan "the prophet," who was the adopted son of King David, were legitimate heirs to the throne of David.

Heli, who died in 13 BC, by order of Herod the Great, in the pogroms which saw the demise of many of the Davidian princes, had previously sired a son who we know by the name "Joseph," and Heli was to later sire the child Mary to Hanna the daughter of Yehoshua III, who was the high priest in Jerusalem from 36 to 23 BC.

It is said that after the death of her father (Heli) "a father of renown," Mary was taken north into the land of Galilee where she was raised under the protection of the Jewish zealots whose aim it was, to throw off the yoke of Roman rule and establish a descendant of King David, back on the throne of Israel.

2nd Samuel 7: 12-14

12 "When your days are fulfilled and you rest with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who will come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 I will be his Father, and he shall be My son. If he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men and with the blows of the sons of men.

The passage I listed above establishes the messiah must be a biological descendant of David. As I stated in the OP, I do not find it reasonable for one of the genealogies to be of Mary. An adopted son would not be of the body of David, i.e. his own seed, and it would make a liar out of the Biblical god.,

Apart from the fact that Nathan is thought to have married one of the daughters of David, Alexander Helios/HELI was also a descendant of Shealtiel the son of Neri, who married Tamar a female descendant of Solomon, a biological son of David.

God cannot lie, Jesus the biological son of Joseph the son of Heli, is of the seed of David.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 10:33:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 9:02:34 PM, Gentorev wrote:
At 12/6/2014 7:08:07 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/6/2014 5:11:08 PM, Gentorev wrote:
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

The genealogy in Matthew is that of Joseph who married the already pregnant Mary.
That Joseph is not directly connected genetically to Jesus, as he had no sexual contact with Mary until she had given birth to Jesus her first born son.

This Joseph, is the son of Jacob and the 24th descendant of King Solomon, who was the biological son of King David and Bathsheba.

Remembering that Joseph, was and still is, a very common name in Israel, The Joseph who is recorded in the genealogy in Luke, is the son of Alexander Helios or "HELI," who had also fathered Mary.

It is this Joseph, the half brother to Mary, who is the biological father of Jesus, and this Joseph, is about the 40th descendant of Nathan the prophet, who was the biological son of Bathsheba and Uriah the Hittite, who became a member of the tribe of Levi by his marriage to Bathsheba the daughter of Ammiel, the son of Oded-edom, who was a descendant of Moses from the house of Levi, by his second wife Jepunniah, who was the widow of a man from the tribe of Judah, and the mother of Caleb, who, at the age of forty, became the adopted son of Moses, and Jepunniah was the daughter of Hobab the Kennite, one of the two fathers-in-law to Moses, see Judges 4: 11.

The Talmud states, "Whoever brings up an orphan in his home is regarded...as though the child had been born to him." (Sanhedrin 119b)." In other words, the adopted child is to be treated as a child born to the father of that house, which means, that Heli and his descendants, who were born from the genetic line of Nathan "the prophet," who was the adopted son of King David, were legitimate heirs to the throne of David.

Heli, who died in 13 BC, by order of Herod the Great, in the pogroms which saw the demise of many of the Davidian princes, had previously sired a son who we know by the name "Joseph," and Heli was to later sire the child Mary to Hanna the daughter of Yehoshua III, who was the high priest in Jerusalem from 36 to 23 BC.

It is said that after the death of her father (Heli) "a father of renown," Mary was taken north into the land of Galilee where she was raised under the protection of the Jewish zealots whose aim it was, to throw off the yoke of Roman rule and establish a descendant of King David, back on the throne of Israel.

2nd Samuel 7: 12-14

12 "When your days are fulfilled and you rest with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who will come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 I will be his Father, and he shall be My son. If he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men and with the blows of the sons of men.

The passage I listed above establishes the messiah must be a biological descendant of David. As I stated in the OP, I do not find it reasonable for one of the genealogies to be of Mary. An adopted son would not be of the body of David, i.e. his own seed, and it would make a liar out of the Biblical god.,

Apart from the fact that Nathan is thought to have married one of the daughters of David, Alexander Helios/HELI was also a descendant of Shealtiel the son of Neri, who married Tamar a female descendant of Solomon, a biological son of David.

God cannot lie, Jesus the biological son of Joseph the son of Heli, is of the seed of David.

I would be interested to see my if you can site any sources on that.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,072
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 11:10:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 9:01:47 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/6/2014 7:31:08 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

http://www.thedevineevidence.com...

I'm sure you can summarize in your own words. Don't make me find your answer.

Part 7 of the article: "Messianic Genealogy Conflicts". It's not all that long a read.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 11:54:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 11:10:29 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 12/6/2014 9:01:47 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/6/2014 7:31:08 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

http://www.thedevineevidence.com...

I'm sure you can summarize in your own words. Don't make me find your answer.

Part 7 of the article: "Messianic Genealogy Conflicts". It's not all that long a read.

If you're not willing to go to the effort, why should I?
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
dee-em
Posts: 6,469
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 12:30:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 11:54:42 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/6/2014 11:10:29 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 12/6/2014 9:01:47 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/6/2014 7:31:08 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

http://www.thedevineevidence.com...

I'm sure you can summarize in your own words. Don't make me find your answer.

Part 7 of the article: "Messianic Genealogy Conflicts". It's not all that long a read.

If you're not willing to go to the effort, why should I?

Don't bother. It's the "one for Joseph, one for Mary" which you explicitly rejected. The usual weak as water apologetics.
jodybirdy
Posts: 2,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 12:48:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

So much for divine intervention and inspiration. Seems to me when stories don't match up that someone isn't being truthful.
A rock pile ceases to be a rock pile the moment a single man contemplates it, bearing within him the image of a cathedral."
Gentorev
Posts: 2,909
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 1:12:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
, Skepticalone wrote......... I would be interested to see my if you can site any sources on that.

Gentorev replies.........To begin with, let us reveal that Nathan, the son of Bathsheba, is not a biological son of David.

In 1st Chronicles 3: 5; There were born [Hebrew BORN=YALAD] to him (David) in Jerusalem, Shimea, Shobab, Nathan, and Solomon. This would appear to mean that David sired all four of Bathsheba"s four sons, whereas in fact, he sired only her youngest son, Solomon.

The four sons of Bathsheba, "BORN=yalad" to David, are, in order of their ages, Shimea, Shobab, Nathan, and Solomon the youngest of her four sons.

After the death of the first child that was born to the adulterous and blood stained union between King David and "Bathsheba," the wife of Uriah the Hittite, who was the biological father of Shimea, Shobab, and Nathan, we read in 2nd Samuel 12: 24; "Then David comforted his wife Bathsheba, he had intercourse with her, and she bore a son, who David named Solomon, etc. "Solomon the youngest of the sons of Bathsheba, who were born into the house of David.

But surely, by saying, "There were born {Hebrew BORN=YALAD] to him (David) in Jerusalem, Shimea, Shobab, Nathan, and Solomon," the author is indicating that all four of Bathsheba"s sons were sired by King David and no one else?

Not so, because we also read in 2nd Samuel 14: 27; "And unto Absalom there were born ("BORN=YALAD) three sons, and one daughter Tamar: she was a woman of fair countenance."

Same Hebrew word used in both verses, (yalad=BORN) but this doesn"t mean that the three sons mentioned in 2 Sam 14: 27; were born to Absalom and no one else. In fact Absalom had no sons at all, as is verified in 2nd Samuel 18: 18; where we read, "During his life time Absalom had built a monument for himself in King"s Valley, because he had no son to keep his name alive."

As the father of the three eldest sons of Bathsheba, [who were "BORN=yalad" to David], was Uriah the Hittite, who was the original husband of Bathsheba, so too, the father of the three sons ["BORN"=yalad to Absalom], was Rehoboam, who had married the beautiful daughter of Absalom.

2nd Chronicles, 11: 20; "Rehoboam married Maccah/Tamar, the daughter of Absalom, and they had three sons, Abijah, Attai, and Ziza, and a daughter Shelomith."

From Young"s Analytical Concordance : "Shelomith;" (6) "A son or daughter of King Rehoboam."

Zechariah 12: 12; And the land shall morn, every family apart: The family of David's house apart, and their wives apart. here are all the sons of David with their wives. now continue: The family of the house of Nathan apart, and their wives apart.

Nathan is not a biological son of David.,
Gentorev
Posts: 2,909
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 2:09:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Continued from post #15:

Tamar, was a female descendant of Solomon, and her 1st marriage was to Naria from the house of Nathan, the prophet of the tribe of Levi, who was a stepson to David and half brother to Solomon, as they were both the sons of Bathsheba.

Tamar bore two sons to Naria, who were adopted by her 2nd husband, "King Jechonias/Jeconiah," His only son, with Tamar, was Zedekiah, who died prematurely in childhood,

The great grandfather of the biblical Jesus was Yehoshua/Jesus III, who was the high priest in Jerusalem from 36 to 23 BC. The sonless Yehoshua, had three daughters, Joanna, Elizabeth and Anna/Hanna. Knowing that his Zadokian lineage would become extinct unless his daughters were placed with future husbands according to the Torah, he married them off to chosen husbands.

Joanna, was betrothed to Joachim from the genetic lineage of David. The second daughter of Yehoshua III, was Elizabeth, the sister to Hanna and aunty to Mary. Elizabeth, who was to become the mother of John the Baptist, was betrothed to a Levite priest by the name Zacharias of the priestly course of Abijah.

Hanna/Anna, the youngest of the three daughters, was betrothed to Alexander Helios (Heli) A Macedonian Jew, of the tribe of Judah through Nathan the Levite, who was the stepson of David. Alexander Helios [Heli] is thought by some, to be the twin brother of Herod"s young Jewish wife Cleopatra, a Macedonian Jewess.

Heli, according to the genealogy of Jesus as recorded in Luke, was a descendant of Nathan the prophet who was the biological son of Bathsheba and Uriah the Hittite, Uriah became a member of the tribe of Levi by his marriage to Bathsheba the daughter of Ammiel, the son of Oded-Edom, who was a descendant of Moses from the house of Levi.

Heli and his descendants were heirs to the throne of David, through Naria, who was a descendant of Nathan the adopted son of King David, and Naria had married Tamar, a female descendant of King Solomon. After the death of Naria, Tamar was taken to wife by King Jeconiah.

Heli, who died in 13 BC, by order of Herod the Great, in the pogroms which saw the demise of many of the Davidian princes, had previously sired a son who we know by the name "Joseph" and Heli was to later sire the child Mary to Hanna the daughter of the high priest Yehoshua III.

It is said that Jehoshua III died three years before the birth of his grand-daughter, "Mary." If it was his death that ended his period as high priest in Jerusalem in the year of 23 BC, this would mean that Mary was born in 20 BC, the same year as Philip the son of Herod and his young Jewess wife, "Cleopatra."

Therefore Mary would have been 7 years old when her father Heli died in 13 BC, and 14 years old when she gave birth to Jesus, who was born in 6 BC, making Mary, who, after being divorced by Joseph the son of Jacob, then married Cleophas/Alpheaus, who is the father of James the younger of Mary"s three biological sons, about 47 years old when Jesus, the first of her three biological sons, was crucified.

According to Young"s Analytical Concordance to the Bible, Cleophas and Alpheaus, which names mean, "Of a renown father," are one and the same person. Cleophas is the male abbreviation of the female Cleopatra, which is a Macedonian name and is the Greek, for "Of a renown father," and Alpheaus, who is the biological father of James the younger of Mary"s three biological sons who, according to Paul, is the brother of the Lord, and "Alpheaus" is the Aramaic of the same meaning, "Of a renown father."

James the son of Cleophas/ Alpheaus the carpenter, is the brother of the Lord, ADELPHOS (O44;^8;^9;_5;`6;a2;`2;): the Greek name meaning "born of the same womb".

As James the brother of the Lord Jesus was a young man when Jesus began his ministry, he had to have been born of Mary when Jesus was but a boy.

Simeon, the stepbrother of Jesus, who succeeded James the brother of Jesus to the Episcopal throne of the church of the circumcision in Jerusalem, was the son of Cleophas to a previous marriage, as was Judas the son of Alpheaus, the other brother of Jesus.

Thomas=Tau"ma, the Aramiac for twin, is also called Didymus, which also is the Greek for twin, he is Thomas Didymus Jude, one of the brother of Jesus and the son of the carpenter Alpheaus/Cleophas the second Husband Of Mary the mother of Jesus.

Knowing that in ART, Thomas Didymus Jude, the son of Alpheaus/, is depicted with a carpenter's rule and square, we must ask the question, "Who is the Carpenter to whom Mary was married at that time, when her family consisted of James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? Was it Joseph the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judah, who was her first husband, or was it Alpheaus/Cleophas the second husband of Mary and the Father of James the biological son of Mary and the youngest boy in the family, plus two boys who it would appear were born to a previous wife of Alpheaus/Cleophas, "Simon and Jude," who is also called Judas Thomas, meaning twin?

In "The Acts of Thomas, sometime called by its full name, "The Acts of Judas Thomas," 2nd-3rd century CE, "The Apostles cast lots as to where they should go, and to Thomas, Judas, brother to Jesus, fell India. Thomas was taken to King Goddophares the ruler of Indo-Pathian Kingdom as an architect and carpenter by Habban."
POPOO5560
Posts: 2,487
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 2:29:45 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/7/2014 12:48:40 AM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

So much for divine intervention and inspiration. Seems to me when stories don't match up that someone isn't being truthful.

both of them are not truthful how the hell they know a long list genealogy of somebody going up to ahraham (pbuh)..... and both were inspired by the holy ghost.... yeah sure.
Never fart near dog
Gentorev
Posts: 2,909
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 3:14:49 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/7/2014 2:29:45 AM, POPOO5560 wrote:
At 12/7/2014 12:48:40 AM, jodybirdy wrote:
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

So much for divine intervention and inspiration. Seems to me when stories don't match up that someone isn't being truthful.

both of them are not truthful how the hell they know a long list genealogy of somebody going up to ahraham (pbuh)..... and both were inspired by the holy ghost.... yeah sure.

Did you ever watch the movie, "ROOTS"? If you had, you would have seen the tribal recorder singing the generations of the main actor. He went on, not for hours, but for days,recalling all the generations.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,072
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 7:47:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/7/2014 12:30:43 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 12/6/2014 11:54:42 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/6/2014 11:10:29 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 12/6/2014 9:01:47 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/6/2014 7:31:08 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

http://www.thedevineevidence.com...

I'm sure you can summarize in your own words. Don't make me find your answer.

Part 7 of the article: "Messianic Genealogy Conflicts". It's not all that long a read.

If you're not willing to go to the effort, why should I?

Don't bother. It's the "one for Joseph, one for Mary" which you explicitly rejected. The usual weak as water apologetics.

Oh? Why do you say that it has been rejected? They never said that Jesus's only ancestry came from David.
Please explain in greater detail why that is wrong.
As for God being a "liar", you and I have no right to tell God what He cannot do.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
dee-em
Posts: 6,469
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 8:03:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/7/2014 7:47:15 AM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 12/7/2014 12:30:43 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 12/6/2014 11:54:42 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/6/2014 11:10:29 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 12/6/2014 9:01:47 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/6/2014 7:31:08 PM, Vox_Veritas wrote:
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

http://www.thedevineevidence.com...

I'm sure you can summarize in your own words. Don't make me find your answer.

Part 7 of the article: "Messianic Genealogy Conflicts". It's not all that long a read.

If you're not willing to go to the effort, why should I?

Don't bother. It's the "one for Joseph, one for Mary" which you explicitly rejected. The usual weak as water apologetics.

Oh? Why do you say that it has been rejected? They never said that Jesus's only ancestry came from David.
Please explain in greater detail why that is wrong.

Read the OP again carefully.

As for God being a "liar", you and I have no right to tell God what He cannot do.

There are no gods. I'm complaining about the pitiful apologetics which Christians engage in to explain the unexplainable.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 10:44:07 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/6/2014 9:02:34 PM, Gentorev wrote:
At 12/6/2014 7:08:07 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/6/2014 5:11:08 PM, Gentorev wrote:
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

The genealogy in Matthew is that of Joseph who married the already pregnant Mary.
That Joseph is not directly connected genetically to Jesus, as he had no sexual contact with Mary until she had given birth to Jesus her first born son.

This Joseph, is the son of Jacob and the 24th descendant of King Solomon, who was the biological son of King David and Bathsheba.

Remembering that Joseph, was and still is, a very common name in Israel, The Joseph who is recorded in the genealogy in Luke, is the son of Alexander Helios or "HELI," who had also fathered Mary.

It is this Joseph, the half brother to Mary, who is the biological father of Jesus, and this Joseph, is about the 40th descendant of Nathan the prophet, who was the biological son of Bathsheba and Uriah the Hittite, who became a member of the tribe of Levi by his marriage to Bathsheba the daughter of Ammiel, the son of Oded-edom, who was a descendant of Moses from the house of Levi, by his second wife Jepunniah, who was the widow of a man from the tribe of Judah, and the mother of Caleb, who, at the age of forty, became the adopted son of Moses, and Jepunniah was the daughter of Hobab the Kennite, one of the two fathers-in-law to Moses, see Judges 4: 11.

The Talmud states, "Whoever brings up an orphan in his home is regarded...as though the child had been born to him." (Sanhedrin 119b)." In other words, the adopted child is to be treated as a child born to the father of that house, which means, that Heli and his descendants, who were born from the genetic line of Nathan "the prophet," who was the adopted son of King David, were legitimate heirs to the throne of David.

Heli, who died in 13 BC, by order of Herod the Great, in the pogroms which saw the demise of many of the Davidian princes, had previously sired a son who we know by the name "Joseph," and Heli was to later sire the child Mary to Hanna the daughter of Yehoshua III, who was the high priest in Jerusalem from 36 to 23 BC.

It is said that after the death of her father (Heli) "a father of renown," Mary was taken north into the land of Galilee where she was raised under the protection of the Jewish zealots whose aim it was, to throw off the yoke of Roman rule and establish a descendant of King David, back on the throne of Israel.

2nd Samuel 7: 12-14

12 "When your days are fulfilled and you rest with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who will come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 I will be his Father, and he shall be My son. If he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men and with the blows of the sons of men.

The passage I listed above establishes the messiah must be a biological descendant of David. As I stated in the OP, I do not find it reasonable for one of the genealogies to be of Mary. An adopted son would not be of the body of David, i.e. his own seed, and it would make a liar out of the Biblical god.,

Apart from the fact that Nathan is thought to have married one of the daughters of David, Alexander Helios/HELI was also a descendant of Shealtiel the son of Neri, who married Tamar a female descendant of Solomon, a biological son of David.

God cannot lie, Jesus the biological son of Joseph the son of Heli, is of the seed of David.

Shealtiel is a descendant of Jeconiah. the son of Jehoiakim.

30"Therefore thus says the Lord concerning Jehoiakim king of Judah, "He shall have no one to sit on the throne of David, and his dead body shall be cast out to the heat of the day and the frost of the night.

His descendant could not contribute to the messianic line.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 11:03:00 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/7/2014 2:09:32 AM, Gentorev wrote:
Continued from post #15:

Tamar, was a female descendant of Solomon, and her 1st marriage was to Naria from the house of Nathan, the prophet of the tribe of Levi, who was a stepson to David and half brother to Solomon, as they were both the sons of Bathsheba.

Tamar bore two sons to Naria, who were adopted by her 2nd husband, "King Jechonias/Jeconiah," His only son, with Tamar, was Zedekiah, who died prematurely in childhood,

The great grandfather of the biblical Jesus was Yehoshua/Jesus III, who was the high priest in Jerusalem from 36 to 23 BC. The sonless Yehoshua, had three daughters, Joanna, Elizabeth and Anna/Hanna. Knowing that his Zadokian lineage would become extinct unless his daughters were placed with future husbands according to the Torah, he married them off to chosen husbands.

Joanna, was betrothed to Joachim from the genetic lineage of David. The second daughter of Yehoshua III, was Elizabeth, the sister to Hanna and aunty to Mary. Elizabeth, who was to become the mother of John the Baptist, was betrothed to a Levite priest by the name Zacharias of the priestly course of Abijah.

Hanna/Anna, the youngest of the three daughters, was betrothed to Alexander Helios (Heli) A Macedonian Jew, of the tribe of Judah through Nathan the Levite, who was the stepson of David. Alexander Helios [Heli] is thought by some, to be the twin brother of Herod"s young Jewish wife Cleopatra, a Macedonian Jewess.

Heli, according to the genealogy of Jesus as recorded in Luke, was a descendant of Nathan the prophet who was the biological son of Bathsheba and Uriah the Hittite, Uriah became a member of the tribe of Levi by his marriage to Bathsheba the daughter of Ammiel, the son of Oded-Edom, who was a descendant of Moses from the house of Levi.

Heli and his descendants were heirs to the throne of David, through Naria, who was a descendant of Nathan the adopted son of King David, and Naria had married Tamar, a female descendant of King Solomon. After the death of Naria, Tamar was taken to wife by King Jeconiah.

Heli, who died in 13 BC, by order of Herod the Great, in the pogroms which saw the demise of many of the Davidian princes, had previously sired a son who we know by the name "Joseph" and Heli was to later sire the child Mary to Hanna the daughter of the high priest Yehoshua III.

It is said that Jehoshua III died three years before the birth of his grand-daughter, "Mary." If it was his death that ended his period as high priest in Jerusalem in the year of 23 BC, this would mean that Mary was born in 20 BC, the same year as Philip the son of Herod and his young Jewess wife, "Cleopatra."

Therefore Mary would have been 7 years old when her father Heli died in 13 BC, and 14 years old when she gave birth to Jesus, who was born in 6 BC, making Mary, who, after being divorced by Joseph the son of Jacob, then married Cleophas/Alpheaus, who is the father of James the younger of Mary"s three biological sons, about 47 years old when Jesus, the first of her three biological sons, was crucified.

According to Young"s Analytical Concordance to the Bible, Cleophas and Alpheaus, which names mean, "Of a renown father," are one and the same person. Cleophas is the male abbreviation of the female Cleopatra, which is a Macedonian name and is the Greek, for "Of a renown father," and Alpheaus, who is the biological father of James the younger of Mary"s three biological sons who, according to Paul, is the brother of the Lord, and "Alpheaus" is the Aramaic of the same meaning, "Of a renown father."

James the son of Cleophas/ Alpheaus the carpenter, is the brother of the Lord, ADELPHOS (O44;^8;^9;_5;`6;a2;`2;): the Greek name meaning "born of the same womb".

As James the brother of the Lord Jesus was a young man when Jesus began his ministry, he had to have been born of Mary when Jesus was but a boy.

Simeon, the stepbrother of Jesus, who succeeded James the brother of Jesus to the Episcopal throne of the church of the circumcision in Jerusalem, was the son of Cleophas to a previous marriage, as was Judas the son of Alpheaus, the other brother of Jesus.

Thomas=Tau"ma, the Aramiac for twin, is also called Didymus, which also is the Greek for twin, he is Thomas Didymus Jude, one of the brother of Jesus and the son of the carpenter Alpheaus/Cleophas the second Husband Of Mary the mother of Jesus.

Knowing that in ART, Thomas Didymus Jude, the son of Alpheaus/, is depicted with a carpenter's rule and square, we must ask the question, "Who is the Carpenter to whom Mary was married at that time, when her family consisted of James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? Was it Joseph the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judah, who was her first husband, or was it Alpheaus/Cleophas the second husband of Mary and the Father of James the biological son of Mary and the youngest boy in the family, plus two boys who it would appear were born to a previous wife of Alpheaus/Cleophas, "Simon and Jude," who is also called Judas Thomas, meaning twin?

In "The Acts of Thomas, sometime called by its full name, "The Acts of Judas Thomas," 2nd-3rd century CE, "The Apostles cast lots as to where they should go, and to Thomas, Judas, brother to Jesus, fell India. Thomas was taken to King Goddophares the ruler of Indo-Pathian Kingdom as an architect and carpenter by Habban."

I asked you to cite a source. Plus, please try to be a little more concise. I don't believe it is necessary to go through the entire line from David to Jesus to make your point.

It seems like you are still trying to make one of the Genealogies into Mary's line. I do not find this to be reasonable for multiple reasons.
1. Luke traces Joseph's genealogy, not Mary's. So, you're getting way ahead of yourself.
2.The family line is supposed to be traced through the father's side (Numbers 1:18, Ezra 2:59)
3. The Messiah should be descendant of Solomon (1 Chronicles 22:9-10,1 Chronicles 17:11-14). I didn't read all of the two posts of genealogies you posted, but I'm guessing you did not include Solomon (at least if you are using the genealogy listed in Luke).
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Gentorev
Posts: 2,909
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 3:49:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Skepticalone wrote....... It seems like you are still trying to make one of the Genealogies into Mary's line. I do not find this to be reasonable for multiple reasons.

Gentorev replies..........That's up to you mate, it is your prerogative to to believe or disbelieve what ever you so wish.

Skepticalone wrote......... 1. Luke traces Joseph's genealogy, not Mary's. So, you're getting way ahead of yourself.

Gentorev replies......... Correct! The genealogy recorded in Luke, traces the genetic line of Jesus, through his biological father, "Joseph the son of Alexander Helios or Heli," who was the husband of Hanna and father of Mary

Skepyicalone wrote........... The family line is supposed to be traced through the father's side (Numbers 1:18, Ezra 2:59)

Gentorev replies....... Correct! Luke traces the genetic line of Jesus through his biological father, "Joseph the son of Heli"and Heli is the father of Mary.

Skepticalone wrote........... The Messiah should be descendant of Solomon (1 Chronicles 22:9-10,1 Chronicles
17:11-14). I didn't read all of the two posts of genealogies you posted, but I'm guessing you did not include Solomon (at least if you are using the genealogy listed in Luke).'

Gentorev replies.........The genetic line of Jesus, recorded in Luke, goes through Shalathiel, who is a descendant of Solomon through his mother Tamar.

.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 5:17:14 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/7/2014 3:49:06 PM, Gentorev wrote:
Skepticalone wrote....... It seems like you are still trying to make one of the Genealogies into Mary's line. I do not find this to be reasonable for multiple reasons.

Gentorev replies..........That's up to you mate, it is your prerogative to to believe or disbelieve what ever you so wish.

It is not about belief at all for me. I am simply trying to sort out if Christians are generally aware of this problem, and how they reconcile it. You are the only one to actually attempt to answer the question. Kudos to you.

Skepticalone wrote......... 1. Luke traces Joseph's genealogy, not Mary's. So, you're getting way ahead of yourself.

Gentorev replies......... Correct! The genealogy recorded in Luke, traces the genetic line of Jesus, through his biological father, "Joseph the son of Alexander Helios or Heli," who was the husband of Hanna and father of Mary

Unless you are reading a different Bible than I am, Jesus doesn't have a 'biological' father.

Skepyicalone wrote........... The family line is supposed to be traced through the father's side (Numbers 1:18, Ezra 2:59)

Gentorev replies....... Correct! Luke traces the genetic line of Jesus through his biological father, "Joseph the son of Heli"and Heli is the father of Mary.

If the line in Luke is the lineage of Mary, then sticking Joseph in as Heli's son (son-in-law) doesn't suddenly make it the lineage of the father. This is a discrepancy.

Skepticalone wrote........... The Messiah should be descendant of Solomon (1 Chronicles 22:9-10,1 Chronicles
17:11-14). I didn't read all of the two posts of genealogies you posted, but I'm guessing you did not include Solomon (at least if you are using the genealogy listed in Luke).'

Gentorev replies.........The genetic line of Jesus, recorded in Luke, goes through Shalathiel, who is a descendant of Solomon through his mother Tamar.

That brings us to another problem, Shalatheil, or Shealtiel, is a descendant of Solomon, and (cue dramatic music) Jeconias. Jeconias was cursed by god, and was never to have any of his descendents sit on the throne of David. This contradicts god's promise to Solomon. Even overlooking the contradiction, Jesus would not have been eligible to the throne being a descendent of Jeconias.




.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Gentorev
Posts: 2,909
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 5:36:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/7/2014 5:17:14 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/7/2014 3:49:06 PM, Gentorev wrote:
Skepticalone wrote....... It seems like you are still trying to make one of the Genealogies into Mary's line. I do not find this to be reasonable for multiple reasons.

Gentorev replies..........That's up to you mate, it is your prerogative to to believe or disbelieve what ever you so wish.

It is not about belief at all for me. I am simply trying to sort out if Christians are generally aware of this problem, and how they reconcile it. You are the only one to actually attempt to answer the question. Kudos to you.

Skepticalone wrote......... 1. Luke traces Joseph's genealogy, not Mary's. So, you're getting way ahead of yourself.

Gentorev replies......... Correct! The genealogy recorded in Luke, traces the genetic line of Jesus, through his biological father, "Joseph the son of Alexander Helios or Heli," who was the husband of Hanna and father of Mary

Unless you are reading a different Bible than I am, Jesus doesn't have a 'biological' father.

Skepyicalone wrote........... The family line is supposed to be traced through the father's side (Numbers 1:18, Ezra 2:59)

Gentorev replies....... Correct! Luke traces the genetic line of Jesus through his biological father, "Joseph the son of Heli"and Heli is the father of Mary.

If the line in Luke is the lineage of Mary, then sticking Joseph in as Heli's son (son-in-law) doesn't suddenly make it the lineage of the father. This is a discrepancy.

Skepticalone wrote........... The Messiah should be descendant of Solomon (1 Chronicles 22:9-10,1 Chronicles
17:11-14). I didn't read all of the two posts of genealogies you posted, but I'm guessing you did not include Solomon (at least if you are using the genealogy listed in Luke).'

Gentorev replies.........The genetic line of Jesus, recorded in Luke, goes through Shalathiel, who is a descendant of Solomon through his mother Tamar.

That brings us to another problem, Shalatheil, or Shealtiel, is a descendant of Solomon, and (cue dramatic music) Jeconias. Jeconias was cursed by god, and was never to have any of his descendents sit on the throne of David. This contradicts god's promise to Solomon. Even overlooking the contradiction, Jesus would not have been eligible to the throne being a descendent of Jeconias.




.

Shalathiel was not a descendant of Jechonias, He was a descendant of Solomon through Tamar, who bore two sons to her first husband was later taken to wife by Jechonias.
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/7/2014 5:59:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 12/7/2014 5:36:05 PM, Gentorev wrote:
At 12/7/2014 5:17:14 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/7/2014 3:49:06 PM, Gentorev wrote:
Skepticalone wrote....... It seems like you are still trying to make one of the Genealogies into Mary's line. I do not find this to be reasonable for multiple reasons.

Gentorev replies..........That's up to you mate, it is your prerogative to to believe or disbelieve what ever you so wish.

It is not about belief at all for me. I am simply trying to sort out if Christians are generally aware of this problem, and how they reconcile it. You are the only one to actually attempt to answer the question. Kudos to you.

Skepticalone wrote......... 1. Luke traces Joseph's genealogy, not Mary's. So, you're getting way ahead of yourself.

Gentorev replies......... Correct! The genealogy recorded in Luke, traces the genetic line of Jesus, through his biological father, "Joseph the son of Alexander Helios or Heli," who was the husband of Hanna and father of Mary

Unless you are reading a different Bible than I am, Jesus doesn't have a 'biological' father.

Skepyicalone wrote........... The family line is supposed to be traced through the father's side (Numbers 1:18, Ezra 2:59)

Gentorev replies....... Correct! Luke traces the genetic line of Jesus through his biological father, "Joseph the son of Heli"and Heli is the father of Mary.

If the line in Luke is the lineage of Mary, then sticking Joseph in as Heli's son (son-in-law) doesn't suddenly make it the lineage of the father. This is a discrepancy.

Skepticalone wrote........... The Messiah should be descendant of Solomon (1 Chronicles 22:9-10,1 Chronicles
17:11-14). I didn't read all of the two posts of genealogies you posted, but I'm guessing you did not include Solomon (at least if you are using the genealogy listed in Luke).'

Gentorev replies.........The genetic line of Jesus, recorded in Luke, goes through Shalathiel, who is a descendant of Solomon through his mother Tamar.

That brings us to another problem, Shalatheil, or Shealtiel, is a descendant of Solomon, and (cue dramatic music) Jeconias. Jeconias was cursed by god, and was never to have any of his descendents sit on the throne of David. This contradicts god's promise to Solomon. Even overlooking the contradiction, Jesus would not have been eligible to the throne being a descendent of Jeconias.




.

Shalathiel was not a descendant of Jechonias, He was a descendant of Solomon through Tamar, who bore two sons to her first husband was later taken to wife by Jechonias.

Still waiting on your sources.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Gentorev
Posts: 2,909
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 2:17:57 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Skepticalone wrote........That brings us to another problem, Shalatheil, or Shealtiel, is a descendant of Solomon, and (cue dramatic music) Jeconias. Jeconias was cursed by god, and was never to have any of his descendents sit on the throne of David. This contradicts god's promise to Solomon. Even overlooking the contradiction, Jesus would not have been eligible to the throne being a descendent of Jeconias.

Gentorev replies........Jesus is not genetically connected to the cursed King Jechonias.

Shalathiel was not of the seed Jechonias. Although he was a descendant and, of the seed of Solomon through Tamar, who bore two sons to her first husband Nari before she was later taken to wife by Jechonias.

Skepticalone wrote...........Still waiting on your sources.

Gentorev replies..........Luke 3: 27 up to and including 31. revealing that Shalathiel was not a biological son of Jechonias, but was a descendant of the prophet "Nathan," through Neri, the first husband of Tamah, who is a descendant of Solomon.
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 2:28:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/6/2014 12:34:55 PM, POPOO5560 wrote:
At 12/6/2014 12:02:46 PM, Skepticalone wrote:
Why do the genealogies in Matthew and Luke not match up with each other? I do not find the explanation of 'one is for Mary and one for Joseph' to be reasonable since both mention Joseph as a son.

https://www.biblegateway.com...
https://www.biblegateway.com...

God is his father and he isnt there, Joseph souldnt to be there and he is there, and jesus is a man without genealogy...

... but even at that, He has a better one that Mohammed - plus His progeny aren't running around screaming "Jihad" all the time.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/10/2014 9:29:36 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 2:17:57 AM, Gentorev wrote:
Skepticalone wrote........That brings us to another problem, Shalatheil, or Shealtiel, is a descendant of Solomon, and (cue dramatic music) Jeconias. Jeconias was cursed by god, and was never to have any of his descendents sit on the throne of David. This contradicts god's promise to Solomon. Even overlooking the contradiction, Jesus would not have been eligible to the throne being a descendent of Jeconias.

Gentorev replies........Jesus is not genetically connected to the cursed King Jechonias.

Shalathiel was not of the seed Jechonias. Although he was a descendant and, of the seed of Solomon through Tamar, who bore two sons to her first husband Nari before she was later taken to wife by Jechonias.

Skepticalone wrote...........Still waiting on your sources.

Gentorev replies..........Luke 3: 27 up to and including 31. revealing that Shalathiel was not a biological son of Jechonias, but was a descendant of the prophet "Nathan," through Neri, the first husband of Tamah, who is a descendant of Solomon.

Being a descendant of Nathan is not equivalent to being a descendant of Solomon. You do realize this, right? That is why I asked for a source showing (as you claim) Mary's lineage comes through Solomon (it is not in the genealogy in Luke).
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Gentorev
Posts: 2,909
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2014 1:17:45 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/10/2014 9:29:36 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 12/10/2014 2:17:57 AM, Gentorev wrote:
Skepticalone wrote........That brings us to another problem, Shalatheil, or Shealtiel, is a descendant of Solomon, and (cue dramatic music) Jeconias. Jeconias was cursed by god, and was never to have any of his descendents sit on the throne of David. This contradicts god's promise to Solomon. Even overlooking the contradiction, Jesus would not have been eligible to the throne being a descendent of Jeconias.

Gentorev replies........Jesus is not genetically connected to the cursed King Jechonias.

Shalathiel was not of the seed Jechonias. Although he was a descendant and, of the seed of Solomon through Tamar, who bore two sons to her first husband Nari before she was later taken to wife by Jechonias.

Skepticalone wrote...........Still waiting on your sources.

Gentorev replies..........Luke 3: 27 up to and including 31. revealing that Shalathiel was not a biological son of Jechonias, but was a descendant of the prophet "Nathan," through Neri, the first husband of Tamah, who is a descendant of Solomon.

Being a descendant of Nathan is not equivalent to being a descendant of Solomon. You do realize this, right? That is why I asked for a source showing (as you claim) Mary's lineage comes through Solomon (it is not in the genealogy in Luke).

Shalathiel a son of Tamar who is of the seed of Solomon, is also the son of Neri, who was Tamar's first husband, and they are recorded in Luke as being of the seed of Nathan also. Through Tamar, Jesus is of the seed of Solomon.

Either way, the genealogy of Joseph the son of Jacob, who is not genetically connected to Jesus and which genealogy is recorded in Matthew, goes through Shalathiel the son of Neri and Tamar, and who is not genetically connected to Jehonias the descendant of Solomon.

If you want to take the genealogy in Matthew through to Solomon, you have to go through Shalathiel the step-son of Jehonias through his mother Tamar the wife of Neri, who is of the seed of Solomon, as Jehonias had no sons who survived to bear children of their own.