The genealogy of Jesus conflict.

Page 2 of 3 [ 46 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,372
Location: Claremont, California

06 Dec 2008, 11:24 am

Accelerator, I appreciate your post, but you have to admit that their are major inconsistencies in the bible. Why do you think so many people turn to atheism? The church says that the bible is the word of God and that nothing shall be added or subtracted. How could any rational person with any common sense adhere to this teaching? Why should we just be quiet about it?

By questioning the virgin birth and other things, we are simply using the minds that God gave us. If Jesus expanded on the bible of his time (and he was far from being diplomatic about it), why shouldn't we question the bible of our time? I would like to see humans go one step further in the moral direction not abolish morality. Like the primitive laws during Jesus's time, I see goofy laws today that are set up under the guise of morality.

_________________
As long as man continues to be the ruthless destroyer of lower living beings he will never know health or peace. For as long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other.

-Pythagoras

Isthisreal
Raven
Raven

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 120
Location: North America

06 Dec 2008, 11:44 am

Quote:

“…you might command certain ones not to teach different doctrine, nor to pay attention to false stories and to genealogies, which end up in nothing, but which furnish questions for research rather than a dispensing of anything by God in connection with faith.

Really the objective of this mandate is love out of a clean heart and out of a good conscience and out of faith without hypocrisy.

By deviating from these things certain ones have been turned
aside into idle talk, wanting to be teachers of law, but not perceiving either the things they are saying or the things about which they are making strong assertions.”

1Timothy 1:3

Wouldn't Matthew and Luke fall under this criticism since they were the ones who originally wrote the genealogies?

This verse refers to a different context than the one I am disputing. It talks about genealogies that the end result of such is pointless. The end result of the genealogy that I am talking about is to show that Jesus in the descendent of David. According to the Bible, the Messiah has to be the descendent of David. If he is not the descendent of David, he is not the Messiah.

Gromit
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 May 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,302
Location: In Cognito

06 Dec 2008, 1:17 pm

Isthisreal wrote:

According to the Bible, the Messiah has to be the descendent of David. If he is not the descendent of David, he is not the Messiah.

Both genealogies are through Joseph who is not the biological father of Jesus, if you believe in the virgin birth. If you believe that, no genealogy that goes through Joseph can show that Jesus is a descendant of David.

Isthisreal
Raven
Raven

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 120
Location: North America

06 Dec 2008, 3:08 pm

Quote:

Both genealogies are through Joseph who is not the biological father of Jesus, if you believe in the virgin birth. If you believe that, no genealogy that goes through Joseph can show that Jesus is a descendant of David.

That is true. The virgin birth would nullify Jesus being connected to David through Joseph. Matthew and Luke didn't think so however, or they wouldn't have written down Joseph's genealogy, connecting him to david.

I digress from my original intention... The purpose of this thread is to point out the inconsistencies in the genealogies listed in Matthew ch.1 , Luke ch.3 , and 1 Chronicles ch 3.

Chibi_Neko
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 23 Oct 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,485
Location: Newfoundland, Canada

06 Dec 2008, 6:14 pm

There is a documentary called "The Secret Family of Jesus"
It's very interesting to watch, and explores the ideas that Jesus had brothers, aunts, uncles, cousins, ect.

_________________
Humans are intelligent, but that doesn't make them smart.

DevilInPgh
Pileated woodpecker

Joined: 23 Aug 2005
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 186
Location: Washington, DC

11 Dec 2008, 2:53 am

Isthisreal wrote:

Here is the genealogy of Jesus according to the books of Matthew and Luke in the King James Bible. For reference, see Matthew ch. 1 and Luke ch. 3 starting at verse 23. I listed the genealogies starting at Jesus' father Joseph and worked backward to joseph's father and so on. They are, according to the Bible, as follows:

Matthew--------- Luke

1 Joseph ---------- 1 Joseph
2 Jacob ---------- 2 Heli
3 Mattan --------- 3 Matthat
4 Eleazar ---------- 4 Levi
5 Eliud ---------- 5 Melchi
6 Achim ---------- 6 Janna
7 Sadoc -------- 7 Joseph
8 Azor --------------- 8 Matathias
9 Eliakim --------- 9 Amos
10 Abiud ----------- 10 Naum
11 Zorababel --------- 11 Esli
12 Salathiel --------- 12 Nagge
13 Jechonias --------------- 13 Maath
14 Josias --------- 14 Matathias
15 Amon ---------- 15 Semei
16 Manases ---------- 16 Joseph
17 Ezekias ---------- 17 Juda
18 Achaz ---------- 18 Joanna
19 Joatham ---------- 19 Rhesa
20 Ozias ---------- 20 Zorobabel
21 Joram --------- 21 Salathiel
22 Josaphat --------- 22 Neri
23 Asa ------------------ 23 Melchi
24 Abia ------------ 24 Addi
25 Roboam ------------- 25 Cosam
26 Solomon ----------- 26 Elmodam
27 David ----------- 27 Er
-------------------------- 28 Jose
--------------------------- 29 Eliezer
----------------------------- 30 Jorim
--------------------------- 31 Matthat
------------------------- 32 Levi
---------------------------- 33 Simeon
------------------------------- 34 Juda
---------------------------- 35 Joseph
--------------------------- 36 Jonan
-------------------------- 37 Eliakim
-------------------------- 38 Melea
--------------------------- 39 Menan
-------------------------- 40 Mattatha
-------------------------- 41 Nathan
-------------------------- 42 David

What do the people who believe in Christianity think about this? Not only are the genealogies completely different, Luke's is almost twice as long as Matthew's. If nothing else, why would Joseph's father be different?

The two lineages also have major problems in themselves, not just that heritage/tribe passes through the father in Judaism and that it has to be physical heritage, not merely "adopted":
1. The Messianic lineage runs only through David's son and successor, Solomon. This is made explicitly clear in II Samuel. Luke does not go through Solomon, hence automatic fail. As someone pointed out, obviously written for a Gentile audience, as they would not know anything about the House of David, just David himself, and that's a maybe.
2. Matthew was writing to a Jewish audience, so he has to be a bit more careful. However, he screwed up at Jeconiah (also known as Yehoiachin). He was a king so wicked that G-d stripped him AND HIS DESCENDANTS of any claim to the throne and the Messiahship. Two generations removed from him begat one of the most righteous Jews in history in Zerubavel, who helped to re-establish the Jewish community in Judah after liberation by the Persians. However, because of his heritage, he could neither sit upon the throne of David nor be appointed the Messiah by G-d. He had to settle for "nasi" - governor. As for the nonsense about the Talmud saying that Jeconiah repented and G-d forgave proves a few things. First, salvation comes from G-d alone, no need for a god-sacrifice. Though Jeconiah may have saved his soul, the curse was still not lifted in the Tanach, therefore it was never lifted. Second, if the Christians want to use the Talmud as an authoritative source, be my guest. They should be warned, though, that cherrypicking is not allowed and that the Talmud repeatedly gives reasons as to why Yoshke was not the Messiah.

EDIT: Oh, I should have mentioned that the curse of Jeconiah starts with the words "As I live". As G-d is eternal, that means forever. And G-d is not one to reneg on oaths. Again, He could have installed Zerubavel as king, but He did not because of the curse.

EDIT 2: Oops, little bit of a goof. Replaced Tanach with Talmud toward the end.

Last edited by DevilInPgh on 13 Dec 2008, 6:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

richardbenson
Xfractor Card #351
$Xfractor Card #351$

Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,553
Location: Leave only a footprint behind

12 Dec 2008, 9:04 pm

well duh, the bible is a gigantic contradiction. thats why the storys dont match up, because people wrote it. and people tend to make mistakes, i wonder how that is divenly inspired by god. apparently god cant get his facts staright, OK.

give me a break l

to me the whole jesus story was written in a way to make old testament prophacies of the messiah match up to him. nothing more, i doubt half of what was written in the nt is acctually the truth and is more lies and misconstruing of what acctually happend, because people wanted it to happen

_________________
Winds of clarity. a universal understanding come and go, I've seen though the Darkness to understand the bounty of Light

DevilInPgh
Pileated woodpecker

Joined: 23 Aug 2005
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 186
Location: Washington, DC

13 Dec 2008, 6:34 pm

richardbenson wrote:

l

to me the whole jesus story was written in a way to make old testament prophacies of the messiah match up to him. nothing more, i doubt half of what was written in the nt is acctually the truth and is more lies and misconstruing of what acctually happend, because people wanted it to happen

No kidding. That's why Judaism is still here.

pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

01 Jan 2009, 7:27 pm

DevilInPgh wrote:

1. The Messianic lineage runs only through David's son and successor, Solomon. This is made explicitly clear in II Samuel.

Where exactly?

Isthisreal
Raven
Raven

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 120
Location: North America

14 Jan 2009, 10:57 pm

I'm not really sure if it says that in 2nd Samuel or not. The only passage I can think of is the one where God says he will establish David's throne forever, or something like that.

Batz
Deinonychus

Joined: 26 Feb 2008
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 321

04 Feb 2009, 10:05 pm

I could say that Mattew's genealogy could be based on David until the end of the seventy years of captivity in Persia, while Luke's genealogy could be based on David, then skips to the genealogy after ther seventy years of captivity.

You forget that there was the interbiblical period, starting after the seventy years of captivity to the start of the Roman Empire, so Luke's genealogy could have been from there.

Aslo, I think it didn't really meant all the geneaology in general; only important people ere placed in the genealogy. Then again, you could prove that wrong by looking at the genealogy form Adam to Noah, if you catch my drift.

ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 88
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

05 Feb 2009, 2:07 am

Isthisreal wrote:

One thing is clear. The Gospels cannot be taken literally or as inerrant. Any thing with a contradiction is DOA.

ruveyn

slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

05 Feb 2009, 7:09 am

ToadOfSteel wrote:

Isthisreal wrote:

What do the people who believe in Christianity think about this?

That spending time sifting through geneaology lists is a good way to kill time?

Or to waste it, yeah.

slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

05 Feb 2009, 7:11 am

Quote:

Any thing with a contradiction is DOA.

Explain, rabbi.

Zonder
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,081
Location: Sitting on my sofa.

05 Feb 2009, 7:20 am

ruveyn wrote:

Any thing with a contradiction is DOA.

For those whose thinking is more strictly logical, yes. But for those whose thinking is more based in faith, no.

It's Logic-typical vrs. Christ's Syndrome.

Z

slowmutant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 13 Feb 2008
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,430
Location: Ontario, Canada

05 Feb 2009, 7:21 am

Zonder wrote:

ruveyn wrote:

Any thing with a contradiction is DOA.

For those whose thinking is more strictly logical, yes. But for those whose thinking is more based in faith, no.

It's Logic-typical vrs. Christ's Syndrome.

Z

What is it that has no contradiction, no opposite?

Page 2 of 3 [ 46 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

Jump to:

The genealogy of Jesus conflict. Post Reply New Topic

The genealogy of Jesus conflict.