Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is Jesus of 'Cursed Lineage'
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 181 of 206 (331695)
07-14-2006 8:16 AM
Reply to: Message 180 by johnfolton
07-14-2006 1:28 AM


Re: Virgin Birth ( Messias means the Christ)
You are again incorrect with the Jewish law.
The Jewish law about Mamzwers says nothing about the 'sexual state' of a woman that has a child. That it because it assumes (quite rightfully), that if a woman has had child she has had sexual relations. Since Joseph was her husband, and she had a child that was not his, that child is a mamzer.
If the Christians took the GNostic view, this contradiction could have been avoided. But they relied on hellenistic tradition, brought in by the gentile converts to christianity. This directly clashed with the Jewish customs/laws/concepts.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by johnfolton, posted 07-14-2006 1:28 AM johnfolton has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 182 by Sandor Szabados, posted 07-14-2006 1:02 PM ramoss has not replied
 Message 183 by lila, posted 10-15-2007 2:28 AM ramoss has not replied

  
Sandor Szabados
Inactive Member


Message 182 of 206 (331747)
07-14-2006 1:02 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by ramoss
07-14-2006 8:16 AM


Re: Virgin Birth ( Messias means the Christ)
OFF TOPIC - DO NOT RESPOND

From The URANTIA Book, a Divine Revelation
The 2,097-page tome is comprised of 196 Papers written by celestial beings - Divine Counselor, Perfector of Wisdom, Archangel, Melchidezek, and Midwayer, just to name a few - between the 1920s and mid-'30s and published in book form in 1955. Urantia is the name for Earth. Over half million copies have been sold and has been translated into many languages. It can be found at Just a moment...
"THE BIRTH OF JESUS
In just the same manner as all babies before that day and since have come into the world, the promised child was born; and on the eighth day, according to the Jewish practice, he was circumcised and formally named Joshua (Jesus).
All that night Mary was restless so that neither of them slept much. By the break of day the pangs of childbirth were well in evidence, and at noon, August 21, 7 B.C., with the help and kind ministrations of women fellow travelers, Mary was delivered of a male child. Jesus of Nazareth was born into the world, was wrapped in the clothes which Mary had brought along for such a possible contingency, and laid in a near-by manger. (P. 1351)
JESUS EARTH PARENTS
Joseph was a mild-mannered man, extremely conscientious, and in every way faithful to the religious conventions and practices of his people. He talked little but thought much. The sorry plight of the Jewish people caused Joseph much sadness. As a youth, among his eight brothers and sisters, he had been more cheerful, but in the earlier years of married life (during Jesus' childhood) he was subject to periods of mild spiritual discouragement. These temperamental manifestations were greatly improved just before his untimely death and after the economic condition of his family had been enhanced by his advancement from the rank of carpenter to the role of a prosperous contractor.
Mary's temperament was quite opposite to that of her husband. She was usually cheerful, was very rarely downcast, and possessed an ever-sunny disposition. Mary indulged in free and frequent expression of her emotional feelings and was never observed to be sorrowful until after the sudden death of Joseph. And she had hardly recovered from this shock when she had thrust upon her the anxieties and questionings aroused by the extraordinary career of her eldest son, which was so rapidly unfolding before her astonished gaze. But throughout all this unusual experience Mary was composed, courageous, and fairly wise in her relationship with her strange and little-understood first-born son and his surviving brothers and sisters.
Jesus derived much of his unusual gentleness and marvelous sympathetic understanding of human nature from his father; he inherited his gift as a great teacher and his tremendous capacity for righteous indignation from his mother. In emotional reactions to his adult-life environment, Jesus was at one time like his father, meditative and worshipful, sometimes characterized by apparent sadness; but more often he drove forward in the manner of his mother's optimistic and determined disposition. All in all, Mary's temperament tended to dominate the career of the divine Son as he grew up and swung into the momentous strides of his adult life. In some particulars Jesus was a blending of his parents' traits; in other respects he exhibited the traits of one in contrast with those of the other.
From Joseph Jesus secured his strict training in the usages of the Jewish ceremonials and his unusual acquaintance with the Hebrew scriptures; from Mary he derived a broader viewpoint of religious life and a more liberal concept of personal spiritual freedom." (p. 1348)
Religion without science has no foundation; science without religion has no direction.
Edited by AdminNWR, : off topic

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by ramoss, posted 07-14-2006 8:16 AM ramoss has not replied

  
lila
Junior Member (Idle past 6006 days)
Posts: 2
Joined: 10-15-2007


Message 183 of 206 (428161)
10-15-2007 2:28 AM
Reply to: Message 181 by ramoss
07-14-2006 8:16 AM


Re: Virgin Birth ( Messias means the Christ)
Originally this forum was about the supposed cursed lineage of Jesus
on this topic I would like to suggest that if Jeconiah is of Solomans lineage then how can he also be of Nathans lineage? Therefore through ONE of these lineages Jesus is not of the cursed lineage.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by ramoss, posted 07-14-2006 8:16 AM ramoss has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by Brian, posted 10-15-2007 1:38 PM lila has not replied
 Message 186 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-15-2007 10:46 PM lila has not replied
 Message 197 by IamJoseph, posted 10-17-2007 3:08 AM lila has replied

  
Adminnemooseus
Administrator
Posts: 3974
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 184 of 206 (428164)
10-15-2007 2:48 AM


Test
Test to see if topic/forum will automatically rebuild.
Adminnemooseus

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 185 of 206 (428218)
10-15-2007 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by lila
10-15-2007 2:28 AM


Re: Virgin Birth ( Messias means the Christ)
Why can't Jesus have been from the cursed lineage?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by lila, posted 10-15-2007 2:28 AM lila has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 186 of 206 (428315)
10-15-2007 10:46 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by lila
10-15-2007 2:28 AM


Cursed lineage: exegetical examinations
Originally this forum was about the supposed cursed lineage of Jesus
on this topic I would like to suggest that if Jeconiah is of Solomans lineage then how can he also be of Nathans lineage? Therefore through ONE of these lineages Jesus is not of the cursed lineage.
Well, lets look at the original question objectively.
We know that mankind was in need of a future Redeemer because of the original Fall of man, spoken of in Genesis. All men have been building up Adam, as ben, in Hebrew, means, builder. In Biblical times, the father’s seed counted towards lineage, not the mother. Even today tradition maintains that a son or daughter from a marriage typically takes the surname of the father.
This is precisely why intermarriage was forbidden in Biblical times. Hypothetically, an invading foreign army with aspirations of establishing a new regime could impregnate Israelite women, and so, lose their heritage by way of attrition.
Even today, a Jewish person is considered either a Cohen (Priest), or a Levy, (Levite), according to who is father is. Many Davidic kings on the throne of Israel had Gentile mothers. Did this make them Gentiles from the Tribe of Judah and the family line of David?
    "But you Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are little among the thousands of Judah, out of you shall come forth to Me the One to be Ruler in Israel, whose goings forth are from old, from everlasting.” -Micah 5:2
    For unto us, a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His Name will be called, ”Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.’ Of the increase of His government and peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David and over His Kingdom, to order it and establish it with judgment and justice from that time forward, even forever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.” -Isaiah 9:6-7
The prophet, Micah and Isaiah, wrote these prophecies some 700 years prior, to Jesus’ birth. In these messianic prophecies, they describe the Messiah as being eternal. We know that only God is eternal, and so, Messiah cannot be merely a mortal man, but rather, something greater than that. Aside from this glaring point, since when is a man, any man, referred to as Mighty God and Everlasting Father?
What else can be deduced, other than, that the Messiah is God incarnate? Its evidence is all over the Old Testament prophecies and clearly fulfilled in the New Testament. The Old Testament is said to be the New Testament concealed, and the New Testament is the Old Testament revealed. Truly, we see this duality and harmonization all throughout the Scriptures, given us, by God.
Any man who might claim to be the Messiah has heavy burden to overcome. In all actuality, it is physically impossible to overcome. We know that Mashiac will come from the line of David. Nevertheless, as we will see, the line was essentially cursed from the time of the prophet Jeremiah. Just as Israel was going into exile, God made two declarations that first appeared contradictory about the last Davidic king over Judah, Jehoiachin. The first declaration was that of his physical descendants, no one would ever sit upon the throne of David, in spite of the fact that they would continue to inherit the rights to the throne. How can this be?
    Is this man Jehoiachin a despised, broken pot, an object no one wants? Why will he and his children be hurled out, cast into a land they do not know? O’ land, land, land, hear the Word of the Lord! This is what the Lord says: ”Record this man as if childless, a man who will not prosper in his lifetime, for none of his offspring will prosper, none will sit on the throne of David or rule anymore in Judah.” -Jeremiah 22:28-30
Well, this really presents a problem for everyone in Davidic lineage to inherit the throne, isn’t it? How can the Messiah overcome this? The second declaration makes it clear, if we have ears to hear and eyes to see. Also a promised Branch would raise up the throne and sit upon it.
    In those days and at that time I will make a righteous Branch sprout from the line of David; He will do what is just and right in the land. In those days, Judah will be saved and Jerusalem will live in safety. This is the Name by which he will be called: ”The Lord Our Righteousness.’ For this is what the lord says, ”David will never fail to have a man sit on the throne of the house of David. -Jeremiah 33:14-17
Thus, we see that the Messiah is not a son of Adam, but rather, a Son of God. Because Jesus was conceived by the Spirit, rather than by the will of a husband through natural procreation, He did not inherit the curse of Jehoiachin. However, because Joseph was His legal guardian, and Joseph and Mary were both from the line of David means that ONLY Jesus could still sit on the throne and avoid the curse. Jesus elucidates this point to the Pharisees by showing that David himself has considered the Mashaic to be God in the flesh.
    While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, saying, ”What do you think about the Christ (Messiah)? Who’s Son is He?’ They said to Him, ”The son of David.’ He said to them, ”How then does David in the Spirit call Him ”Lord,’ saying: ”The Lord said to my Lord, sit at my right hand, till I make your enemies a footstool?’ If David then calls Him ”Lord,’ how is He his son?’ And no on one was able to answer Him a word, nor from that day did anyone dare to question Him anymore.” -Matthew 22:41-46

"It is better to shun the bait, than struggle in the snare." -Ravi Zacharias

This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by lila, posted 10-15-2007 2:28 AM lila has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 187 by EighteenDelta, posted 10-16-2007 12:32 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 188 by Brian, posted 10-16-2007 4:55 AM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 193 by ramoss, posted 10-16-2007 7:40 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
EighteenDelta
Inactive Member


Message 187 of 206 (428329)
10-16-2007 12:32 AM
Reply to: Message 186 by Hyroglyphx
10-15-2007 10:46 PM


Re: Cursed lineage: exegetical examinations
Even today, a Jewish person is considered either a Cohen (Priest), or a Levy, (Levite), according to who is father is. Many Davidic kings on the throne of Israel had Gentile mothers. Did this make them Gentiles from the Tribe of Judah and the family line of David?
Have to strongly disagree there...
Historical definitions of Jewish identity have traditionally been based on halakhic definitions of matrilineal descent, not patron but matron.
See who is a jew

"Debate is an art form. It is about the winning of arguments. It is not about the discovery of truth. There are certain rules and procedures to debate that really have nothing to do with establishing fact ” which creationists have mastered. Some of those rules are: never say anything positive about your own position because it can be attacked, but chip away at what appear to be the weaknesses in your opponent's position. They are good at that. I don't think I could beat the creationists at debate. I can tie them. But in courtrooms they are terrible, because in courtrooms you cannot give speeches. In a courtroom you have to answer direct questions about the positive status of your belief. We destroyed them in Arkansas. On the second day of the two-week trial we had our victory party!"
-Stephen Jay Gould

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-15-2007 10:46 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by ramoss, posted 10-16-2007 9:56 AM EighteenDelta has not replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 188 of 206 (428340)
10-16-2007 4:55 AM
Reply to: Message 186 by Hyroglyphx
10-15-2007 10:46 PM


Re: Cursed lineage: exegetical examinations
However, because Joseph was His legal guardian, and Joseph and Mary were both from the line of David means that ONLY Jesus could still sit on the throne and avoid the curse.
Any idea when this is going to happen?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-15-2007 10:46 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 190 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-16-2007 12:58 PM Brian has replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 189 of 206 (428389)
10-16-2007 9:56 AM
Reply to: Message 187 by EighteenDelta
10-16-2007 12:32 AM


Re: Cursed lineage: exegetical examinations
Yes, when it comes to needing to convert, the 'Jewishishness' of the parents counts.
However, from the point of view of family line, it is purely paternal.
Bloodlines are very important in the Jewish faith. The 'Branch of David' is an unbroken male decendent. No adoptions, no women in the line.. but an unbroken line from David through Solomon.
Therefore, according to Jewish Custom, if you accept the 'virgin birth' myth, Jesus would not fit the prophecy. He would have to be Joesphes biological son, and it would have to be through Solomon.
The fact Mathew and Luke disagree show one or the other is making things up (if not both).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 187 by EighteenDelta, posted 10-16-2007 12:32 AM EighteenDelta has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 190 of 206 (428456)
10-16-2007 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 188 by Brian
10-16-2007 4:55 AM


Re: Cursed lineage: exegetical examinations
quote:
However, because Joseph was His legal guardian, and Joseph and Mary were both from the line of David means that ONLY Jesus could still sit on the throne and avoid the curse.
Any idea when this is going to happen?
I don't know the day or hour. But since Moshiac ben Yosef has completed his mission as the suffering servant, all that is left is the coronation ceremony for Mashiac ben David.

"It is better to shun the bait, than struggle in the snare." -Ravi Zacharias

This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by Brian, posted 10-16-2007 4:55 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by Brian, posted 10-16-2007 1:43 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Brian
Member (Idle past 4959 days)
Posts: 4659
From: Scotland
Joined: 10-22-2002


Message 191 of 206 (428470)
10-16-2007 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by Hyroglyphx
10-16-2007 12:58 PM


Re: Cursed lineage: exegetical examinations
Do you acknowledge that what you suggest here is utterly alien to Judaism and the Hebrew Bible?
With that in mind, how do you harmonise the Xian concept of Messiah with the Messiah promised in the Hebrew Bible?
BTW, Jesus was not Joseph's son, unless you sensibly reject the virgin birth misunderstanding.
PPS Micah 5:2 is not messianic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-16-2007 12:58 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-16-2007 5:10 PM Brian has replied
 Message 196 by IamJoseph, posted 10-17-2007 3:04 AM Brian has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 192 of 206 (428527)
10-16-2007 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 191 by Brian
10-16-2007 1:43 PM


Re: Cursed lineage: exegetical examinations
Do you acknowledge that what you suggest here is utterly alien to Judaism and the Hebrew Bible?
Which part?
With that in mind, how do you harmonise the Xian concept of Messiah with the Messiah promised in the Hebrew Bible?
Didn't you read what I wrote? I explained in great detail.
BTW, Jesus was not Joseph's son, unless you sensibly reject the virgin birth misunderstanding.
Again, didn't you read it? I explained all of that.
Micah 5:2 is not messianic.
Then what is it?

"It is better to shun the bait, than struggle in the snare." -Ravi Zacharias

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by Brian, posted 10-16-2007 1:43 PM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by Brian, posted 10-17-2007 5:19 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 193 of 206 (428571)
10-16-2007 7:40 PM
Reply to: Message 186 by Hyroglyphx
10-15-2007 10:46 PM


Re: Cursed lineage: exegetical examinations
Yes, let us look at Mich and Isaiah.
The first one says that from the clan of Bethalehm, you will see a ruler coming. That happened long before Jesus. His name was David. If you read on further, it is comparing the pain of childbirth to the hardship that the nation of Israel will go through before the Messiah comes. It has nothing to do with Jesus was so ever.
As for Isaiah 9:6-7, that also has nothing to do with Jesus what so ever. It was specifically referring to Hezekiah. (Literally "God is our Strength) or "mighty God". In context, Isaiah was talking about a
sign that had already passed, not a future sign.
As for Jeremiah 22, it doesn't refer to ALL of the line of David, but 0nly the lineage of Jehoiachin. There are many lineages that of David that do not include Jehoiachin. Apparently, Jesus was not one of them, and is therefore disqualified.
Yes, the Christians believed that "jesus" had God as a father, but the term 'Son of God' was slang to be 'a rightous man' or someone specifically blessed. An earlier example of this is shown to be David, who in Psalm 2:7 became the Son of God when he ascended the throne. It was reconized by the Jews not to be literal. This was put in a pagan context when the Roman and Greek converts to Christianity put their own spin on the writings.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-15-2007 10:46 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by Hyroglyphx, posted 10-16-2007 10:03 PM ramoss has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 194 of 206 (428594)
10-16-2007 10:03 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by ramoss
10-16-2007 7:40 PM


Re: Cursed lineage: exegetical examinations
The first one says that from the clan of Bethalehm, you will see a ruler coming. That happened long before Jesus.
Yes, which is precisely the point. Its prophecy. Generally in order for prophecy to mean anything, it must be written before it actually happens.
His name was David.
David came before both Isaiah and Micah. Unless of course you are saying that prophecy is about David. But even still, lets examine that. Both prophets speak of a Ruler in eternal connotations, not temporal ones. More importantly, it speaks of the messiah as coming after David.
If you read on further, it is comparing the pain of childbirth to the hardship that the nation of Israel will go through before the Messiah comes. It has nothing to do with Jesus was so ever.
All consistent with Jesus. What the heck other reason do you think the messiah would come for??? Think about it.
As for Isaiah 9:6-7, that also has nothing to do with Jesus what so ever. It was specifically referring to Hezekiah. (Literally "God is our Strength) or "mighty God". In context, Isaiah was talking about a
sign that had already passed, not a future sign.
Some basic facts: The general Rabbinical consensus is that Micah is unmistakably a messianic verse. And if Isaiah is speaking about Hezekiah, then you must consider him as the messiah, based on the descriptions. He did not meet the criteria as messiah. Isaiah 9 is speaking about a great deliverance. But during his kingship, Assyria had control of this part of the world under the reign of Sennacherib, which is inconsistent with the theme of the text.
Secondly, the salvation of Galilee, which is prominently listed in this verse, never came by way of Hezekiah. In fact, he was totally plundered.
Thirdly, the increasing of the nation is inconsistent with the text, because while he was a great king who brought Israel out of paganism, the government under Hezekiah did not live up to the description given in the text.
And lastly, Micah was contemporaneous with Hezekiah. Micah speaks of the Ruler, like Isaiah, in an eternal context. In conjunction with Isaiah 9, its evident that not only both verses are messianic, but that the messiah is not merely a mortal man.
As for Jeremiah 22, it doesn't refer to ALL of the line of David, but 0nly the lineage of Jehoiachin. There are many lineages that of David that do not include Jehoiachin. Apparently, Jesus was not one of them, and is therefore disqualified.
He is in Matthew's gospel, but not in Luke's. Why is that important? Remember the portion speaking of Jehoicachin where it said, "Record this man as if childless, a man who will not prosper in his lifetime, for none of his offspring will prosper, none will sit on the throne of David or rule anymore in Judah."
Well, that certainly would present a problem for anyone claiming to be the messiah because he is integral, and because the messiah is clearly a descendant of David. But this is easily resolved. Both the NT genealogies are consistent with one another up until it gets to the point after David. Then the names are totally different.
Why?
Because Luke is recording Mary's genealogy while Matthew is recording Joseph's. Since Joseph did not father Jesus by natural conception, Jesus avoids the "curse," even though its critical that he be connected to David's line. Since He was born unto Mary, He avoids the curse altogether while still maintaining the lineage. That's exactly why the Immaculate Conception so integral to the gospel.
Yes, the Christians believed that "jesus" had God as a father, but the term 'Son of God' was slang to be 'a rightous man' or someone specifically blessed.
Even if every description of the messiah were attributed to slang, there is still the points of connection through timeline. This is why the Judaizers attempt to malign the book of Daniel, because it illustrates, in concert with all the other prophecies, no other than Jesus.

"It is better to shun the bait, than struggle in the snare." -Ravi Zacharias

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by ramoss, posted 10-16-2007 7:40 PM ramoss has not replied

  
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 195 of 206 (428633)
10-17-2007 2:45 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by JIM
10-31-2003 11:55 AM


quote:
The truth is that there was a strong Messianic tradition long before the time of Christ, a tradition that was well known among the Jews of Jesus' day. It was this tradition that the early Christians knew and applied to Jesus This tradition is preserved in the pre-Christian translations of the Old Testament made by the Jews, such as the Septuagint (LXX), and the Aramaic Targums. These translations were somewhat standardized by the time of Christ, so the Messianic traditions contained in them have remained rather unaffected by later debates with the Christians.
True. As at the time of jesus, there were five other candidates assumed as a Messiah, and all were in error, and all of these were far more prominently held than was Jesus. All sacrificed themselves, the last one, Rav Akiva, was killed for the crime of heresy in a manner far worse than cricifixtion: his skin was torn off while still alive.
quote:
The post-Christians translations made by the Jews reflect the effects of their debates with the Christians and their resultant anti-Christian bias. It is no surprise that the post-Christian Jewish apologists switched from the Septuagint to the later Greek translations of the Old Testament.
The ancient Jewish Messianic traditions are also still present in the Talmudic literature, although somewhat tainted by the post-Christian debates. These ancient Jewish sources indicate that the passages in the Old Testament understood by the early Christians as Messianic were also understood by the ancient Jews as Messianic.
The messianic premise is Jewish, not Christian. The latter changed the criteria what constitutes a messiah: ressurection was to be for the deceased people, not the messiah; only the former requires this facility and its manifestation. This never happened, nor any of the factors nominated in Isaiah.
But a strange, inexplicable compulsion did occur for millions of europeans, and christianity managed to prevail over hellenism and paganism with a compromised/improvised form of monotheism, using tools other than the OT instruments. Where hellenism and judaism failed to attain a compromised position for a new, enjoined belief system 200 years earlier, christianity succeeded, but without denting judaism. Islam followed on christianity's heels, utilising a mid-point platform of the OT and NT, while again contradicting both those scriptures in core areas.
JC is not regarded from the davidic lineage, which depends not on the NT scriptures, but the absence of such evidence from David to JC datings. It appears the NT writers simply chose names from the OT and formed a thread - else the final verse in the book of Ruth would have toppled the NT. The criteria for a messiah is listed in Isaiah - these remain elusive till today.
Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by JIM, posted 10-31-2003 11:55 AM JIM has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024