|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 65/40 Hour: 1/5 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Luke and Matthews geneologies | |||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Chara, You posted a link to a list of messianic prophecies and implied, at least, that you agreed that these prophecies had been fulfilled. Then bumped the post. So I responded to the only thing of substance-- the list of prophecies. You are right, it is mostly off topic, but not entirely. And I couldn't let such a list get away scott free. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Chara Inactive Member |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by John:
So I responded to the only thing of substance-- [/B][/QUOTE] In the context of the discussion, my question was not relevant?
quote: *Added as a qualifier to the discussion re previous post. The question is not relevant ... why?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: No offense intended.
quote: It seems that pointing out that Christ did not fulfill the messianic prophecies or that the prophecies were too fuzzy to have any real meaning seems directly relevant.
quote: I missed that it was a question. oops... Math of probabilities? You mean, since so many prophecies were fulfilled by Jesus the chances are good that he is the one? 1) There aren't many, if any, unambiguous and verifiable prophecies that were fulfilled by Christ. 2) I don't think it works that way. Being the messiah, he'd have to fulfill all of them, not just some or most. Otherwise, you'd never be sure. It isn't a case of best qualified. It is qualified or not-qualified. The genealogies are pretty clear and unambiguous, unless you want them to mean that Christ is the messiah. For the later, you need much mojo. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
funkmasterfreaky Inactive Member |
quote: John you have done a wonderful job running and hiding from this question, dancing around the point and nit picking at wordings, however it's a very simple straight forward question. It's an easy one word post. Just curious ------------------saved by grace
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
quote: No offense to Chara, but I am not exactly sure what the question means. Namely, how does the math of probability connect with whether the genealogies describe messianic bloodlines? Secondly, you've got two-- not one but two-- different genealogies for Christ, neither of which fits the requirements for a messianic bloodline. This is in direct contradiction of the messianic prophecies. If you have a set of conditions, you can meet those conditions or not. This is a definite not. It is counter-evidence, hands down. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
judge Member (Idle past 6472 days) Posts: 216 From: australia Joined: |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by John:
[B][QUOTE]Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky: quote: No offense to Chara, but I am not exactly sure what the question means. Namely, how does the math of probability connect with whether the genealogies describe messianic bloodlines? Secondly, you've got two-- not one but two-- different genealogies for Christ, neither of which fits the requirements for a messianic bloodline. This is in direct contradiction of the messianic prophecies. If you have a set of conditions, you can meet those conditions or not. This is a definite not. It is counter-evidence, hands down. [/B][/QUOTE] Hi John...I think you will from my original post that one geneology is that of Mary (Matthews) and one is that of Joseph the "step" father of Jesus. As Matthew gives Marys geneology, Jesus was a direct blood descendent of David, thus fulfillinhg the prophesies. All the best
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: Your assertion is unsupported. And I think you will find, unsupportable. But please try.
quote: Niether Matthew nor Mark give a valid messianic bloodline. In the end, this is the killer and this conclusion has yet to be challenged. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
doctrbill Member (Idle past 2792 days) Posts: 1174 From: Eugene, Oregon, USA Joined: |
quote: I'm disappointed in your response. You did not address a single one of my points. Instead you question my qualifications and change the subject. As to whether there was organized sham involved in the messianic prophecies - I don't think so. But while we are on the subject, do not suppose that well organized sham has a short shelf-life. Do you not think that Judaism is "well organized sham"? If not, then why are you not Jewish? BTW. You might want to learn how to spell PROPHECY. db
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
judge Member (Idle past 6472 days) Posts: 216 From: australia Joined: |
quote: Hi again! hope all is well.Can you define what would be a "valid messainic bloodline"? I believe I have supplied this but perhaps you are defining it differently.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: The prophecies are not only that the messiah be of David's line, but of David's line via his son Solomon. Luke's bloodline, typically argued to be that of Mary rather than Joseph, traces back to David via Nathan not Solomon. II Samuel 7:12-13. So we strike that one. Note: It really doesn't matter if it is Joseph's line or Mary's. Matthew give us a lineage that runs through a character named King Jeconiah. What's wrong with the King you ask? Well, God cursed him for one. Jeremiah 22:30 "Write this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days. For no man of his seed shall prosper sitting upon the throne of David and ruling anymore in Judah." ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Karl Inactive Member |
Not so fast.
I've looked this passage up (NIV) 30 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." The context is the coming exile in Babylon; Jeremiah is saying to Jehoiachin (Jeconiah) "The nation of Judah's been up to no good, you've been a bad lad; so you're all going into exile. Therefore, your sons will not be kings". It does not have to be, as far as I can see, a curse on the line from Jehoiachin for ever. I am sure that, given the fact that Matthew was (a) writing for a Jewish audience, and (b) was well versed in the OT himself, he would not have made an elementary error like this if he thought it was a problem. IIRC, this whole issue came from a site with a religious motive for discrediting Matthew's genealogy. Such sources need to be treated with caution; it's a bit like getting your science of a creationist website. [This message has been edited by Karl, 11-29-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: It plainly states "for none of his offspring will prosper,none will sit on the throne of David or rule anymore in Judah." That strikes me as pretty absolute. You can, of course, deny that it is a messianic passage. It is, however, nearly universally argued as such.
quote: Matthew made numerous errors so this is a bit of a moot point.
No webpage found at provided URL: http://web2.iadfw.net/capella/aguide/mattherr.htm No webpage found at provided URL: http://www.2think.org/hii/matt_err.shtml quote: Granted. However, from what I can tell, the author has it right. This isn't the only source I have read, but merely the most concise. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com [This message has been edited by John, 11-29-2002]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Karl Inactive Member |
It's a shame I have to nip off now, as the sites you quote raise interesting issues. There is definitely a contrast between how Matthew used OT as prophecy and how modern fundamentalists try to use it.
I'll address it next week, or, possibly, over the weekend. Suffice it to say, I don't think Matthew was making mistakes; I think he was understanding the OT in a different paradigm to the one modern fundamentalists, and the authors of the websites you cite, expect.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
John Inactive Member |
quote: I anxiously await your return. Take care. ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
outblaze Inactive Member |
quote: Probably 100% when it's prophetia ex eventu. Matthew's (1:22-23) spin on Isaiah 7:14 comes to mind.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024