Jesus, THE Messiah?

[david]

The Bible writer Matthew wrote:
“And Jesus, on coming into Peter’s house, saw his mother-in-law lying down and sick with fever.” (Matthew 8:14)
Matthew here provided an interesting but nonessential detail: Peter was married. This minor fact is supported by Paul, who wrote:
“Have I no right to take a Christian wife about with me, like the rest of the apostles and . . . Cephas?” (1 Corinthians 9:5, The New English Bible) The context indicates that Paul was defending himself against unwarranted criticism. (1 Corinthians 9:1-4) Plainly, this small fact—Peter’s being married—is not introduced by Paul to support the accuracy of Matthew’s account but is conveyed incidentally.

All four of the Gospel writers—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—record that on the night of Jesus’ arrest, one of his disciples drew a sword and struck a slave of the high priest, taking off the man’s ear. Only the Gospel of John reports a seemingly unnecessary detail: “The name of the slave was Malchus.” (John 18:10, 26) Why does John alone give the man’s name? A few verses later the account provides a minor fact not stated anywhere else: John “was known to the high priest.” He was also known to the high priest’s household; the servants were acquainted with him, and he with them. (John 18:15, 16) It was only natural, then, that John mention the injured man’s name, whereas the other Gospel writers, to whom the man was a stranger, do not.

At times, detailed explanations are omitted from one account but are provided elsewhere by statements made in passing. For instance, Matthew’s account of the trial of Jesus before the Jewish Sanhedrin says that some people present “slapped him in the face, saying: ‘Prophesy to us, you Christ. Who is it that struck you?’”

(Matthew 26:67, 68) Why would they ask Jesus to “prophesy” who had struck him, when the striker was standing there in front of him? Matthew does not explain. But two of the other Gospel writers supply the missing detail: Jesus’ persecutors covered his face before he was slapped. (Mark 14:65; Luke 22:64) Matthew presents his material without concern as to whether every last detail was supplied.

The Gospel of John tells of an occasion when a large crowd gathered to hear Jesus teach. According to the record, when Jesus observed the crowd, , “he said to Philip: ‘Where shall we buy loaves for these to eat?’” (John 6:5) Of all the disciples present, why did Jesus ask Philip where they could buy some bread? The writer does not say. In the parallel account, though, Luke reports that the incident took place near Bethsaida, a city on the north shores of the Sea of Galilee, and earlier in John’s Gospel it says that that “Philip was from Bethsaida.” (John 1:44; Luke 9:10) So Jesus logically asked a person whose hometown was nearby. The agreement between the details is remarkable, yet clearly unwitting.

[acertainchap]

Jesus was the prophesied Messiah we already know this. Who else could it be? The Scripture makes it clear that he is.

[david]

Quote

we already know this.

Yes, “we” (you and I) already know this. Some do not.

[david]

The Encyclopaedia Judaica says: “The Jews of the Roman period believed [the Messiah] would be raised up by God to break the yoke of the heathen and to reign over a restored kingdom of Israel.” (Jerusalem, 1971, Vol. 11, col. 1407) They wanted liberation from the yoke of Rome. Jewish history testifies that on the basis of the Messianic prophecy recorded at Daniel 9:24-27 there were Jews who expected the Messiah during the first century C.E. (Luke 3:15) But that prophecy also connected his coming with ‘making an end of sin,’ and Isaiah chapter 53 indicated that Messiah himself would die in order to make this possible. However, the Jews in general felt no need for anyone to die for their sins. They believed that they had a righteous standing with God on the basis of their descent from Abraham. Says A Rabbinic Anthology, “So great is the [merit] of Abraham that he can atone for all the vanities committed and lies uttered by Israel in this world.” (London, 1938, C. Montefiore and H. Loewe, p. 676) By their rejection of Jesus as Messiah, the Jews fulfilled the prophecy that had foretold regarding him: “He was despised, and we esteemed him not.”—Isaiah 53:3, JP.

Before his death, Moses foretold that the nation would turn aside from true worship and that, as a result, calamity would befall them.

DEUTERONOMY 31:27-29
“For I—I well know your rebelliousness and your stiff neck. If while I am yet alive with YOU today, YOU have proved rebellious in behavior toward Jehovah, then how much more so after my death! Congregate to me all the older men of YOUR tribes and YOUR officers, and let me speak in their hearing these words, and let me take the heavens and the earth as witnesses against them. For I well know that after my death YOU will without fail act ruinously, and YOU will certainly turn aside from the way about which I have commanded YOU; and calamity will be bound to befall YOU at the close of the days, because YOU will do what is bad in the eyes of Jehovah so as to offend him by the works of YOUR hands.””

They had made a covenant with Jehovah. A covenant is an agreement. The terms of the Law covenant were that if the Israelites kept the covenant they would be a people for the name of Jehovah, a kingdom of priests and a holy nation, with His blessing (Ex 19:5, 6; De 28:1-14)

The book of Judges testifies that they repeatedly turned away from false worship.
In the days of the prophet Jeremiah, national unfaithfulness led to the nation’s being taken into exile in Babylon.

Why did God also allow the Romans to destroy Jerusalem and its temple in 70 C.E.? Of what unfaithfulness had the nation been guilty so that God did not protect them as he had done when they had put their trust in him?

It was shortly before this that they had rejected Jesus as the Messiah.

[acertainchap]

Quote (david @ Nov. 07 2007,09:02)

Quote Yes, “we” (you and I) already know this.  Some do not.

True.

[IM4Truth]

One thing that is for sure, though, God is not done with the Jewish People. God has always called them His People. In the Book of Romans it explains it, that they will be drafted in again. When, in the Millenium. We had gone through a Bible study on Romans with a study group and if you ever find an opportunity to do so, it is quit interesting. Try Google or Heaven Net, maybe they have something on that.
How much time do you have to study the Bible, since you go to School?

Peace and Love Mrs.

[Towshab]

Quote (david @ Nov. 06 2007,14:26)

Quote Well, come to find out, someone looked up his name in Hebrew and it meant “Stranger.” It means sojourner or stranger. In these Bibles, it is translated as the following words: KJV (14) – foreigner, 2; sojourner, 9; stranger, 3; NAS (14) – foreign resident, 1; settlers, 1; sojourner, 8; sojourners, 2; sojourning, 1; tenants, 1; Quote In listening to this stranger, I nearly was deceived! Yes! In what were you nearly decieved. Most everything he says about contradictions….is ridiculous. He doesn't have a grasp of the word. (or the Word.) But I am curious as to how or what he almost decieved you with. david.

Ok I'm calling them serious conflicts now so it will align with your sensibilities . I'll be listing some more Matthew soon.

[Towshab]

This is fro Gene balthrop, moved from the Trinity thread (isn't it already long enough? I bet you wouldn't need 890+ in a Jewish forum to talk about the nature of G-d)

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Nov. 04 2007,22:25)

Quote (Towshab @ Nov. 05 2007,12:20) The Jews have been a persecuted people in all of their history. This chapter is not about them atoning for anyone's sins but suffering because of the sins of others. Yes they have transgressed in their own right but please name for me a nation that ever enslaved, persecuted, or slaughtered Israelites that was a righteous and holy nation. Not a one. They were always allowed to fall under the bondage of wicked people. Towshab…..> The Jew's only make up One thirteenth of the tribes of Israel and while the Jew are a tribe of Israel they are no where near the full House of Israel, God Said they would be as the sands of the sea. The conception that the Jew are complete Israel is wrong they are only a small part of Israel. If you look in 2 Kings you will find the Kingdom of Israel at war with the Kingdom of Judah. They were not even the same Nation as the Jew's were.

You are taking ‘sand’s of the sea’ much too literally. Read this verse

==============================
1Sa 13:5 And the Philistines gathered themselves together to fight with Israel, thirty thousand chariots, and six thousand horsemen, and people as the sand which is on the sea shore in multitude: and they came up, and pitched in Michmash, eastward from Bethaven.
==============================

It is estimated that the Jewish people consist of around 12 million, most in Israel and the United States. There would have been millions more had the holocaust not taken place but that is history. Do you think that there were 12 million people present in 1Sa 13:5?

But technically you are right. Judaism stems from ‘Judah-ism’ and refers to those who come from the kingdom of Judah which includes the tribe of Judah, Benjamin and Levi, as well as some other Israelites who came to settle with these tribes. Still in its common usage people equate Judaism with the children of Jacob.

Quote

And the Kingdom of Israel as well as the Kingdom of Judah were both stricken By God for their own sin, not for the sins of anyone else. It was God who used the other nations to destory there nations and kicked them out of their land Just as it says, it was for their own transgressions of Idolatry and unfaithfullness that brought on their desasters. Didn't God say He would desperse them into all the nations and send a sword after them where ever they would go.

Yes as each man is responsible for his own iniquities so were the nations responsible for their own. Yet G-d never once used a righteous Gentiles nation to subjugate them, it was always another wicked nation. The reason for this is obvious: G-d wanted His children to see that following Him was much better than being a part of the other wicked nations around them.

Quote

I believe you are totally wrong in saying the Jew's are suffering for others, they are suffering for the own sins not others. And not all Nations perscute Jew's the Untied Sates Has and still does support Israel, infact without our aid there proberly wouldn't even be a Jewish Nation. We are their Allies and have been since there Nation started even to now.

Haha, you are right in some sense. But you put too much trust in a nation. G-d always has and always will preserve His people. If the USA did not step up G-d would still provide a way. Yet there are many in the USA who would like to see Israel become no more because they see Israel as the cause of the strife in the Middle East.

Isn’t it odd that when the Israelies pulled out of certain territories and allowed the Palestinians to occupy them that the Palestinians then turned on one another. People need to get their head out of the sand and realize that without Israel the Arabs would still be fighting one another.

I was not around when Israel became a nation again but I’ll guarantee you that the Christian world was in shock when it did. Could they have been wrong for so long? Surely the Jews, the people that murdered Jesus, did not deserve to be a nation again. Yet G-d made a way. Sadly it took the death of millions to do so.

Let me ask you, do you think that the holocaust was the fault of the Jewish people? If you do then you indeed disagree that Is 53:5 is not about Israel. Again, please show me where the Israelites where ever delivered to a righteous people for subjugation and I will accept that the transgressions of the conquering nations did not factor in as well.

Quote

Here is a list of the tribes the Kingbom of Israel 1….> Ephriam 2….> Manasseh 3….> Gad 4….> Ruben 5….> Simeon 6….> Asher 7….> Zebulum 8….> Issachar 9….> Dan 10..> Naphtali the Kingdom of Judah 1….> Judah 2….> Levi 3….> Bengamin All these tribes still exist today, infact many who are on theis very site are decendents of these tribes and don't even know it, but someday will. A time will come when God will gather all of Israel from aroung the world where He scattered them. Shalom………..gene

Careful of that statement.

==============================
Deu 4:23 Take heed unto yourselves, lest ye forget the covenant of the LORD your God {which most do when they become Christians}, which he made with you, and make you a graven image, or the likeness of any thing {including worshiping a man}, which the LORD thy God hath forbidden thee.
Deu 4:24 For the LORD thy God is a consuming fire, even a jealous God.
Deu 4:25 When thou shalt beget children, and children's children, and ye shall have remained long in the land, and shall corrupt yourselves, and make a graven image, or the likeness of any thing, and shall do evil in the sight of the LORD thy God, to provoke him to anger:
Deu 4:26 I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that ye shall soon utterly perish from off the land whereunto ye go over Jordan to possess it; ye shall not prolong your days upon it, but shall utterly be destroyed.
Deu 4:27 And the LORD shall scatter you among the nations, and ye shall be left few in number among the heathen, whither the LORD shall lead you.
Deu 4:28 And there ye shall serve gods, the work of men's hands, wood and stone, which neither see, nor hear, nor eat, nor smell.
Deu 4:29 But if from thence thou shalt seek the LORD thy God, thou shalt find him, if thou seek him with all thy heart and with all thy soul.
Deu 4:30 When thou art in tribulation, and all these things are come upon thee, even in the latter days, if thou turn to the LORD thy God, and shalt be obedient unto his voice;
Deu 4:31 (For the LORD thy God i
s a merciful God;) he will not forsake thee, neither destroy thee, nor forget the covenant of thy fathers which he sware unto them.

Lev 26:33 And I will scatter you among the heathen, and will draw out a sword after you: and your land shall be desolate, and your cities waste.
Lev 26:34 Then shall the land enjoy her sabbaths, as long as it lieth desolate, and ye be in your enemies' land; even then shall the land rest, and enjoy her Sabbaths {can anyone say Sunday?}.

Deu 28:63 And it shall come to pass, that as the LORD rejoiced over you to do you good, and to multiply you; so the LORD will rejoice over you to destroy you, and to bring you to nought; and ye shall be plucked from off the land whither thou goest to possess it.
Deu 28:64 And the LORD shall scatter thee among all people, from the one end of the earth even unto the other; and there thou shalt serve other gods, which neither thou nor thy fathers have known, even wood and stone.
Deu 28:65 And among these nations shalt thou find no ease, neither shall the sole of thy foot have rest: but the LORD shall give thee there a trembling heart, and failing of eyes, and sorrow of mind:

Neh 1:6 Let thine ear now be attentive, and thine eyes open, that thou mayest hear the prayer of thy servant, which I pray before thee now, day and night, for the children of Israel thy servants, and confess the sins of the children of Israel, which we have sinned against thee: both I and my father's house have sinned.
Neh 1:7 We have dealt very corruptly against thee, and have not kept the commandments, nor the statutes, nor the judgments, which thou commandedst thy servant Moses.
Neh 1:8 Remember, I beseech thee, the word that thou commandedst thy servant Moses, saying, If ye transgress, I will scatter you abroad among the nations:
Neh 1:9 But if ye turn unto me, and keep my commandments, and do them; though there were of you cast out unto the uttermost part of the heaven, yet will I gather them from thence, and will bring them unto the place that I have chosen to set my name there.
==============================

There is much more but there is an overwhelming theme here and that is that the children of Israel will not follow the commandments and will turn to other gods. Christianity provides that. Christianity replaces obedience to G-d’s Torah with grace. Most of Christianity makes Jesus out to be G-d when there IS only one G-d of all flesh. So when His children turn to any other religion, even Christianity, all of these things take place.

==============================
Deu 13:1 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,
Deu 13:2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;
Deu 13:3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
Deu 13:4 Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him.
Deu 13:5 And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee.
==============================

Jesus called himself a prophet and he brought signs and wonders. But what many people do not see is that Jesus in most of the gospels did NOT call for people to chase after other gods. The Gospel of John paved the way. In that gospel Jesus became something different than what one sees in the synoptic gospels. He often equates himself with G-d although he does not come out and say so. Yet the message is clear and that is what allowed Christianity to turn Jesus into G-d. Without John this would not have happened. Thus while the real Jesus, if he did indeed exist, was not the person in Deu 13. The church with the aid of the gospel of John turned Jesus into that person warned against in Deu 13.

Even Paul in his writings did not seem to believe that Jesus was divine. It was the Gospel of John.

For instance look at the other gospel accounts of the baptism of Jesus. In all three synoptics G-d spoke from heaven and called Jesus His son. Yet in John this does not happen. Why? Because by the time John was written people were already thinking that Jesus was G-d so that gospel didn’t need G-d speaking from heaven anymore!

Gene even you must admit that without John, there would be no need for hundreds of pages debating the trinity or Jesus’ eternal existence. John’s Jesus is something much different than the Jesus found in the synoptic gospels. He’s almost like a whole different person. Yet it is John that most people will be told to read first when pondering Christianity. Once that filter is set into place its hard to remove.

[Towshab]

Quote (david @ Nov. 06 2007,14:31)

GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST In the first chapter of Matthew we find the genealogy of Jesus running from Abraham forward. At Luke chapter 3 is a genealogy back to “Adam, son of God.” Jesus’ genealogy is the only one given in the Christian Greek Scriptures.

That's because they were trying to connect Jsus with David to 'legitimatize' his claim to the throne. Too bad the virgin birth and Jeconiah got in the way.

Quote

Part of his genealogy appears at 1 Chronicles chapters 1 to 3, running from Adam through Solomon and Zerubbabel. The books of Genesis and Ruth combined give the line from Adam to David. The latter three lists (Genesis/Ruth, 1 Chronicles, and Luke) agree fully from Adam to Arpachshad, with minor differences as to certain names, such as Kenan, which is “Cainan” at Luke 3:37. The Chronicles and Genesis/Ruth lists agree down to David, while another “Cainan” is found in Luke’s account between Arpachshad and Shelah.—Lu 3:35, 36. From Solomon to Zerubbabel,

Son of Shealtiel, son of Jeconiah, cursed bloodline.

Quote

the Chronicles record and Matthew agree in the main, Matthew omitting some names. These differences and differences in Luke’s account from David to Jesus will be discussed later. Besides many private family records, the Jews kept public records of genealogies and that the chroniclers, such as Ezra, had access to these when compiling their lists; also, that the public registers existed in the first century evidently up until 70 C.E.

And beyond. The genealogies were not stored in the Temple.

Quote

The matter of the descent of the Messiah from Abraham, and through David, was of prime importance to them. So we can be confident that both Matthew and Luke consulted these genealogical tables. Reliability of the Gospel Genealogies. The question arises: Why does Matthew leave out some names that are contained in the listings of the other chroniclers?

Because he was hung up on the symbology of the number 14 which was supposed to equate to royalty.

Quote

First of all, to prove one’s genealogy it was not necessary to name every link in the line of descent. For example, Ezra, in proving his priestly lineage, at Ezra 7:1-5, omitted several names contained in the listing of the priestly line at 1 Chronicles 6:1-15. Obviously it was not essential to name all these ancestors to satisfy the Jews as to his priestly lineage.

One cannot be a priest and a king. Kings are to be through David priests through Levi. This is only passed maternally. You cannot be a priest and a king.

Quote

Similarly with Matthew: He doubtless used the public register and copied from it, if not every name, the ones necessary to prove the descent of Jesus from Abraham and David. He also had access to the Hebrew Scriptures, which he could consult alongside the official public records.—Compare Ru 4:12, 18-22 and Mt 1:3-6.

Too bad he didn't catch the fact that the bloodline of Jeconiah was cursed. He needed e-sword or biblegateway.

Quote

The lists made by both Matthew and Luke were comprised of names publicly recognized by the Jews of that time as authentic.

If you say so. There is no proof that the names after the Jewish bible were not made up.

Quote

The scribes and Pharisees as well as the Sadducees were bitter enemies of Christianity, and they would have used any possible argument to discredit Jesus, but it is noteworthy that they never challenged these genealogies.

Your assumption is that they ever even knew or saw them. Since Jesus was not recorded outside of the Christian bible this assumption is very far-fetched.

Quote

If either Matthew’s or Luke’s genealogy of Jesus had been in error, what an opportunity it would have been for these opponents to prove it then and there! For until 70 C.E. they evidently had ready access to the public genealogical registers and the Scriptures.

Most scholars agree that the earliest date for the gospels was 70 AD. So much for that theory.

Quote

The same is true regarding the first-century pagan enemies of Christianity, many of whom were, like those Jews, learned men who would readily have pointed to any evidence that these lists of Matthew and Luke were unauthentic and contradictory. But there is no record that the early pagan enemies attacked Christians on this point.

There is no record of anything outside of what the church preserved. What a bogus assumption.

Quote

Also, both Matthew and Luke achieved their objective, and that was all they needed to do. To prove that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David, it was not necessary to make a new genealogy. All they had to do was copy from the public tables that the nation fully accepted regarding the lineage of David and of the priesthood and all other matters requiring proof of one’s descent. (See Lu 1:5; 2:3-5; Ro 11:1.) Even if there was an omission in these tables, it did not detract from what these Gospel writers intended and indeed accomplished, namely, presenting legally and publicly recognized proof of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah. Problems in Matthew’s Genealogy of Jesus. Matthew divides the genealogy from Abraham to Jesus into three sections of 14 generations each. (Mt 1:17) This division may have been made as a memory aid.

Nah it was symbologic of royalty. 'Cept he forgot one and only listed 13 in his last set. Doh!

Quote

However, in counting the names we find that they total 41, rather than 42. One suggestion as to how they may be counted is as follows: By taking Abraham to David, 14 names, then using David as the starting name for the second 14, with Josiah as the last; finally, by heading the third series of 14 names with Jeconiah (Jehoiachin) and ending with Jesus. Notice that Matthew repeats the name David as the last of the first 14 names and as the first of the next 14. Then he repeats the expression “the deportation to Babylon,” which he links with Josiah and his sons.—Mt 1:17.

More apologetics to deal with Matthew's goofs.

Quote

As stated earlier, Matthew may have copied his list exactly from the public register that he used, or he may have purposely left out some links with a view to aiding memory. However, a suggestion as to the omission here of three kings of David’s line between Jehoram and Uzziah (Azariah) is that Jehoram married wicked Athaliah of the house of Ahab, the daughter of Jezebel, thereby bringing this God-condemned strain into the line of the kings of Judah. (1Ki 21:20-26; 2Ki 8:25-27) Naming Jehoram as first in the wicked alliance, Matthew omits the names of the next three kings to the fourth generation, Ahaziah, Jehoash, and Amaziah, the fruits of the alliance.—Compare Mt 1:8 with 1Ch 3:10-12. Matthew indicates that Zerubbabel is the son of Shealtiel (Mt 1:12), and this coincides with other references. (Ezr 3:2; Ne 12:1; Hag 1:14; Lu 3:27) However, at 1 Chronicles 3:19 Zerubbabel is referred to as the son of Pedaiah. Evidently Zerubbabel was the natural son of Pedaiah and the legal son of Shealtiel by reason of brother-in-law marriage; or possibly, after Zerubbabel’s father Pedaiah died, Zerubbabel was brought up by Shealtiel as his son and therefore became legally recognized as the son of Shealtiel.

Ah well, still the bloodline of the curse king Jeconiah.

Quote

A Problem in Luke’s Genealogy of Jesus. Available manuscript copies of Luke list a second “Cainan,” between Arpachshad (Arphaxad) and Shelah. (Lu 3:35, 36; compare Ge 10:24; 11:12; 1Ch 1:18, 24.) Most scholars take this to be a copyist’s error. In the Hebrew Scriptures, “Cainan” is not found in this relative position in the genealogical listings in the Hebrew or the Samaritan texts, nor is it in any of the Targums or versions except the Greek Septuagint. And it does not seem that it was even in the earlier copies of the Septuagint, because Josephus, who usually follows the Septuagint, lists Seles (Shelah) next as the son of Arphaxades (Arpachshad). (Jewish Antiquities, I, 146 [vi, 4]) Early writers Irenaeus, Africanus, Eusebius, and Jerome rejected the second “Cainan” in copies of Luke’s account as an interpolation. [[One listed in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus Christ as the son of Arpachshad. (Lu 3:36) The name Cainan appears in genealogical lists in present copies of the Greek Septuagint, such as the Alexandrine Manuscript of the fifth century C.E. (Ge 10:24; 11:12, 13; 1Ch 1:18 but not 1Ch 1:24), although it is not found in extant Hebrew manuscripts of the Hebrew Scriptures. The name Cainan is also missing at Luke 3:36 in two Bible manuscripts (Papyrus Bodmer 14, 15, of c. 200 C.E.; Bezae Codices, of the fifth and sixth centuries C.E.). This omission is in harmony with the Masoretic text at Genesis 10:24; 11:12, 15; and 1 Chronicles 1:18, according to which Shelah, not Cainan, is the son of Arpachshad.]] Why do the genealogies of Jesus Christ as given by Matthew and by Luke differ? The difference in nearly all the names in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus as compared with Matthew’s is quickly resolved in the fact that Luke traced the line through David’s son Nathan, instead of Solomon as did Matthew. (Lu 3:31; Mt 1:6, 7) Luke evidently follows the ancestry of Mary,

Evidently? Why not vice-versa? Why can't Matthew's be through Mary and Luke's be through Joseph? Well both say Joseph so its really evident that Matthew and Luke didn't have email or a cell phone to make sure they could get together and not conflict.

Quote

thus showing Jesus’ natural descent from David, while Matthew shows Jesus’ legal right to the throne of David by descent from Solomon through Joseph, who was legally Jesus’ father.

What part of 'seed' escapes you? Adoption passes no 'seed'. Oh well.

Quote

Both Matthew and Luke signify that Joseph was not Jesus’ actual father but only his adoptive father, giving him legal right.

This ain't Judge Judy. Adoptive rights do not count for being a successor to David and Solomon. If that was the case I could be messiah if I found the right person to 'adopt' me.

Quote

Matthew departs from the style used throughout his genealogy when he comes to Jesus, saying: “Jacob became father to Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.” (Mt 1:16) Notice that he does not say ‘Joseph became father to Jesus’ but that he was “the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born.” Luke is even more pointed when, after showing earlier that Jesus was actually the Son of God by Mary (Lu 1:32-35), he says: “Jesus . . . being the son, as the opinion was, of Joseph, son of Heli.”—Lu 3:23. Since Jesus was not the natural son of Joseph but was the Son of God, Luke’s genealogy of Jesus would prove that he was, by human birth, a son of David through his natural mother Mary.

Too bad that paternal lineage is the only way to be a legitimate successor to the throne of David.

Quote

Regarding the genealogies of Jesus given by Matthew and by Luke, Frederic Louis Godet wrote: “This study of the text in detail leads us in this way to admit—1. That the genealogical register of Luke is that of Heli, the grandfather of Jesus; 2. That, this affiliation of Jesus by Heli being expressly opposed to His affiliation by Joseph, the document which he has preserved for us can be nothing else in his view than the genealogy of Jesus through Mary. But why does not Luke name Mary, and why pass immediately from Jesus to His grandfather? Ancient sentiment did not comport with the mention of the mother as the genealogical link. Among the Greeks a man was the son of his father, not of his mother; and among the Jews the adage was: ‘Genus matris non vocatur genus [“The descendant of the mother is not called (her) descendant”]’ (‘Baba bathra,’ 110, a).”—Commentary on Luke, 1981, p. 129. Actually each genealogy (Matthew’s table and Luke’s) shows descent from David, through Solomon and through Nathan.

A son of Nathan cannot be king. Since Jesus was an 'adoptive' son of Solomon he cannot be king either because he was not of the 'seed' of David. Dead end. Really this virgin birth is more of a hindrance than a benefit.

Quote

(Mt 1:6; Lu 3:31) In examining the lists of Matthew and Luke, we find that after diverging at Solomon and Nathan, they come together again in two persons, Shealtiel and Zerubbabel. This can be explained in the following way: Shealtiel was the son of Jeconiah; perhaps by marriage to the daughter of Neri he became Neri’s son-in-law, thus being called the “son of Neri.” It is possible as well that Neri had no sons, so that Shealtiel was counted as his “son” for that reason also. Zerubbabel, who was likely the actual son of Pedaiah, was legally reckoned as the son of Shealtiel, as stated earlier.—Compare Mt 1:12; Lu 3:27; 1Ch 3:17-19.

So they both pass through the curse bloodline of Jeconiah. Sweet.

Quote

Then the accounts indicate that Zerubbabel had two sons, Rhesa and Abiud, the lines diverging again at this point. (These could have been, not actual sons, but descendants, or one, at least, could have been a son-in-law. Compare 1Ch 3:19.) (Lu 3:27; Mt 1:13) Both Matthew’s and Luke’s genealogies of Jesus vary here from that found in 1 Chronicles chapter 3. This may be because a number of names were purposely left out by Matthew and possibly also by Luke. But the fact should be kept in mind that such differences in the genealogical lists of Matthew and Luke are very likely those already present in the genealogical registers then in use and fully accepted by the Jews and were not changes made by Matthew and Luke. We may conclude, therefore, that the two lists of Matthew and Luke fuse together the two truths, namely, (1) that Jesus was actually the Son of God and the natural heir to the Kingdom by miraculous birth through the virgin girl Mary, of David’s line

Not.

Quote

, and (2) that Jesus was also the legal heir in the male line of descent from David and Solomon through his adoptive father Joseph. (Lu 1:32, 35; Ro 1:1-4) If there was any accusation made by hostile Jews that Jesus’ birth was illegitimate, the fact that Joseph, aware of the circumstances, married Mary and gave her the protection of his good name and royal lineage refutes such slander.

Mamzer. That's the word of the day.

[Towshab]

Quote (david @ Nov. 06 2007,14:39)

Towshab, I'm curious, just to know what you make of the serpent that deceived Eve. Of course you know what I believe regarding this. But being that you don't believe Satan is a personal being (but rather that word (opposer/resister) simply meant different ones) I'm wondering how you understand the Genesis account. david

My answer is this scripture

2Ch 18:18 Again he said, Therefore hear the word of the LORD; I saw the LORD sitting upon his throne, and all the host of heaven standing on his right hand and on his left.
2Ch 18:19 And the LORD said, Who shall entice Ahab king of Israel, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? And one spake saying after this manner, and another saying after that manner.
2Ch 18:20 Then there came out a spirit, and stood before the LORD, and said, I will entice him. And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith?
2Ch 18:21 And he said, I will go out, and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And the LORD said, Thou shalt entice him, and thou shalt also prevail: go out, and do even so.
2Ch 18:22 Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil against thee.

[Towshab]

Quote (david @ Nov. 06 2007,15:00)

The historical evidence found in the Gospels demonstrates that Jesus was indeed the Messiah. Persons in the first century, who were in position to question the witnesses and examine the evidence, accepted the historical information as authentic. [[For example, on the matter of geneology, as was stated above: The lists made by both Matthew and Luke were comprised of names publicly recognized by the Jews of that time as authentic. The scribes and Pharisees as well as the Sadducees were bitter enemies of Christianity, and they would have used any possible argument to discredit Jesus, but it is noteworthy that they never challenged these genealogies.

Almost as noteworthy as Jesus not carrying the list of genealogies around and showing the Pharisees to say 'see. my lineage says I can be the messiah'. Since the gospels were written after 70 AD this is a bogus assumption.

Quote

If either Matthew’s or Luke’s genealogy of Jesus had been in error, what an opportunity it would have been for these opponents to prove it then and there! For until 70 C.E. they evidently had ready access to the public genealogical registers and the Scriptures. The same is true regarding the first-century pagan enemies of Christianity, many of whom were, like those Jews, learned men who would readily have pointed to any evidence that these lists of Matthew and Luke were unauthentic and contradictory. But there is no record that the early pagan enemies attacked Christians on this point.]]

Maybe Christianity was so small and insignificant in the 1st century that no one really cared? They likely thought it would fizzle and die. Besides they had their hands full fighting the Romans.

Quote

The historical Gospel records show that various individuals openly acknowledged that Jesus was the Christ, or Messiah. (Mt 16:16; Joh 1:41, 45, 49; 11:27) Jesus did not say they were incorrect, and on occasion he admitted being the Christ. (Mt 16:17; Joh 4:25, 26)

All neat and tidy but found absolutely no where EXCEPT the Christian bible.

Quote

Since Jesus was present where people could hear him and see his works, he wanted them to believe on the solid basis of this evidence, so that their faith would be founded on their own eyewitness view of the fulfillment of the Hebrew Scriptures. (Joh 5:36; 10:24, 25; compare Joh 4:41, 42.) Now the Gospel record of what Jesus was and did has been provided along with the Hebrew Scriptures, which supplied abundant information about what he would do, so that individuals may know and believe that Jesus is indeed the Messiah.—Joh 20:31

Actually he matches much more closely with Deu 13. read it (and weep).

Quote

Ge 49:10 Born of the tribe Mt 1:2-16; Lu 3:23-33; Heb 7:14 of Judah

Nah, virgin birth nullifies this.

Quote

Ps 132:11; From the family of Mt 1:1, 6-16; 9:27; Ac 13:22, 23; Isa 9:7; David the son of Ro 1:3; 15:8, 12 11:1, Jesse 11:10 Mic 5:2 Born in Bethlehem Lu 2:4-11; Joh 7:42 Isa 7:14 Born of a virgin Mt 1:18-23; Lu 1:30-35 Jer 31:15 Babes killed after Mt 2:16-18 his birth Ho 11:1 Called out of Mt 2:15 Egypt Mal 3:1; Way prepared Mt 3:1-3; 11:10-14; 4:5; before 17:10-13; Lu 1:17, 76; Isa 40:3 3:3-6; 7:27; Joh 1:20-23; 3:25-28; Ac 13:24; 19:4 Isa 61:1, 2 Commissioned Lu 4:18-21 Isa 9:1, 2 Ministry caused Mt 4:13-16 people in Naphtali and Zebulun to see great light Ps 78:2 Spoke with Mt 13:11-13, 31-35 illustrations Isa 53:4 Carried our Mt 8:16, 17 sicknesses Ps 69:9 Zealous for Mt 21:12, 13; Joh 2:13-17 Jehovah’s house Isa 42:1-4 As Jehovah’s Mt 12:14-21 servant, would not wrangle in streets Isa 53:1 Not believed in Joh 12:37, 38; Ro 10:11, 16 Zec 9:9; Entry into Mt 21:1-9; Mr 11:7-11; Ps 118:26 Jerusalem on colt Lu 19:28-38; of an ass; hailed Joh 12:12-15 as king and one coming in Jehovah’s name Isa 28:16; Rejected but Mt 21:42, 45, 46; Ac 3:14; 53:3; becomes chief 4:11; 1Pe 2:7 Ps 69:8; cornerstone 118:22, 23 Isa 8:14, 15 Becomes stone of Lu 20:17, 18; Ro 9:31-33 stumbling Ps 41:9; One apostle Mt 26:47-50; Joh 13:18, 26-30; 109:8 unfaithful, betrays Ac 1:16-20 him Zec 11:12 Betrayed for 30 Mt 26:15; 27:3-10; Mr 14:10, 11 pieces of silver Zec 13:7 Disciples scatter Mt 26:31, 56; Joh 16:32 Ps 2:1, 2 Roman powers and Mt 27:1, 2; Mr 15:1, 15; leaders of Israel Lu 23:10-12; Ac 4:25-28 act together against anointed of Jehovah Isa 53:8 Tried and condemned Mt 26:57-68; 27:1, 2, 11-26; Joh 18:12-14, 19-24, 28-40; 19:1-16 Ps 27:12 Use of false Mt 26:59-61; Mr 14:56-59 witnesses Isa 53:7 Silent before Mt 27:12-14; Mr 14:61; accusers 15:4, 5; Lu 23:9 Ps 69:4 Hated without cause Lu 23:13-25; Joh 15:24, 25 Isa 50:6; Struck, spit on Mt 26:67; 27:26, 30; Joh 19:3 Mic 5:1 Ps 22:16, ftn Impaled Mt 27:35; Mr 15:24, 25; Lu 23:33; Joh 19:18, 23; 20:25, 27 Ps 22:18 Lots cast for Mt 27:35; Joh 19:23, 24 garments Isa 53:12 Numbered with Mt 26:55, 56; 27:38; sinners Lu 22:37 Ps 22:7, 8 Reviled while on Mt 27:39-43; Mr 15:29-32 stake Ps 69:21 Given vinegar and Mt 27:34, 48; Mr 15:23, 36 gall Ps 22:1 Forsaken by God to Mt 27:46; Mr 15:34 enemies Ps 34:20; No bones broken Joh 19:33, 36 Ex 12:46 Isa 53:5; Pierced Mt 27:49; Joh 19:34, 37; Zec 12:10 Re 1:7 Isa 53:5, Dies sacrificial Mt 20:28; Joh 1:29; 8, death to carry away Ro 3:24; 4:25; 1Co 15:3; 11, sins and open way Heb 9:12-15; 1Pe 2:24; 12 to righteous 1Jo 2:2 standing with God Isa 53:9 Buried with the Mt 27:57-60; Joh 19:38-42 rich Jon 1:17; In grave parts of Mt 12:39, 40; 16:21; 17:23; 2:10 three days, then 27:64; 28:1-7; Ac 10:40; resurrected 1Co 15:3-8 Ps 16:8-11, ftn Raised before Ac 2:25-31; 13:34-37 corruption Ps 2:7 Jehovah declares Mt 3:16, 17; Mr 1:9-11; him His Son by Lu 3:21, 22; Ac 13:33; spirit begetting Ro 1:4; Heb 1:5; 5:5 and by resurrection I know these probably didn't line up. But these prophecies are really what it's all about. “messiah the leader” was prophesied to come. Prophecies were given explaining what he would do, where he would arrive, the time of his arrival, etc. Towshab, before you've said that all these are taken out of context. Well, we might as well discuss them.

I already have, twice. I don't have time to do it a third time. Go back and read my responses to the other 'cut-n-pasters', morningstar and Kenreich.

[Towshab]

Quote (IM4Truth @ Nov. 06 2007,17:06)

One thing that is for sure, though, God is not done with the Jewish People. God has always called them His People. In the Book of Romans it explains it, that they will be drafted in again. When, in the Millenium. We had gone through a Bible study on Romans with a study group and if you ever find an opportunity to do so, it is quit interesting. Try Google or Heaven Net, maybe they have something on that. How much time do you have to study the Bible, since you go to School? Peace and Love Mrs.

Seriously the Jews don't want to share the same tree with Christians.

Mat 7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

[Towshab]

Quote (david @ Nov. 06 2007,15:10)

Towshab also often makes the argument that this is all fantasy, that it's all made up, the gospels. It's a made up story, of events that just didn't happen. Back then, as today, the Messiah is a big deal.

Only among Christians. But even that is fading. Jesus' promise of 'coming quickly' is starting to look like a sham.

Quote

If someone today [Fred] said they were the messiah and their friends wrote a story about it, how would that go. Well, that story would have details that could either be verified or not verified by other witnesses. People would say: You were never there. I was there on that day. (Unless this Fred guy decides to make his story take place where there are no other humans, in the wilderness).

When the real end times Moshiach comes the whole world will know.

Quote

We don't know of people claiming that Jesus was simply a made up person or that he wasn't born where he claimed or that he wasn't born when it claimed, etc. Jesus had great opponents, who would have done anything to discredit him. If they could not discredit him, get rid of him. They could not discredit him them. It would have been fantastically easy. About as easy as it is today to discredit anyone claiming to be the Messiah.

That post was odd. I'll admit i could make little sense of it.

[Towshab]

Quote (david @ Nov. 06 2007,15:25)

The Bible writer Matthew wrote: “And Jesus, on coming into Peter’s house, saw his mother-in-law lying down and sick with fever.” (Matthew 8:14) Matthew here provided an interesting but nonessential detail: Peter was married. This minor fact is supported by Paul, who wrote: “Have I no right to take a Christian wife about with me, like the rest of the apostles and . . . Cephas?” (1 Corinthians 9:5, The New English Bible) The context indicates that Paul was defending himself against unwarranted criticism. (1 Corinthians 9:1-4) Plainly, this small fact—Peter’s being married—is not introduced by Paul to support the accuracy of Matthew’s account but is conveyed incidentally. All four of the Gospel writers—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John—record that on the night of Jesus’ arrest, one of his disciples drew a sword and struck a slave of the high priest, taking off the man’s ear.

Well whaddya know, we finally see a point they all agree on.

Quote

Only the Gospel of John reports a seemingly unnecessary detail: “The name of the slave was Malchus.” (John 18:10, 26) Why does John alone give the man’s name? A few verses later the account provides a minor fact not stated anywhere else: John “was known to the high priest.” He was also known to the high priest’s household; the servants were acquainted with him, and he with them. (John 18:15, 16) It was only natural, then, that John mention the injured man’s name, whereas the other Gospel writers, to whom the man was a stranger, do not. At times, detailed explanations are omitted from one account but are provided elsewhere by statements made in passing. For instance, Matthew’s account of the trial of Jesus before the Jewish Sanhedrin says that some people present “slapped him in the face, saying: ‘Prophesy to us, you Christ. Who is it that struck you?’” (Matthew 26:67, 68) Why would they ask Jesus to “prophesy” who had struck him, when the striker was standing there in front of him? Matthew does not explain. But two of the other Gospel writers supply the missing detail: Jesus’ persecutors covered his face before he was slapped. (Mark 14:65; Luke 22:64) Matthew presents his material without concern as to whether every last detail was supplied. The Gospel of John tells of an occasion when a large crowd gathered to hear Jesus teach. According to the record, when Jesus observed the crowd, , “he said to Philip: ‘Where shall we buy loaves for these to eat?’” (John 6:5) Of all the disciples present, why did Jesus ask Philip where they could buy some bread? The writer does not say. In the parallel account, though, Luke reports that the incident took place near Bethsaida, a city on the north shores of the Sea of Galilee, and earlier in John’s Gospel it says that that “Philip was from Bethsaida.” (John 1:44; Luke 9:10) So Jesus logically asked a person whose hometown was nearby. The agreement between the details is remarkable, yet clearly unwitting.

Was there a real point to this? What you have presented is so minor I would have never seen it in the first place. I expect minor differences.

[Towshab]

Quote (david @ Nov. 06 2007,16:23)

The Encyclopaedia Judaica says: “The Jews of the Roman period believed [the Messiah] would be raised up by God to break the yoke of the heathen and to reign over a restored kingdom of Israel.” (Jerusalem, 1971, Vol. 11, col. 1407) They wanted liberation from the yoke of Rome. Jewish history testifies that on the basis of the Messianic prophecy recorded at Daniel 9:24-27 there were Jews who expected the Messiah during the first century C.E. (Luke 3:15) But that prophecy also connected his coming with ‘making an end of sin,’ and Isaiah chapter 53 indicated that Messiah himself would die in order to make this possible. However, the Jews in general felt no need for anyone to die for their sins. They believed that they had a righteous standing with God on the basis of their descent from Abraham. Says A Rabbinic Anthology, “So great is the [merit] of Abraham that he can atone for all the vanities committed and lies uttered by Israel in this world.” (London, 1938, C. Montefiore and H. Loewe, p. 676) By their rejection of Jesus as Messiah, the Jews fulfilled the prophecy that had foretold regarding him: “He was despised, and we esteemed him not.”—Isaiah 53:3, JP.

Interesting how there are brackets around 'the Messiah'. Gee, wonder what THAT means? Daniel 9 does not speak of THE messiah but tow anointed ones. The Jews under Roman authority were looking for anyone to deliver them. There were many other false messiahs after Jesus.

Quote

Before his death, Moses foretold that the nation would turn aside from true worship and that, as a result, calamity would befall them. DEUTERONOMY 31:27-29 “For I—I well know your rebelliousness and your stiff neck. If while I am yet alive with YOU today, YOU have proved rebellious in behavior toward Jehovah, then how much more so after my death! Congregate to me all the older men of YOUR tribes and YOUR officers, and let me speak in their hearing these words, and let me take the heavens and the earth as witnesses against them. For I well know that after my death YOU will without fail act ruinously, and YOU will certainly turn aside from the way about which I have commanded YOU; and calamity will be bound to befall YOU at the close of the days, because YOU will do what is bad in the eyes of Jehovah so as to offend him by the works of YOUR hands.””

Like that didn't happen many times in Jewish history. Could you please be a bit more ambiguous next time?

Quote

They had made a covenant with Jehovah. A covenant is an agreement. The terms of the Law covenant were that if the Israelites kept the covenant they would be a people for the name of Jehovah, a kingdom of priests and a holy nation, with His blessing (Ex 19:5, 6; De 28:1-14) The book of Judges testifies that they repeatedly turned away from false worship. In the days of the prophet Jeremiah, national unfaithfulness led to the nation’s being taken into exile in Babylon. Why did God also allow the Romans to destroy Jerusalem and its temple in 70 C.E.? Of what unfaithfulness had the nation been guilty so that God did not protect them as he had done when they had put their trust in him? It was shortly before this that they had rejected Jesus as the Messiah.

Shortly by 40 years. Jesus was just a short blip on the radar. Someone turned their head or blinked an he was never even noticed. But Paul the Apostate heard about him and thought 'hey, its time to start a new religion called Judaism Lite: 0 Commandments, less filling.'

[charity]

Quote (Towshab @ Nov. 07 2007,15:29)

It was shortly before this that they had rejected Jesus as the Messiah.

Shortly by 40 years. Jesus was just a short blip on the radar. Someone turned their head or blinked an he was never even noticed. But Paul the Apostate heard about him and thought 'hey, its time to start a new religion called Judaism Lite: 0 Commandments, less filling.'[/quote]
Wow

So Paul Is responsible for a generation recall….. BC (BEFORE CHRIST) and the numbering of Days, new age, to begin from day ONE again, all to his honor

Lets see if we can Name the next Age HP..AFTER, Harry potter

No really I think you have points…..AN wishing it was an Attempt to unit Judah and Israel, in obedience, give way,
There is one answer that can change and fit all together, that is the resurrection of the dead, First born of the dead, from the grave of the womb, to a second death, No heritage.

Thanks…Praise God In everything,Christ is not an a sin escape goat, but the first born of the new creation, even as we are.

[Not3in1]

Quote (charity @ Nov. 07 2007,21:50)

its time to start a new religion called Judaism Lite: 0 Commandments, less filling.'

[Not3in1]

David,

What makes anyone fall away from the faith? [Lack of] faith.

What causes lack of faith? Doubt, deception, a thing called worldly wisdom, and pride. These favorite tools of the enemy are quite handy for getting the job done in people who are weak in body and/or in spirit (lately I am counted among these).

[IM4Truth]

Mandy Do not put yourself down and Satan will get the upper hand. God loves you and so do we on this website.
Did you get your Test Results back? Is that why you feel weak right now? No matter what Jesus and our Heavenly Father will always be with you.

Peace and Love Irene

[Not3in1]

Hi sis Irene,

Thank you for the encouragement! Yes, I did get some results back, but like so many of the results that I have received lately, the “results” only require MORE testing (ugh). And I am tired. Lately I have been pondering the fact that there are so many religions and so many different beliefs within the same house. I'm beginning to question why God didn't make things more clear? Still, I love him and serve him. But I wonder….

[Author]

Posts