All I heard you say is that you disagree that Luke's genealogy goes through the line of Mary. All you have said is that they both contradict each other and yet you fail to provide any evidence for that. You just merely disagree and choose not to believe the evidence presented before you. What you are essentially saying is that: The wiki article of the Genealogy of Jesus, the GotQuestions page explaining why Matthew and Luke's versions are different, the cgg site which mentions the inheritance in Numbers 27, these pictures http://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=73889562&f=119&p=531333715 as well as all of the other pictures on Google images visualizing the genealogy are incorrect. All you say in reply is that you do not believe any of that.

I can point you to so many websites which will basically say the same thing about the genealogy and explain the inheritance. I heard the exact same message as you. When I applied critical thinking and logical thinking then it all made sense. I don't see why it doesn't make any sense to you. How will we be able to move onto Matthew 2 if we cannot get past Matthew 1?

I have read these sites too and they are lying, clearly lying and being clearly biased because they are in love with their Jesus. If you look at the genealogy in Matthew it is clearly referring to Joseph and if you read Luke 3 it is also referring to Joseph. Mary's name is not even mentioned. Yet how can you claim that Luke's genealogy is about Mary? I have provided lots and lots of evidence but you will not accept it. Christians will never accept anything that goes against their doctrines. Every criticism, no matter how legitimate, is from the devil in an attempt to overthrow the true religion. With the help of intellectual acrobatics, you can undo a lot of contradictions in your head at least, because in reality they are still there. I don't think you are even being aware of the ridiculous non-sense that you are posting as an explanation; go back in time a little bit and look at the explanation for the genealogy and you must be able to see that it is insufficient. You would never use such a fickle standard for any other book, yet you let New Testament escape what should be normal scrutiny.

Many apologetics, William Lane Craig for example, admits that the New Testament contains errors and contradictions. Many modern apologetics do so, and you can still believe in your Jesus, sacrifice your life for him if you want to, I do not really care. But when you come up to my face with that offensive attitude of yours and claim that "OOOHH Jesus is CLEARLY the Messiah" and claim there is biblical evidence for that, then I must you put you in place. There are no evidence for Christianity; and the gospel writers said that FAITH was required (in contrast to the "You shall know that I am the LORD" in the Old Testament) - now it was all about faith, faith, and again faith. So I suggest that you admit to yourself that you have faith and nothing else; you can prove anything, you have no evidence, indeed you have a thousand evidence speaking against you, and then do not allow yourself to sink and become intellectually dishonest, because it will not work, and it will not work on Jews - they are brought up under the LORD's care and close watch and they can see the heathenish rubbish when you show it to them.

Edit:

Man how many times don't you think I've read that now? I get your point; I understand what you're saying, but it's false. The fact that you must link to sites which use extrabiblical models for their explanation (because they cannot possibly explain this error biblically with bible verses) means something. They even draw assumptions which they cannot possibly prove, they assume this and that yet there are no facts about it in the Bible, nor in the New Testament. That are just assumptions and yet they fail miserably because Luke 3 and Matthew is clearly talking about Joseph. Mary's name is not even mentioned oh my what can't you understand? Shall I have to post the Bible chapters in order for you to see clearly? Can't you read yourself? Why do you have to post some complicated explanation by some "scholar" on an issue that ought to be childish simple? Where in the Luke 3 chapter do you find any references to Mary? There are none. neither are there in Matthew 1.

You see my claims about New Testament is this:

1. Jews wanted to assimilate into the Roman Empire and become more acceptable (this is a classic and many Jewish movements wanted to assimilate into Germany during the Nazi Era as well) hence the lack of strong criticism and judgment on what was probably the most wicked, idolatrous, perverse and cruel empire in the history of mankind.
2. The Jewish gospel writers were influenced by pagan thinking and these ideas crept into the Bible (the trinity, the virgin birth, prophecy by stars, hell and heaven, devil and demons etc., there is even a dose of fascism in the NT - that claims that fear and weakness is a sin, something that was never seen as such in the OT).
3. The Jewish gospel writers had, at least a few of them, a poor understanding of Hebrew (Matthew in particular), hence his misunderstanding of a lot of prophecies and chapters in the Old Testament. Yet-
4. in their eagerness to reform Judaism and create a new religion they enthusiastically threw in too much material from the Old, and mistakenly attributes the term prophecy to what was not prophecies etc. In other words, the New Testament is packed page up and page down with so called "prophecies" from the Old Testament that are not real prophecies, and this they did because they did not have a thorough understanding of hebrew. And they mistakenly thought that the Bible was somehow a mysterious religious book that was not be read simply and directly, but with mystery-glasses on, and they sought for clues here and there and overall had a very mystical approach to the Torah. This is not how the Bible is supposed to be read. There are seldom double meanings and hidden hints in the Old Testament; what the reader needs to know he will doubtless get to know, unless he reads it the way it should not be read.
5. There is a strong antisemitic undertone in the gospels. The Jews are again and again depicted as really unlikable people. There is no wonder that Christianity has shed more Jewish blood than anything else; Jewish heads been chopped off in the name of Jesus, Jews have been burned at the stake because of refusal to confess Jesus as their Messiah. I see the hand of God in all of this, because the Jewish religion is alive, the Jewish people has been kept separate and survived the long exile that was prophecied. The Jewish people are doubtless where God want them to be - in Israel, and Jeremiah 31 is becoming more and more real for every year. All this magic you don't see, because you don't believe in the true religion, you believe in a mystified, pagan-polluted, spiritual-maschostic form of Judaism called Christianity.

This post was edited by Tjo on Sep 20 2018 06:15am

….

This post was edited by Tjo on Sep 20 2018 06:15am

I agree the bible is an imperfect literal guide. It is a perfect emotional guide on how to live. There is also quite a bit lost in translations of the bible too.

When did Christianity persecute jews?

Jews were persecuted since the time of Christ I would say but it was in the middle ages that it was the worst. Since Christians blamed the Jews for the death of Christ you can see where the antisemitism comes from.
The Christian theology, and the Pauline theology in particular, seem to undo the promise made to Abraham and to his seed. Jews believe that this covenant will stand forever, and it is an unconditional covenant; blessings for obedience, cursings for disobedience. But here the Christian writers used a wide arsenal of theology, philosophy, and lies to claim that the Jews were somehow rejected, and that the Christians, not the Jewish nation, were the "seed of Abraham". Yet when reading the Old Testament and then studying the Jewish history I can clearly see how Moses and the prophets so clearly, into detail, predicted the future of the Jewish nation. I believe that in the future the Jewish nation will be glorified, and the whole world will begin to worship the one true God in the correct way. Right now this is unfolding as we speak; but the blessings that would come with complete obedience is not yet here; Israel is not glorified, is not safe, is hated and despised still in large parts of the world. In the future this will change I believe.




There is doubtless a little lost in translation and many modern versions do not do justice to the Old Testament at least, but usually it is about minor details and the essential parts are correctly translated. I believe this to be the case with New Testament too. Christianity is more of a complex, philosophical system than Torah-Judaism (I am not a fan of Talmud or Kabbalah, I see the Torah and the prophets as my guide) hence there are many theological doctrines in the Christian world, and they all have pretty good arguments. The King James Version is pretty reliable but even this one is in error in many places.

The Bible also is, as I see it, an instrument, but the relationship between God and man is not based solely on this book. God's word is nigh to each and everyone of us. His ways are peace. Take for example the commandment "Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself" - fulfilling this commandment will bring so much blessings to your life that it is insane. It is good to meditate on these commandments because they bring in energy in the soul and life to the body. One can understand the ways of God by seeking peace, true, genuine peace. Conflict and misery comes from serving oneself. This also is so important to understand because life is supposed to be happy; according to the Old Testament one of the promises was happiness and health for obedience. Christians seem to think that misery and despair is the legitimate fruit of a godly life. This is false I believe.

I got my season pass for heaven

9.95 plus tax

There you have it "they are lying and being clearly biased." The Jews make a big deal about genealogies, they always reference the men as well. Do you honestly think that the Jews would make such a huge blunder when referencing the genealogy of Jesus? Yes, they both mention Joseph but have studied the Levirate marriage part? The only evidence you have provided is your opinion and nothing more. I do appreciate how the devil is working through you to attempt to overthrow the true religion. Yet it is all for naught. When you go to investigate then you will find a satisfactory answer. When I look back at the explanation about the genealogy then I see how it makes perfect sense and sufficient.

I have never heard of William Lane Craig so he mustn't be very famous. There is so much evidence for Christianity and that Jesus is clearly the Messiah. Let's look at what The Bible has to say.

Let's look at John 14:6

Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Here Jesus is claiming that he is the ONLY way to the Father. That means that all the works you do for salvation means absolutely nothing. It makes so much sense that we humans cannot save ourselves and that God is the one who does the saving. You also undermine how powerful faith really is. Do you honestly think that if I were not utterly convinced about the truth of the Gospel that I would keep on coming here? The difference between the believers and unbelievers is that we have the heart and the driving force that keeps us going. Those who do not believe eventually fall away and stop showing up. Just look through all of the history of these past few threads. My faith drives me into action.

Let's look at James 2:14-26
Faith and Deeds
What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.”

Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.

You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless? Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,” and he was called God’s friend. You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.

In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.

Let's look at Romans 8:24

For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what they already have?

Not only do I have faith but I also have the hope for what is to come. I have the promise of God's word which is accessible through The Bible.

I see what you are saying, all you are saying is that it is false and nothing more. I have a problem when you claim that something is false without providing a reason why, not only that but failing to provide a different explanation. All you say is that it is false. When I go to investigate and post my findings, I use references. I have never seen you do something like that. Look at this posthttps://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=73889562&f=119&p=525625079#p525625079 and you will see how I post my references at the end. That is how you know that I didn't make the whole thing up. I must question where you are getting all of your information from. You don't even post Bible verses.



I see all of your claims about the New Testament. I see no references or Bible verses where you can even draw those conclusions. I must question where you are getting all of your information from. Did you think this all up or did you hear this from somebody? I cannot tell. I cannot take your claims seriously.



Christians blamed the Jews for the death of Christ? In my experience we Christians say that we are the ones who put Jesus at the cross. If we were there back in the day then we would have also joined in the hurling of insults towards Jesus on the cross. I see how Moses and the prophets clearly predicted the future of the Jewish nation. We have a hope for the future, which is unseen. That is faith and hope. The future will change the way things are now.

There are many things that are not written in The Bible but what is written there is enough. Some stories may raise questions that may never be answered. Yet those questions aren't so critical that they undermine the message of the Gospel.

Let's look at John 20:30-31

Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.



I agree with most of this except the last point. We don't go looking for misery and despair. We instead prepare for those times and we don't let them bring us down because we have the hope that God will help us through those hard times. All we know is that the times of suffering brings out the true identity of a person. What happens when you take away that with which they put all their hope and salvation in?

Yes the genealogy is a clear contradiction. Show me Bible verses to prove me wrong, not assumptions made by some theologian. There are two genealogies and both are referring to Joseph, none to Mary. I just don't get how you can get "Joseph, the son of Heli" to refer to Mary. Please I am just so eager to understand.

Lol

I haven't forgotten about this. I will reply tomorrow night when I have more time.