RE: Proof of Christianity
August 12, 2013 at 8:54 pm
(This post was last modified: August 12, 2013 at 9:01 pm by Tea Earl Grey Hot.)
(August 12, 2013 at 5:25 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: I'm incorrect how?
I never say it didn't say Joseph. I said that the text supports Jesus lineage and right to qualify as messiah, as Nora denied. One is the line of Joseph, the other Mary. That much is Crystal clear.
Matthew 1:16
[16] and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.
Let's ponder on this verse. It says that Joseph was the son of Jacob. It traced a lineage alway to Jacob. Now, if it traced the lineage down to Jacob and then it says that Joseph was Jacob's son, that means that Joseph is part of the lineage thus its Joseph lineage. It only mentions Mary being the husband of Joseph.
Luke 3:23-24
[23]
Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli,
[24] the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jan'na-i, the son of Joseph,
and etc.
This says too that Jesus was "the son of Joseph" and then immediately says that Joseph was "...the son of Heli" and then continues on the genealogy in backwards order.
It says nothing about this being Mary's genealogy. No mention of Mary is made whatsoever in this genealogy.
The reason why they're different is probably because one or more is made up.
Quote:They can't be the same, because one fooled females and the other males. Look at the link I provided, it's all explained.
Yes, it's plain to everyone that they're not the same genealogy but both of them explicitly state to be the genealogy of Joseph. One or both must be incorrect.
Quote:It's called the line of Jesus through Joseph because that's just the way these things are referred to. Why is Mary's line in Luke full of females and Matthews names male?
You're asserting the thing to be proved. It's not plain at all that Luke's genealogy is through Mary especially when the name Mary isn't mentioned at all in the entire chapter. And what makes you think that because of the fact that Luke's genealogy mentions some women that therefore this must be Mary's line?
My ignore list
"The lord doesn't work in mysterious ways, but in ways that are indistinguishable from his nonexistence."
-- George Yorgo Veenhuyzen quoted by John W. Loftus in The End of Christianity (p. 103).
"The lord doesn't work in mysterious ways, but in ways that are indistinguishable from his nonexistence."
-- George Yorgo Veenhuyzen quoted by John W. Loftus in The End of Christianity (p. 103).
