RE: Proof of Christianity
August 13, 2013 at 11:11 am
(This post was last modified: August 13, 2013 at 11:12 am by Tea Earl Grey Hot.)
(August 13, 2013 at 3:50 am)fr0d0 Wrote: The names are male, but the line is female. Patriarchy it's a wonderful thing.
Please give evidence for this! You keep saying the same thing but not backing it up. The one source you gave us committed the same sin too.
This idea that naming the males of the mother's line and then ending it with husband of mother and making no mention mother herself at all was a practice is probably a desperate ad hoc solution to this bible contradiction.
Can you find a source that gives solid evidence that this was practice? I doubt you can. All you'll probably find are apologists assuming this was practice in order to get out of a bible contradiction. "The Bible is perfect so we can't possibly have a contradiction, therefore, Luke must be talking about Mary's line but couldn't say Mary and had to make it look like it was Joseph's because of the patriarchal system back then. Yeah, that's it!"
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).
