God's Child(ren)?

[Minimalist]

"Paul" which xtians insist was the earliest xtian writing ( a dubious assertion but it is what they claim) knows nothing of joseph, mary, pilate, a trial, or a virgin birth.

Obviously, those parts of the legend had not been written when the Pauline epistles were compiled.

[Godscreated]

"Paul" which xtians insist was the earliest xtian writing ( a dubious assertion but it is what they claim) knows nothing of joseph, mary, pilate, a trial, or a virgin birth.

Obviously, those parts of the legend had not been written when the Pauline epistles were compiled.

To give the history of Christ was not what God wanted of Paul, he was sent to the gentile population to tell of the eternal salvation through the resurrected Christ, the death and resurrection are the focus of salvation not Mary, Joesph,Pilate or the trial these were willing and not so willing participants in the life of Christ and none of which can bring salvation to one's life. Min this is old territory, we've been over this, Paul's mission to the gentiles was for salvation, the disciples mission was to prove to the Jewish people that Jesus was the Messiah through their own history.

[theophilus]

Mary's genealogy isn't listed in the Bible. Could this possibly mean that Mary wasn't Jewish? If Mary wasn't Jewish, could this mean that Jesus wasn't Jewish?

Joseph's genealogy is found in the first chapter of Matthew but Mary's genealogy is here:

http://www.gnpcb.org/esv/search/?q=Luke+3%3A23-38

It mentions Joseph and not Mary but this article explains the reason for it:

Breaking up genealogies into male and female representations was acceptable in the ancient Near East culture since it was often impolite to speak of women without proper conditions being met: male presence, etc. Therefore, one genealogy is of Mary and the other of Joseph--even though both mention Joseph. In other words, the Mary geneaology was counted "in" Joseph and under his headship.

http://carm.org/bible-difficulties/matth...and-luke-3

To really understand this you should read the whole article.

Luke tells the story of the birth of Jesus from Mary's point of view so it is natural that he would include her genealogy rather than Joseph's. If you study the genealogy you will find that Mary was descended from David but not throught Solomon, the son who became king.

[Ashendant]

Now, if I have read the Bible correctly, Jesus is supposed to be the son of God.

Yes, but since I'm a Muslim, I don't believe that Jesus is the son of God.

A verse from the Quran:

"Say: He is God, the One and Only; God, the Eternal, Absolute. He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him." [Surah 112, verses 1-4]

But doesn't the Quran also say

39:4 If Allah had willed to choose a son, He could have chosen what He would of that which He hath created.

Oh and

6:100-1
Yet they ... impute falsely, without knowledge, sons and daughters unto Him. ... The Originator of the heavens and the earth! How can He have a child?

So huh can he have a child or not

[Minimalist]

Luke tells the story of the birth of Jesus from Mary's point of view so it is natural that he would include her genealogy rather than Joseph's.

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 Jannai, the son of Joseph,

THERE IS NO FUCKING MARY IN THERE, THEO...CAN'T YOU READ?

---

Really, apologetics is one thing but I think you must be literally blind.

---

To give the history of Christ was not what God wanted of Paul,

You know what they say, G-C. Excuses are like assholes. Everybody's got one but you are burdened by yours.

[theophilus]

THERE IS NO FUCKING MARY IN THERE, THEO...CAN'T YOU READ?

I provided a link to an article that explains the reason for this.

It mentions Joseph and not Mary but this article explains the reason for it:

Breaking up genealogies into male and female representations was acceptable in the ancient Near East culture since it was often impolite to speak of women without proper conditions being met: male presence, etc. Therefore, one genealogy is of Mary and the other of Joseph--even though both mention Joseph. In other words, the Mary geneaology was counted "in" Joseph and under his headship.

http://carm.org/bible-difficulties/matth...and-luke-3

To really understand this you should read the whole article.

Can't you read?

[Minimalist]

I provided a link to an article that explains the reason for this.

Apologetic horseshit, Theo. Can you not read? Why must you always look for some fucking scumbag preacher to tell you that your fairy tales are okay just the way they are.

Think for yourself boy. Try it once. You might like it!

[theophilus]

I provided a link to an article that explains the reason for this.

Apologetic horseshit, Theo. Can you not read? Why must you always look for some fucking scumbag preacher to tell you that your fairy tales are okay just the way they are.

Think for yourself boy. Try it once. You might like it!

I do think for myself and I had reached the conclusion that Luke gives Mary's genealogy a long time before I ever heard about the organization I linked to. I included the link because I think it explains things better that I could and the site contains a lot of other useful information about the Bible.

Luke tells the story of the birth of Jesus entirely from Mary's point of view so it seems logical that he would include her genealogy rather than Joseph's.

[Minimalist]

Your capacity for self-delusion is remarkable. You read what it says and decide it means something else because you are embarrassed by the text.

Fascinating insight into the mind of a deluded believer. Thanks for that, if nothing else.


It remains apologetic horseshit.

[Godscreated]

I provided a link to an article that explains the reason for this.

Apologetic horseshit, Theo. Can you not read? Why must you always look for some fucking scumbag preacher to tell you that your fairy tales are okay just the way they are.

Think for yourself boy. Try it once. You might like it!

Theophilus is correct Luke gives Mary's geneology and Matthew gives Joseph's geneology. Why do you think they are different. Min it is you who can not see the evidence put before your face, you are the one who is blind and not think for yourself 'O follower of Ehrman. Theophilus does think for himself, he researches your ridiculous and assumed thoughts, you on the other hand refer to Ehrman's bible.