Are Muslims right about Paul?

[sojourner]

thats like saying we have a better understanding of how our great grandparents lived then they do.

No, that's like saying that modern archaeologists have a better understanding of how the ancients lived than our great grandparents did.

 

[Harikrish]

Only one line of the Jews are maintained in the Bible which can be traced all the way back to Adam. This was decedents through the lineage of Seth. This is called the "royal" line because the decedents of Seth believed and followed God. Through them God's promise of the coming Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ, would be accomplished. The Gospel of Luke, Christ's genealogy begins with Adam and Seth. (Luke 3:23-38)

The Genealogy of Jesus Christ
23 Jesus when he began his ministry, was about ithirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli, 24 the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel,5 the son of Neri,28 Nathan, the son of David,32 the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of Sala, the son of Nahshon, 33 the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, 35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, 37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan, 38 the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.

 

[Pegg]

No, that's like saying that modern archaeologists have a better understanding of how the ancients lived than our great grandparents did.

archaeologists dont always have a clear answer for what they find in the dirt though. And sometimes one archaeologist will interpret the findings differently to another.

So unfortunately archaeology does not in itself prove any particular theories. Just think about how much they have changed their view of the neanderthal man over the past few years. Their explanations change. Bible critics change their theories too...and they have one purpose....to disprove the bible because they have a bias toward disproving it. That is a danger to allow yourself to be influenced by such ones.

 

[sojourner]

archaeologists dont always have a clear answer for what they find in the dirt though. And sometimes one archaeologist will interpret the findings differently to another.

So unfortunately archaeology does not in itself prove any particular theories. Just think about how much they have changed their view of the neanderthal man over the past few years. Their explanations change. Bible critics change their theories too...and they have one purpose....to disprove the bible because they have a bias toward disproving it. That is a danger to allow yourself to be influenced by such ones.

That's just flat out dishonest! Biblical critics are not "out to disprove the bible." They're out to dispel misinformation about the bible -- some misinformation being held as sacred, gospel truth by some of the faithful. Therefore, it may appear that they're "disproving the bible," when they're really disproving the misunderstandings.

Modern archaeological methods are better than those of 150 years ago, so the point stands: even though our great grandparents were closer to the source, we understand the source better than they did. Same with modern biblical scholarship as opposed to medieval biblical scholarship.

 

[sojourner]

Only one line of the Jews are maintained in the Bible which can be traced all the way back to Adam. This was decedents through the lineage of Seth. This is called the "royal" line because the decedents of Seth believed and followed God. Through them God's promise of the coming Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ, would be accomplished. The Gospel of Luke, Christ's genealogy begins with Adam and Seth. (Luke 3:23-38)

The Genealogy of Jesus Christ
23 Jesus when he began his ministry, was about ithirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli, 24 the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel,5 the son of Neri,28 Nathan, the son of David,32 the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of Sala, the son of Nahshon, 33 the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, 35 the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, 36 the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, 37 the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan, 38 the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.

You, of course, understand that the genealogy is a theological, not a literal/historical construction. No one can be "traced back to Adam.

 

[Pegg]

That's just flat out dishonest! Biblical critics are not "out to disprove the bible." They're out to dispel misinformation about the bible -- some misinformation being held as sacred, gospel truth by some of the faithful. Therefore, it may appear that they're "disproving the bible," when they're really disproving the misunderstandings.

Modern archaeological methods are better than those of 150 years ago, so the point stands: even though our great grandparents were closer to the source, we understand the source better than they did. Same with modern biblical scholarship as opposed to medieval biblical scholarship.

Why do you think they are called 'bible critics' ?

What do you think it means to be a critic??

 

[Harikrish]

You, of course, understand that the genealogy is a theological, not a literal/historical construction. No one can be "traced back to Adam.

You did not understand my post. Adam had many children. His children branched out and formed their own lineage. But only the lineage of Seth is recorded in the biblical genealogy for the reasons given below. Therefore Jews can be traced back to Adam through lineage of Seth. There are other Jews that make up the different tribes. But the Jews in the bible are a direct line to Adam even though they have been grouped by other labels.

Adams decedents through the lineage of Seth is called the "royal" line because the decedents of Seth believed and followed God. Through them God's promise of the coming Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ, would be accomplished. The Gospel of Luke, Christ's genealogy begins with Adam and Seth. (Luke 3:23-38)

 

[sojourner]

Why do you think they are called 'bible critics' ?

What do you think it means to be a critic??

A "critic" is one who engages in critical thinking and reading. There are several different kinds of criticism used in the exegetical process. Among them are: Redaction criticism, which looks at how the texts were edited and put together; Form criticism, which looks at the writing structure and style; Historical criticism, which looks at the time in which the text was written, and the circumstances under which the texts were written.

A critic is one who evaluates the texts in order to understand them better. A good critic reads past his/her own biases and does not impose upon the texts what isn't there.

 

[sojourner]

You did not understand my post. Adam had many children. His children branched out and formed their own lineage. But only the lineage of Seth is recorded in the biblical genealogy for the reasons given below. Therefore Jews can be traced back to Adam through lineage of Seth. There are other Jews that make up the different tribes. But the Jews in the bible are a direct line to Adam even though they have been grouped by other labels.

Adams decedents through the lineage of Seth is called the "royal" line because the decedents of Seth believed and followed God. Through them God's promise of the coming Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ, would be accomplished. The Gospel of Luke, Christ's genealogy begins with Adam and Seth. (Luke 3:23-38)

You misunderstand my post. The genealogy is a theological construction, not a historical fact. I've studied that chapter and have written a paper on it. No one can factually be traced back to "Adam." "Adam" wasn't a historic figure -- only a literary character.

 

[Pegg]

A good critic reads past his/her own biases and does not impose upon the texts what isn't there.

Yes. And how many of them do you think actually does this?

 

[Harikrish]

You misunderstand my post. The genealogy is a theological construction, not a historical fact. I've studied that chapter and have written a paper on it. No one can factually be traced back to "Adam." "Adam" wasn't a historic figure -- only a literary character.

Has your paper made it into the Bible?

How can the genealogy leading to Jesus be a theological construction? It is the evidence that links Jesus to the line of David, thus fulfilling another prophesy.

 

[sojourner]

Yes. And how many of them do you think actually does this?

Most of them -- to the best of their ability.

 

[sojourner]

How can the genealogy leading to Jesus be a theological construction?

Because that's what it is. how can a flamingo be a flamingo? Because that's what it is.

It is the evidence that links Jesus to the line of David, thus fulfilling another prophesy.

Because no one ever wrote anything in order to appear to fulfill prophecy...

 

[Pegg]

Most of them -- to the best of their ability.

ha, you are far more optimistic then I.

 

[sojourner]

ha, you are far more optimistic then I.

No, just not unnecessarily skeptical.

 

[Harikrish]

Because that's what it is. how can a flamingo be a flamingo? Because that's what it is.

Because no one ever wrote anything in order to appear to fulfill prophecy...

Are you not familiar with the prophesy of the suffering saviour in Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22?

John7:42
For the Scriptures clearly state that the Messiah will be born of the royal line of David, in Bethlehem, the village where King David was born."

How can flamingos fit your theological constructs when the verse speaks of a literal lineage that can be traced between Jesus and David? Are you biased towards flamingos like those who are biased against pigs.

 

[sojourner]

Are you not familiar with the prophesy of the suffering saviour in Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22?

Yes. The author isn't writing about Jesus. Much later Christians read "Jesus" into the prophecy.

John7:42

...has nothing to do with Isaiah.

For the Scriptures clearly state that the Messiah will be born of the royal line of David, in Bethlehem, the village where King David was born."

Cite text, please.
Don't you think the gospel writers intentionally wrote Jesus to fulfill prophecy? Of course they did! They weren't writing factual history, after all -- the gospels are highly mythic.

 

[Pegg]

No, just not unnecessarily skeptical.

Your not skeptical of the skeptics.... good for you!

 

[sojourner]

Your not skeptical of the skeptics.... good for you!

Not unnecessarily so. I know who's reliable and who's not.

 

[Muffled]

Might want to pay attention to reality over the next year.

Using imagination to make any of these ties, is just that.


It is the same methodology as ancient aliens, or America unearthed, of any ufo show. All pseudo science garbage

I believe actually, ancient alien reasoning isn't any less logical than the reasoning of scientists. The fact remains that no-one knows what really happened only that there are artifacts to show that something did happen unless of course one get the assessment that buildings are jsut accidental rock formations which seems a pretty long stretch to me.