1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Contradiction: Which geneaology of Jesus is correct?

Discussion in 'Scriptural Debates' started by SA Huguenot, Sep 12, 2019.

  1. SA Huguenot

    SA Huguenot Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2019
    Messages:
    988
    Ratings:
    +223
    Religion:
    Protestant
    1. Who was the father of Joseph, husband of Mary?
    (a) Jacob (Matthew 1:16).
    OR
    (b) Heli (Luke 3:23).

    This so called contradiction was also highlited by Zakir naik in 2000 with his debate against DR Campbell. His question was, If we read "Matthew 1 and Luke 3, we find a contradiction on who the father of Joseph, Jesus's father was. there is not a single person in the namelist the same as the other. How can one trust the Bible if it does not even know the ancerstors of Jesus and gives 2 totally different name lists?"

    Well, I learned that naik got his information from the Atheist website, annodated bible.com, where this accusation is used as "evidence" that the Bible is somehow corrupted, incoherrent and not reliable.
    I went and read for myself and found the following:

    Mat 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
    Luk 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

    Yes, a contradiction so it seems does exist in the geneaologies of Jesus.

    But one thing caught my eye, this words in brackets: "(as was supposed) ".
    Why, I asked myself?
    I went to the Greek to see if this word is in the scripture, and I found the following.
    Answer:
    I found the word, "Nomidzo” to describe that Heli was Joseph’s father by “Custom” or “Regulation”.
    Then it hit me!
    Heli was Mary's father, and Joseph was his Son in law!
    Just shows you how one can miss pure logical practices when we read the Bible.
    When I got married, I had a father, AND A FATHER IN LAW.
    My grandfathers were now 4, out of who I did not call 2 of them Grand Fathers in law!
    Thats silly, they are my grandfathers, and my father in law, is My FATHER BY CUSTOM!

    THIS MEAN THAT THE WHOLE LIST OF THE 2 GENEAOLOGIES WHICH THE ATHEIST CALLS A CONTRADICTION, IS ACTUALLY THE NAMELIST OF MARY'S ANCESTRY, AS WELL AS JOSEPH'S ANCESTORS!

    I can only say: "WOW"!!!!
    Who would have thought that the Bible would contain such a correct and detailed version of events.
    and to top it off, If the Atheist and Muslim did not demand this to be a Biblical error, I would never have discovered this nice detail so precious to the history of Jesus Christ.

    He was king of 2 lineages, tracked from the first man created by God, and the descendend of the seed of the Woman.
    And He is King of everything.
     
  2. Desert Snake

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,326
    Ratings:
    +1,660
    Religion:
    The God of gods
    3 Corinthians [called Apocrypha

    Describes the manifestation, and what 'Spirit of the Lord', means, as it pertains to the manifestation.
     
  3. Lyndon

    Lyndon "Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2014
    Messages:
    6,512
    Ratings:
    +3,032
    Religion:
    Theism+Jesus(pbuh) influenced by....... Taoism and Buddhism
    probably neither is correct, and Jesus was not even related to Joseph, he was adopted
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. metis

    metis aged ecumenical anthropologist

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2013
    Messages:
    28,776
    Ratings:
    +12,111
    Religion:
    Catholic-- liberal & ecumenical
    I do believe it's likely a mistake to take the genealogy lists literally.
     
  5. SA Huguenot

    SA Huguenot Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2019
    Messages:
    988
    Ratings:
    +223
    Religion:
    Protestant
    Yes, Joseph did not have a human father, and Joseph was married to Mary.
    The physical ancestry of Joseph was a trace back to Adam by legal inherritance of name.
    mary was a descendent also of Adam, but in flesh.
     
  6. pcarl

    pcarl Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2005
    Messages:
    3,634
    Ratings:
    +1,476
    Religion:
    Catholic
    Both genealogies are a construction of the authors.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. Nowhere Man

    Nowhere Man Bompu Zen Man with a little bit of Bushido.

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    23,377
    Ratings:
    +8,677
    Religion:
    Zen Buddhism
    Besides, God was obligated to marry Mary since he was the one who got her pregnant.
     
  8. 80s fashion girl

    Joined:
    May 28, 2019
    Messages:
    91
    Ratings:
    +64
    Religion:
    none
    If you read through and compare both genealogies side by side you will see more contradictions.
     
  9. MikeDwight

    MikeDwight Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2019
    Messages:
    839
    Ratings:
    +63
    Religion:
    Presbyterian
    its like Huguenot, 80s fashion girl, nowhere man, pcarl,metis, and lyndon said, I just found some crap in my head we'd all like to hear, plus if I had a Father in Law and two geneology lists I'd become a Hussite.
     
  10. SA Huguenot

    SA Huguenot Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2019
    Messages:
    988
    Ratings:
    +223
    Religion:
    Protestant
    Now I am a bit confused by your statement.
    If you have a Father and Mother, dont they have 2 different geaneologies?
    Wont your Mothers Mom and Dad's parents be different to your father and mother's parents.
    If not I think you have a lineage of Incest equal to none.
    What you are telling me is that your fathers' fathers were all the brothers of your Mother's mothers!
    dear Lord, No wonder you want Jesus' ancestors to be all the same people, because you want him to be a redneck like you?
    You are hilarious!:D:D:D:rolleyes:
     
  11. SA Huguenot

    SA Huguenot Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2019
    Messages:
    988
    Ratings:
    +223
    Religion:
    Protestant
    So, what do you say?
    Your Father and Mother also had the same grand, and great grand fathers and mothers?
    Let me draw you a picture, it seems as if you are not grasping the most logical pattern on Earth.

    I Bet you dont even know you had 4 grand fathers!
    :rolleyes::)
     

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 1
  12. 80s fashion girl

    Joined:
    May 28, 2019
    Messages:
    91
    Ratings:
    +64
    Religion:
    none
    Your response to my post makes no sense....whatsoever.
     
    #12 80s fashion girl, Sep 13, 2019
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2019
  13. Thirza Fallen

    Thirza Fallen Crazy Cat Lady

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Messages:
    2,433
    Ratings:
    +627
    Religion:
    Agnostic/Unitarian Universalist
    Mary's genealogy didn't matter because women are not generally mentioned separate from their master, I mean husband.
     
  14. SA Huguenot

    SA Huguenot Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2019
    Messages:
    988
    Ratings:
    +223
    Religion:
    Protestant
    Which is why the Biblical detail is so incredible.
    As God promised in Genesis:' Your Seed will crush his head'!
    Eves' seed.
    Who would ever have known that the Mitochondria of Eve will be in Jesus's body?
     
  15. SA Huguenot

    SA Huguenot Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2019
    Messages:
    988
    Ratings:
    +223
    Religion:
    Protestant
    Dont worry!
    I forgot you did not have a father in law, and a grand father in law.
    You were conceived by miracle.
     
  16. Thirza Fallen

    Thirza Fallen Crazy Cat Lady

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Messages:
    2,433
    Ratings:
    +627
    Religion:
    Agnostic/Unitarian Universalist
    It just means offspring, so anything having to do with Eve is because she is carrying Adam's baby. Back then, they thought sperm contained the whole baby. I wouldn't read anything too deep in this. Plus, with as much plagiarizing as the Bible does, the concepts are generally whatever their neighboring religions believe.
     
  17. SA Huguenot

    SA Huguenot Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2019
    Messages:
    988
    Ratings:
    +223
    Religion:
    Protestant
    And you make accusation after accusation with no substance at all.
    for one,
    I find it very interesting that the Bible clearly say, Your seed, His seed!
    if the Bible would have said, His seed only, your claim would be valid.
    By the way, here we have a definate geneaology from Joseph's descendends, and another from Mary's, and you just dont like this at all.
    I have never found an atheist or Muslim who would not continue to argue this point, because they realise that their argument are so silly, everyone can see it is wrong.
    Even if you dont like it, I will always use this evidence that the Bible is clear to demonstrate that by "Law", Joseph was Jesus' father, and Heli his grandfather.
    If this was not specifically using the Word, Ndzomiso, you would have had an argument.
    I also find it terrible that a non Muslim non Atheist would continue to fight to keep this argument alive.
     
  18. Thirza Fallen

    Thirza Fallen Crazy Cat Lady

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Messages:
    2,433
    Ratings:
    +627
    Religion:
    Agnostic/Unitarian Universalist
    Context is important. In those times, women were property and they thought women were just receptacles. That's the context. The Bible genealogy is not Mary's. Few scholars think that. Try again.
     
  19. SA Huguenot

    SA Huguenot Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2019
    Messages:
    988
    Ratings:
    +223
    Religion:
    Protestant
    Now why on earth would you suggest that "Few scholars suggest that "...
    I dont have to listen to any scholar if it comes to read the Bible.
    I learned to read when I was 5, and still continue to do so without Mommy helping me.
    Or are you one of those robotic persons that needs to hear what a preacher tells you the Bible says?
    Never man, Tyndale gave it to us in english so we can read it for ourself!
    I find it amusing that many people will receive an education, studying the most difficuilt subjects, but when it comes to a very simple book, like the Bible, they all of a sudden think there must be some educated person that learned the "Mysterious sayings" only they can understand.

    Please note.
    I listened to Christian preachers in the 80's, and they made ma an Atheist with their shallow understanding of the Bible.
    at 20 I thought the Bible was utter rubbish.
    If it was not for my curiosity to get all those so called contradictions, and absurdities atheists and Muslims claimed about the Bible, I would never have learned what a fantastic book it is.
    Today I realise the value of the Bible as the history of Man and God.
     
  20. Thirza Fallen

    Thirza Fallen Crazy Cat Lady

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2013
    Messages:
    2,433
    Ratings:
    +627
    Religion:
    Agnostic/Unitarian Universalist
    No, that is fundamentalism.

    It isn't simple. It generally isn't taken in context, which is important. The Bible is not to be lightly read. It took over a thousand years to come about, with different view points, events, changes, etc, so it can't be taken at face value.


    Most atheists were Christian and know more about the Bible than current Christians. Just because you disagree does not make it shallow.
     
Loading...