My computer has been down for two days, so It'll take a while to catch up with these posts, but I will.
quote=gnostic; And in the very next chapter, it mentioned Bethlehem as being the birthplace of Jesus.
Yup! Which only verifies Luke’s statement that Joseph the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judaea, took Mary, to who he was betrothed, from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to the town of Bethlehem of Judaea where, as Matthew correctly informs us, the baby Jesus was born.
quote=gnostic; And lastly at the end of chapter, Joseph decided to leave Egypt, but his decision was not to return to Bethlehem, but to move further north in Narazeth.
Ahh yes, this was after the wise men who had first seen the star while in the east, that had heralded the birth of Jesus, who, according to Luke had been returned to the house of his mother and step-father in Nazareth of Galilee about two months after he had been born. Those wise men who were to later travel all the way to Jerusalem to pay homage to the child, who they knew had been born to be the king of the Jews, which, when the time that they had first seen the star was revealed to Herod, he chose the age of the young boys to be slaughtered as being two years and below, according to the time that he had learned from the wise men when they had first seen the star that had heralded his birth. Sorry matey, nowhere is it stated that Mary stayed in the house of Joseph, unless you can accept Luke 2: 39; the scripture that states, “And when they had performed all things according to the law (40 days after the birth of Jesus) they returned to, (Now listen to this matey and listen carefully) they returned unto Galilee, to THEIR OWN city Nazareth. The fact that you cannot accept that each Gospel compliments the others is of no concern to me. If it your wish to deny God’s Holy Word, that is your own decision. And by the way, nowhere in Matthew does it say that Joseph wanted to return to Bethlehem of Judaea, but only that he did not want to reside in the land of Judaea, because Herods cruel son was ruling there.
quote=gnostic; Another point, I'd like to make, is that not only Mary stayed in Joseph's house, until Jesus was born.
Nowhere does the bible state that Mary stayed in the house of Joseph, and if you believe that Joseph lived in the town of Bethlehem of Judaea, when the bible states that Nazareth was THEIR home town and that Joseph took Mary from their own city, Nazareth of Galilee, to Bethlehem of Judaea where Mary gave birth to her first born son: and that, about 40 days after the birth of the baby they returned to their house in Nazareth of Galilee, then this is but a figment of your own imagination, which you cannot in any way corroborate. The fact that Mary who was engaged to Joseph the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judah, lived in the town of Nazareth is verified by the fact that it was to nazareth in Galilee that the angel appeared to mary and informed her that she would become pregnant, which she did about three months later when she was in Jerusalem among the family and friends of Elizabeth her cousin, who were of the daughters of Levi.
quote=gnostic; At no point, does Matthew says that they moved to Bethlehem, from Nazareth (only Luke mention this move, south from Nazareth, not Matthew).
Correct! Matthew merely corroborates Luke’s statement that Joseph took Mary from their own city, Nazareth of Galilee, to Bethlehem of Judaea where Mary gave birth to her first born son.
quote=gnostic; At no point, does Matthew says that they stayed in manger, barn or stable, because there were no room in the inn, at Bethlehem (that's only found in Luke).
Correct! As I have already shown, the only reference that Matthew makes to the baby Jesus, is the fact that he was the fulfilment of The Lord’s prophecy through his servant Isaiah, that an unmarried woman would be with child and bear a son, who would be given many different appellations, which we know he has been given, Matthew then concentrates on the young child Jesus who was in the house (Not the manger or the Inn or stable) but the HOUSE of his mother and step-father when the wise men came to visit him. Matthew's, only reference to the birth of the baby Jesus in Bethlehem of Judaea, merely corroborates Luke’s statement that Joseph took Mary from their own city, Nazareth of Galilee, to Bethlehem of Judaea where Mary gave birth to her first born son.
quote=gnostic; At no point, does Matthew says that the magi visited Mary and Jesus in manger. Again, only Luke mentioned this manger.
Wrong again old matey. Neither Matthew nor Luke mention anything about the magi visiting Mary and Jesus in the manger, stable, or Inn.
Luke mentions only the shepherds, who came to see the Baby in the manger, whereas Matthew speaks of the Magi visiting the HOUSE, wherein the young child Jesus then lived with his mother and step-father by the time that they had travelled to Israel.
quote=gnostic; The only logical conclusion with Matthew's gospel is that Mary gave birth in Joseph's house, in Bethlehem (Matthew 1:24), the very same house that the magi visited (Matthew 2:11).
Another figment of your own imagination, show us anywhere that it is said that Joseph lived in Bethlehem of Judaea?
Luke 2: 39; the scripture that states, “And when they had performed all things according to the law (40 days after the birth of Jesus) they returned to, (Now listen to this matey and listen carefully) they returned unto Galilee, to THEIR OWN city Nazareth. As to everything else you have said in this post, it has already been covered, and I have shown, everything that you have said is merely speculation and the figments of your own imagination, which you cannot verify by scripture, which is the only source from which you can debate the life of Jesus, as there is no other record of his life. Nighty, night mate.
Last edited: