Originally posted by Phil Hill Males have an X and a Y chromosome while females have two Xs. Jesus is the son of Mary and God. Mary has two X chromosomes and God (the father) has none. Where did Jesus get his Y chromosome from?
Originally posted by RJHinds Some Biblical scholars say the two different genealogies show that Jesus qualifies as a descendent of David, both legally through Joseph and by blood through Mary. This gives two witnesses to His right to the throne of David.
That is what I also have learned. The footnotes of the Recovery Version Bible explain this.
Originally posted by Phil Hill Then you got lied to as the bible clearly says the genealogy is of the same parent. But then again, what do you expect from a book that says pi is 3?
Originally posted by Phil Hill Then you got lied to as the bible clearly says the genealogy is of the same parent. But then again, what do you expect from a book that says pi is 3?
Now, now. The pi thing is another topic. You're for staying on topic. Right?
FMF: All you have done here is lay out what 'fulfilled prophecies' the writers of the Gospels needed to include in their accounts.
Sorry. But I count this theory as a kind of hyper-conspiracy paranoia. i.e. Whatever was written was skillfully spun to munipulate us in a totally deceptive way, by collective effort, over a very large amount of time.[/b]
Literature being skillfully spun to sustain a narrative that engages and unifies a group of people is not really such an incredible or impossible thing to do. In fact I would say doing it is a natural and predictable anthropological facet of human nature and human intellectual capacity.
Originally posted by Phil Hill Then you got lied to as the bible clearly says the genealogy is of the same parent. But then again, what do you expect from a book that says pi is 3?
They must have rescaled 1 (don't ask why - the lord works in mysterious ways you see). A unit length must back then have been given by 0.954929659 (denoted simply by 1).
From this we get:
pi * 1 = pi * 0.954929659 = 3 Reveal Hidden Content
Originally posted by FMF If you don't know what they are, then the question is moot.
If you don't know what they are, then the question is moot.
You're a slick one FMF !!
No specifics ? You see FMF I had written you a long post. Then I stopped and drastically shortened it. I thought "Why assume this or that ?"
Then I drastically shortened my response not to try to assume your typical favorite skeptical samples.
So if you don't want to stick your neck out and be specific on whch favored handy dandy "Jesus the copy-cat" myth you want to use, I'll just let it slide.
By the way. Do you think that a Christian is obligated to become 100% familiar with every other belief system on earth before he is justified to place his trust in Christ ?
Do you think scholarly familiarity with every world belief is a mandatory obligation of one who feels to put his trust in Jesus Christ ?
Originally posted by jaywill Do you think scholarly familiarity with every world belief is a mandatory obligation of one who feels to put his trust in Jesus Christ ?
If you did not realize that miraculous births are a common element in historical literature and religious texts around the world and throughout history, then that is fine. You believe your chosen "miraculous birth" story and you don't know about anyone else's. Good for you.
Do you think that a Christian is obligated to become 100% familiar with every other belief system on earth before he is justified to place his trust in Christ ?
Nothing of the sort has been suggested.
Did you think the "miraculous birth" of Jesus was the only "miraculous birth" among the world religions?
Originally posted by FMF If you don't know what they are then you obviously don't believe/subscribe to them. So my question is answered for all intents and purposes.
Not necessarily. You don't know if I believe in some other virgin birth or not, and if not, why I don't. Nothing wrong with taking a case by case approach.
Do you know of another tradition about a virgin birth that you think should be compared to the Gospel's account?
Don't ask me to supply your rival candidate. You supply one if you have one to seriously look into.
The genealogy of Jesus given in Luke 2:23-38 goes all the way back to Adam, whereas the one given in Matthew 1:1-17 only goes back to Abraham. They are exactlly the same between Abraham and David. The difference begins with the sons of David. Matthew gives the royal line from Solomon to Joseph, the legal husband of Mary, the mother of Jesus. Luke gives the actual blood line from Nathan to Mary, the mother of Jesus. The substitution of Joseph's name in Luke 3:23 is supported by the scriptural precedent of Numbers 27:1-11 and 36:1-12. At the same time it avoids the Judgment recorded in Jeremiah 22:28-30 against the descendants of Coniah (Jeconiah).
Originally posted by jaywill Don't ask me to supply your rival candidate.
I am not asking you to supply anything. I asked you if you also believe in the "miraculous births" described in the scriptures of various other religions apart from your own. I take it the answer is no.
18 Aug '12 12:02
Reveal Hidden Content
Why Y?
Back to Top