+- +-

+- User

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+-Stats ezBlock

Members
Total Members: 106
Latest: JadedIvy78
New This Month: 2
New This Week: 0
New Today: 0
Stats
Total Posts: 9707
Total Topics: 640
Most Online Today: 445
Most Online Ever: 771
(July 30, 2019, 01:13:39 am)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 140
Total: 140

Author Topic: Re: The Genealogy of Jesus  (Read 721 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Bladerunner

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1360
  • Karma: +1014/-0
  • My Friend
  • Location: Tennessee, USA
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
« on: December 14, 2019, 10:23:47 am »


Hello, Geoff...... Glad to have you on this forum.....

there are two genealogies of Jesus......... One is run through Abraham to Jesus and the other Luke's.

Keep in mind that Joseph's line had a blood curse upon them.  NO (MALE) child of that line could sit on the throne....Which would have also affected Jesus.

Joseph was the legal son of HELI....In other passages, we are told Heli is Mary's father...It was the custom where there were no males in the household, for the father to adopt the son-in-law and thus stabilizing the inheritance of the land, etc.  This is the reason why Joseph is listed ass the Son of Heli. (being the legal son of Heli).

Hope this helps

Blade


Thanks for the welcome.
I understand the curse.
I have several problems with what you wrote.
You say that Joseph was the "legal" son of Heli. There is no scriptural evidence to support the inference of this statement that I am aware of. If you know of this evidence in scripture please present it.
You also say "In other passages, we are told Heli is Mary's father". I am unaware of these passages. Would you please provide them?
You also seek to demonstrate that Mary had no male siblings. Would you provide the scriptural evidence for this please?
I am well aware that the statements you make are widely held to be true but I can't believe that God would leave us to make assumptions concerning something so important.
I mean, how does an assumption, however obvious it may seem, take the place of the word of God?

Psa 132:11  The LORD hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it; Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne.

Act 2:30  Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

You say assumptions which is not true...All that needs to be done is a backwards search sometimes.

Mat 1:1-16,,gives us the Genealogy of Adam to David and the royal LEGAL line from DAVID to Jesus..

In Mat 1:16.
." And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ."

We see above that Joseph was indeed in the LEGAL Royal line of DAVID, He is the Husband of MARY, the mother of Mary.

Thus so far we have established. Joseph (of the royal line) as the Husband of Mary who was the mother of Jesus Christ.

In Luke 3:23-28, we find Luke's genealogy of Jesus from Abraham to David is the same as Matthews.   Yet, from David to Jesus, Luke does not follow the royal line but rather through the second surviving son of Bathsheba, Nathan.  This line starting at Nathan down through Heli, the father of Mary, the Mother of Jesus. The Genealogy in LUKE is backwards with HELI being first in verse


Luk 3:23..(KJV).."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,"

We also see that Jesus , the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.

As above, Joseph already has a father in Matthew....so Heli has to be an adoptive Father as is Joseph being the LEGAL father of Jesus.......
By deductive reasoning, we can see that Mary was the daughter of HELI even though the Bible does not directly say... It can be see as no other way.

See this is where I have problems with your summary. You say "so Heli has to be an adoptive Father".
Luke says: 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,
What was Luke meaning by this statement?
Jesus being the son of Joseph, as everyone supposed. That's what he meant. Why do we know this? Because every time it's mentioned by those who knew Jesus that's what they thought to be the case... that Jesus was the son of Joseph. All these statements below are given to us as the word of God.
Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Luk 4:22 And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not this Joseph's son?

Joh 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

Joh 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?

Listen to his mother...

Luk 2:48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.
Luk 2:49  And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?
Luk 2:50  And they understood not the saying which he spake unto them.

Why didn't Mary and Joseph understand what he told them? I'll bet you think you know what he meant! Why didn't they?

Quote
FYI: God does this from time to time.....Hiding events, names, etc for the His Kings and priest (the Church (body of Christ)) to seek out and find.

Oh yes, things are hidden. I don't deny that, but the facts are hidden and must be found. We are not supposed to follow rabbit trails riddled with assumptions and conjecture.

Quote
Are you familiar with Jewish LAWs and customs....If I am going over ground you already know, disregard.

On the trip out of Egypt to the wilderness, i was asked of Moses about the father "Zelophehad" who only had daughters and had no sons to receive His inheritance of Land given to them by GOD. This rule permitted the daughters to receive the inheritance if and only if they married within their tribe and their father legally adopted the son-in-law. This is also seen the book of Ruth. I suggest reading this book very cloesly for it is all about Jewish Law on redemption of Land by a Goel. (Boaz).

Yes it so happens I am very aware of all this.
I would be quite accepting of this solution if there was any evidence that it was the case in this situation, but there is not. You are basing your belief on the assumption that it is the case.
There is a stronger case to argue that Mary was of the house of Levi but you won't find me using it because, once again, it is conjecture, without scriptural evidence.
Jer 33:17  For thus saith the LORD; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel;
Jer 33:18  Neither shall the priests the Levites want a man before me to offer burnt offerings, and to kindle meat offerings, and to do sacrifice continually.
Luk 1:5  There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.
Luk 1:36  And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth....

Perhaps you are also aware that there are also snares laid to catch the unwary that would assume that which has not been spoken.
2Th 2:11  And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12  That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Quote
Here are some passages that you can look upon in your leisure as to the laws and customs of those seen in the above paragraph.  Numbers 26:33; 27:1-11; 36:2-12; Joshua 17:3-6; 1 Chronicles 7:15[/b][/b][/color]

Thank you but I am very familiar with them all.

Quote
Because Jesus was born through the "SEED of the WOMAN" (Mary), her husband Joseph whose biological father was Jacob (Mat 1:16), adopted Jesus as was also the customs and laws given to the Jewish people by GOD.   

There is no assumptions as you can see. Maybe deductive reasoning leaving only one true answer. Many people will say this is not good enough...... It is to me.....because I simply believe every WORD, period, comma, etc to be the true WORD of GOD....SIMPLE

Yes many people would say it's not good enough to apply "deductive reasoning" in place of scriptural evidence. I am one of them.
Supply scriptural support for your assertions and I'll be happy to concur.
You will need scriptural evidence that Mary was a descendant of David and that she had no male siblings. Find that and I will accept what you say. If not, your statement about believing the word of God to be true is just hot air.

Quote
Make no bones about, Satan is trying to stop any one part of the plan of God from being fulfilled.

It makes his job easy when we put our trust in assumptions.

Geoff...It is very easy to dismiss scriptures because "it did not say that". Well, Yes it did say that...Jospeh's biological father is given in Mat 1:1-16...FACT

In Luke 3 we find that Heli is also Joseph's father.....HOW can this be????

One cannot have two fathers yet here we have two people who have two fathers...Jesus and Joseph.....

Since this is GOD's WORD...we start searching as to why this was said...We look at the history of the Jewish people and the Laws that GOD gave them...and find the answer...... I gave it to you and you have rejected it.

One last item...You ask for me for information about why it appears Joseph had two fathers....This I gave you in fine detail......Yes it is up to you to follow Acts 17:11 (part of my signature) and find out for yourself.

Yet all you can do is take jabs at the God's WORD and Myself....By taking a jab at GOD's WORDs, you have to answer to Him...
 
as Far as your Jab at me
[/b] "Why didn't Mary and Joseph understand what he told them? I'll bet you think you know what he meant! Why didn't they?" was unnecessary.

in Rev 1:6..(KJV)... God tells all of us;
"And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen."

and in Probs 25:2..(KJV)..."It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter."

Here we find even though it is an OT scripture, it also relevant to Rev 1:6..as we in the CHurch (body of Christ) are to be Kings and Priest.

I urge you to follow Acts 17:11  and read your Bible literally,historically,  grammatically paying attention to the synthesis of the WORD....

For in JOHN !:! states (KJV)
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."


In Psalms 12:6-7..(KJV).."The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. 7. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."

As in 2 TIM 3:16..(KJV).."All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"[/color]

The Bible (KJV) is an integrated Book (OT and NT). It has 66 books that were written by 40 humans and has only ONE Author....

I hope this helps and if you also reject it, that is fine.....It is my job, given to me by GOD (in scripture) to teach the TRUE WORD for ll to hear.....

I pray the Lord touches your heart so that the Blindness you have is removed enabling  you to see His True WORD>...

I hope you have a very Blessed day as we are all (saved and unsaved) awaiting our individual rapture (death) to our everlasting life, wherever that may be......Up or Down.

Blade





1 Cor 15:3-4.."For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

Acts 17:11.."These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter


Geoff

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Super Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 16
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
« Reply #1 on: December 14, 2019, 10:06:27 pm »


Hello, Geoff...... Glad to have you on this forum.....

there are two genealogies of Jesus......... One is run through Abraham to Jesus and the other Luke's.

Keep in mind that Joseph's line had a blood curse upon them.  NO (MALE) child of that line could sit on the throne....Which would have also affected Jesus.

Joseph was the legal son of HELI....In other passages, we are told Heli is Mary's father...It was the custom where there were no males in the household, for the father to adopt the son-in-law and thus stabilizing the inheritance of the land, etc.  This is the reason why Joseph is listed ass the Son of Heli. (being the legal son of Heli).

Hope this helps

Blade


Thanks for the welcome.
I understand the curse.
I have several problems with what you wrote.
You say that Joseph was the "legal" son of Heli. There is no scriptural evidence to support the inference of this statement that I am aware of. If you know of this evidence in scripture please present it.
You also say "In other passages, we are told Heli is Mary's father". I am unaware of these passages. Would you please provide them?
You also seek to demonstrate that Mary had no male siblings. Would you provide the scriptural evidence for this please?
I am well aware that the statements you make are widely held to be true but I can't believe that God would leave us to make assumptions concerning something so important.
I mean, how does an assumption, however obvious it may seem, take the place of the word of God?

Psa 132:11  The LORD hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it; Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne.

Act 2:30  Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

You say assumptions which is not true...All that needs to be done is a backwards search sometimes.

Mat 1:1-16,,gives us the Genealogy of Adam to David and the royal LEGAL line from DAVID to Jesus..

In Mat 1:16.
." And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ."

We see above that Joseph was indeed in the LEGAL Royal line of DAVID, He is the Husband of MARY, the mother of Mary.

Thus so far we have established. Joseph (of the royal line) as the Husband of Mary who was the mother of Jesus Christ.

In Luke 3:23-28, we find Luke's genealogy of Jesus from Abraham to David is the same as Matthews.   Yet, from David to Jesus, Luke does not follow the royal line but rather through the second surviving son of Bathsheba, Nathan.  This line starting at Nathan down through Heli, the father of Mary, the Mother of Jesus. The Genealogy in LUKE is backwards with HELI being first in verse


Luk 3:23..(KJV).."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,"

We also see that Jesus , the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.

As above, Joseph already has a father in Matthew....so Heli has to be an adoptive Father as is Joseph being the LEGAL father of Jesus.......
By deductive reasoning, we can see that Mary was the daughter of HELI even though the Bible does not directly say... It can be see as no other way.


See this is where I have problems with your summary. You say "so Heli has to be an adoptive Father".
Luke says: 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,
What was Luke meaning by this statement?
Jesus being the son of Joseph, as everyone supposed. That's what he meant. Why do we know this? Because every time it's mentioned by those who knew Jesus that's what they thought to be the case... that Jesus was the son of Joseph. All these statements below are given to us as the word of God.
Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Luk 4:22 And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not this Joseph's son?

Joh 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

Joh 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?

Listen to his mother...

Luk 2:48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.
Luk 2:49  And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?
Luk 2:50  And they understood not the saying which he spake unto them.

Why didn't Mary and Joseph understand what he told them?
I'll bet you think you know what he meant! [/b]Why didn't they?

Quote
FYI: God does this from time to time.....Hiding events, names, etc for the His Kings and priest (the Church (body of Christ)) to seek out and find.


Oh yes, things are hidden. I don't deny that, but the facts are hidden and must be found. We are not supposed to follow rabbit trails riddled with assumptions and conjecture.

Quote
Are you familiar with Jewish LAWs and customs....If I am going over ground you already know, disregard.

On the trip out of Egypt to the wilderness, i was asked of Moses about the father "Zelophehad" who only had daughters and had no sons to receive His inheritance of Land given to them by GOD. This rule permitted the daughters to receive the inheritance if and only if they married within their tribe and their father legally adopted the son-in-law. This is also seen the book of Ruth. I suggest reading this book very cloesly for it is all about Jewish Law on redemption of Land by a Goel. (Boaz).


Yes it so happens I am very aware of all this.
I would be quite accepting of this solution if there was any evidence that it was the case in this situation, but there is not. You are basing your belief on the assumption that it is the case.
There is a stronger case to argue that Mary was of the house of Levi but you won't find me using it because, once again, it is conjecture, without scriptural evidence.
Jer 33:17  For thus saith the LORD; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel;
Jer 33:18  Neither shall the priests the Levites want a man before me to offer burnt offerings, and to kindle meat offerings, and to do sacrifice continually.
Luk 1:5  There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.
Luk 1:36  And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth....

Perhaps you are also aware that there are also snares laid to catch the unwary that would assume that which has not been spoken.
2Th 2:11  And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12  That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Quote
Here are some passages that you can look upon in your leisure as to the laws and customs of those seen in the above paragraph.  Numbers 26:33; 27:1-11; 36:2-12; Joshua 17:3-6; 1 Chronicles 7:15

Thank you but I am very familiar with them all.

Quote
Because Jesus was born through the "SEED of the WOMAN" (Mary), her husband Joseph whose biological father was Jacob (Mat 1:16), adopted Jesus as was also the customs and laws given to the Jewish people by GOD.   

There is no assumptions as you can see. Maybe deductive reasoning leaving only one true answer. Many people will say this is not good enough...... It is to me.....because I simply believe every WORD, period, comma, etc to be the true WORD of GOD....SIMPLE


Yes many people would say it's not good enough to apply "deductive reasoning" in place of scriptural evidence. I am one of them.
Supply scriptural support for your assertions and I'll be happy to concur.
You will need scriptural evidence that Mary was a descendant of David and that she had no male siblings. Find that and I will accept what you say. If not, your statement about believing the word of God to be true is just hot air.

Quote

Make no bones about, Satan is trying to stop any one part of the plan of God from being fulfilled.


It makes his job easy when we put our trust in assumptions.


Geoff...It is very easy to dismiss scriptures because "it did not say that". Well, Yes it did say that...Jospeh's biological father is given in Mat 1:1-16...FACT

In Luke 3 we find that Heli is also Joseph's father.....HOW can this be? ???

One cannot have two fathers yet here we have two people who have two fathers...Jesus and Joseph.....

Since this is GOD's WORD...we start searching as to why this was said...We look at the history of the Jewish people and the Laws that GOD gave them...and find the answer...... I gave it to you and you have rejected it.

BEFORE I SAY ANYTHING IN RESPONSE I STUFFED UP AND MADE THIS INTO TWO TOPICS BY MISTAKE! I APOLOGISE, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO FIX UP THE MESS IF YOU CAN! :)

Okay, here goes...

I'm not prepared to accept circumstantial evidence as truth when there are other options.

Quote
One last item...You ask for me for information about why it appears Joseph had two fathers....This I gave you in fine detail......Yes it is up to you to follow Acts 17:11 (part of my signature) and find out for yourself.

Which I have done a long time ago.

Quote
Yet all you can do is take jabs at the God's WORD and Myself....By taking a jab at GOD's WORDs, you have to answer to Him...

I trust the word of God implicitly... your word... not so much.
 
Quote
as Far as your Jab at me[/color] "Why didn't Mary and Joseph understand what he told them? I'll bet you think you know what he meant! Why didn't they?" was unnecessary.

You take it as a jab but it wasn't intended as such. I have an opinion on it, most people I have discussed it with do. If you don't then I assumed wrongly. See how assumptions are not always right?
A wise person once told me that offence can't be given, it's always taken. It has served me well knowing that.

Quote
in Rev 1:6..(KJV)... God tells all of us;[/color]"And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen."

and in Probs 25:2..(KJV)..."It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter."

Here we find even though it is an OT scripture, it also relevant to Rev 1:6..as we in the CHurch (body of Christ) are to be Kings and Priest.

I urge you to follow Acts 17:11  and read your Bible literally,historically,  grammatically paying attention to the synthesis of the WORD....

You mean continue to do what I do in other words...

Quote
For in JOHN !:! states (KJV)[/color] "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

Yes it seems you read 'word' in that verse and see Jesus. I don't. Jesus officially became the word as recorded in Phil. 2:8-9, a fulfilment of God's plan and purpose from the foundation.
Phi 2:8  And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
Phi 2:9  Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:


Quote
In Psalms 12:6-7..(KJV).."The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. 7. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."

As in 2 TIM 3:16..(KJV).."All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"[/color]

The Bible (KJV) is an integrated Book (OT and NT). It has 66 books that were written by 40 humans and has only ONE Author....

Yes I concur absolutely as long as you don't think that the bible as we know it (even the KJV) is infallibly the word of God as delivered to the holy men of God who penned what they heard of the Spirit. Unfortunately devious men have had their way. An example of what I mean would be the personification of the 'word' in John 1:1

Quote
I hope this helps and if you also reject it, that is fine.....It is my job, given to me by GOD (in scripture) to teach the TRUE WORD for ll to hear.....

As it is my commission also...

Quote
I pray the Lord touches your heart so that the Blindness you have is removed enabling  you to see His True WORD>...

Speaking of jabs...
Just as well that wise person was true to his task...

Quote
I hope you have a very Blessed day as we are all (saved and unsaved) awaiting our individual rapture (death) to our everlasting life, wherever that may be......Up or Down.

Joh 6:44  No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Joh 6:65  And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

I'm not so bold as to think I am anything. I am relying on the mercy of God as are all men whether they know it or not, for...
1Ti 2:3  For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
1Ti 2:4  Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.




Bladerunner

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1360
  • Karma: +1014/-0
  • My Friend
  • Location: Tennessee, USA
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
« Reply #2 on: December 15, 2019, 09:19:34 pm »


Hello, Geoff...... Glad to have you on this forum.....

there are two genealogies of Jesus......... One is run through Abraham to Jesus and the other Luke's.

Keep in mind that Joseph's line had a blood curse upon them.  NO (MALE) child of that line could sit on the throne....Which would have also affected Jesus.

Joseph was the legal son of HELI....In other passages, we are told Heli is Mary's father...It was the custom where there were no males in the household, for the father to adopt the son-in-law and thus stabilizing the inheritance of the land, etc.  This is the reason why Joseph is listed ass the Son of Heli. (being the legal son of Heli).

Hope this helps

Blade


Thanks for the welcome.
I understand the curse.
I have several problems with what you wrote.
You say that Joseph was the "legal" son of Heli. There is no scriptural evidence to support the inference of this statement that I am aware of. If you know of this evidence in scripture please present it.
You also say "In other passages, we are told Heli is Mary's father". I am unaware of these passages. Would you please provide them?
You also seek to demonstrate that Mary had no male siblings. Would you provide the scriptural evidence for this please?
I am well aware that the statements you make are widely held to be true but I can't believe that God would leave us to make assumptions concerning something so important.
I mean, how does an assumption, however obvious it may seem, take the place of the word of God?

Psa 132:11  The LORD hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it; Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne.

Act 2:30  Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

You say assumptions which is not true...All that needs to be done is a backwards search sometimes.

Mat 1:1-16,,gives us the Genealogy of Adam to David and the royal LEGAL line from DAVID to Jesus..

In Mat 1:16.
." And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ."

We see above that Joseph was indeed in the LEGAL Royal line of DAVID, He is the Husband of MARY, the mother of Mary.

Thus so far we have established. Joseph (of the royal line) as the Husband of Mary who was the mother of Jesus Christ.

In Luke 3:23-28, we find Luke's genealogy of Jesus from Abraham to David is the same as Matthews.   Yet, from David to Jesus, Luke does not follow the royal line but rather through the second surviving son of Bathsheba, Nathan.  This line starting at Nathan down through Heli, the father of Mary, the Mother of Jesus. The Genealogy in LUKE is backwards with HELI being first in verse


Luk 3:23..(KJV).."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,"

We also see that Jesus , the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.

As above, Joseph already has a father in Matthew....so Heli has to be an adoptive Father as is Joseph being the LEGAL father of Jesus.......
By deductive reasoning, we can see that Mary was the daughter of HELI even though the Bible does not directly say... It can be see as no other way.


See this is where I have problems with your summary. You say "so Heli has to be an adoptive Father".
Luke says: 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,
What was Luke meaning by this statement?
Jesus being the son of Joseph, as everyone supposed. That's what he meant. Why do we know this? Because every time it's mentioned by those who knew Jesus that's what they thought to be the case... that Jesus was the son of Joseph. All these statements below are given to us as the word of God.
Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Luk 4:22 And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not this Joseph's son?

Joh 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

Joh 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?

Listen to his mother...

Luk 2:48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.
Luk 2:49  And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?
Luk 2:50  And they understood not the saying which he spake unto them.

Why didn't Mary and Joseph understand what he told them?
I'll bet you think you know what he meant! [/b]Why didn't they?

Quote
FYI: God does this from time to time.....Hiding events, names, etc for the His Kings and priest (the Church (body of Christ)) to seek out and find.


Oh yes, things are hidden. I don't deny that, but the facts are hidden and must be found. We are not supposed to follow rabbit trails riddled with assumptions and conjecture.

Quote
Are you familiar with Jewish LAWs and customs....If I am going over ground you already know, disregard.

On the trip out of Egypt to the wilderness, i was asked of Moses about the father "Zelophehad" who only had daughters and had no sons to receive His inheritance of Land given to them by GOD. This rule permitted the daughters to receive the inheritance if and only if they married within their tribe and their father legally adopted the son-in-law. This is also seen the book of Ruth. I suggest reading this book very cloesly for it is all about Jewish Law on redemption of Land by a Goel. (Boaz).


Yes it so happens I am very aware of all this.
I would be quite accepting of this solution if there was any evidence that it was the case in this situation, but there is not. You are basing your belief on the assumption that it is the case.
There is a stronger case to argue that Mary was of the house of Levi but you won't find me using it because, once again, it is conjecture, without scriptural evidence.
Jer 33:17  For thus saith the LORD; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel;
Jer 33:18  Neither shall the priests the Levites want a man before me to offer burnt offerings, and to kindle meat offerings, and to do sacrifice continually.
Luk 1:5  There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.
Luk 1:36  And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth....

Perhaps you are also aware that there are also snares laid to catch the unwary that would assume that which has not been spoken.
2Th 2:11  And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
2Th 2:12  That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Quote
Here are some passages that you can look upon in your leisure as to the laws and customs of those seen in the above paragraph.  Numbers 26:33; 27:1-11; 36:2-12; Joshua 17:3-6; 1 Chronicles 7:15

Thank you but I am very familiar with them all.

Quote
Because Jesus was born through the "SEED of the WOMAN" (Mary), her husband Joseph whose biological father was Jacob (Mat 1:16), adopted Jesus as was also the customs and laws given to the Jewish people by GOD.   

There is no assumptions as you can see. Maybe deductive reasoning leaving only one true answer. Many people will say this is not good enough...... It is to me.....because I simply believe every WORD, period, comma, etc to be the true WORD of GOD....SIMPLE


Yes many people would say it's not good enough to apply "deductive reasoning" in place of scriptural evidence. I am one of them.
Supply scriptural support for your assertions and I'll be happy to concur.
You will need scriptural evidence that Mary was a descendant of David and that she had no male siblings. Find that and I will accept what you say. If not, your statement about believing the word of God to be true is just hot air.

Quote

Make no bones about, Satan is trying to stop any one part of the plan of God from being fulfilled.


It makes his job easy when we put our trust in assumptions.


Geoff...It is very easy to dismiss scriptures because "it did not say that". Well, Yes it did say that...Jospeh's biological father is given in Mat 1:1-16...FACT

In Luke 3 we find that Heli is also Joseph's father.....HOW can this be? ???

One cannot have two fathers yet here we have two people who have two fathers...Jesus and Joseph.....

Since this is GOD's WORD...we start searching as to why this was said...We look at the history of the Jewish people and the Laws that GOD gave them...and find the answer...... I gave it to you and you have rejected it.

BEFORE I SAY ANYTHING IN RESPONSE I STUFFED UP AND MADE THIS INTO TWO TOPICS BY MISTAKE! I APOLOGISE, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO FIX UP THE MESS IF YOU CAN! :)

Okay, here goes...

I'm not prepared to accept circumstantial evidence as truth when there are other options.

Quote
One last item...You ask for me for information about why it appears Joseph had two fathers....This I gave you in fine detail......Yes it is up to you to follow Acts 17:11 (part of my signature) and find out for yourself.

Which I have done a long time ago.

Quote
Yet all you can do is take jabs at the God's WORD and Myself....By taking a jab at GOD's WORDs, you have to answer to Him...

I trust the word of God implicitly... your word... not so much.
 
Quote
as Far as your Jab at me[/color] "Why didn't Mary and Joseph understand what he told them? I'll bet you think you know what he meant! Why didn't they?" was unnecessary.

You take it as a jab but it wasn't intended as such. I have an opinion on it, most people I have discussed it with do. If you don't then I assumed wrongly. See how assumptions are not always right?
A wise person once told me that offence can't be given, it's always taken. It has served me well knowing that.

Quote
in Rev 1:6..(KJV)... God tells all of us;[/color]"And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen."

and in Probs 25:2..(KJV)..."It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter."

Here we find even though it is an OT scripture, it also relevant to Rev 1:6..as we in the CHurch (body of Christ) are to be Kings and Priest.

I urge you to follow Acts 17:11  and read your Bible literally,historically,  grammatically paying attention to the synthesis of the WORD....

You mean continue to do what I do in other words...

Quote
For in JOHN !:! states (KJV)[/color] "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

Yes it seems you read 'word' in that verse and see Jesus. I don't. Jesus officially became the word as recorded in Phil. 2:8-9, a fulfilment of God's plan and purpose from the foundation.
Phi 2:8  And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
Phi 2:9  Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:


Quote
In Psalms 12:6-7..(KJV).."The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. 7. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever."

As in 2 TIM 3:16..(KJV).."All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"[/color]

The Bible (KJV) is an integrated Book (OT and NT). It has 66 books that were written by 40 humans and has only ONE Author....

Yes I concur absolutely as long as you don't think that the bible as we know it (even the KJV) is infallibly the word of God as delivered to the holy men of God who penned what they heard of the Spirit. Unfortunately devious men have had their way. An example of what I mean would be the personification of the 'word' in John 1:1

Quote
I hope this helps and if you also reject it, that is fine.....It is my job, given to me by GOD (in scripture) to teach the TRUE WORD for ll to hear.....

As it is my commission also...

Quote
I pray the Lord touches your heart so that the Blindness you have is removed enabling  you to see His True WORD>...

Speaking of jabs...
Just as well that wise person was true to his task...

Quote
I hope you have a very Blessed day as we are all (saved and unsaved) awaiting our individual rapture (death) to our everlasting life, wherever that may be......Up or Down.

Joh 6:44  No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Joh 6:65  And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

I'm not so bold as to think I am anything. I am relying on the mercy of God as are all men whether they know it or not, for...
1Ti 2:3  For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
1Ti 2:4  Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

Your questioning the KJV can also be discussed in a different thread should you wish it.

Your question about the WORD of GOD in JOHN 1:1 and my use of it can be discussed in a different thread if you wish.

However, I would like to clear up the Joseph, May and Heli "assumption" as you called it....

In Luke 3:23.(KJV) ."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,"

Your word "assumption" kind of hit me wrong. Needless to say, I went back to research it a little more and here is the answer as given to you by GOD himself....

"AS WAS SUPPOSED"   meaning..νομίζω nomízō, nom-id'-zo; from G3551; properly, to do by law (usage), i.e. to accustom (passively, be usual); by extension, to deem or regard:—suppose, thing, be wont.

So Joseph was a son to heli according to customs of Israel concerning the issues brought about by Zelophehad. A Son-in-law  adopted......

Outline of Biblical (KJV) Usage :   to hold by custom or usage, own as a custom or usage, to follow a custom or usage, it is the custom, it is the received usage , to deem, think, suppose

Hope you have a good evening.


Blade

« Last Edit: December 15, 2019, 09:23:24 pm by Bladerunner »
1 Cor 15:3-4.."For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

Acts 17:11.."These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."

Geoff

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Super Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 16
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
« Reply #3 on: December 15, 2019, 10:43:02 pm »
Quote
Your questioning the KJV can also be discussed in a different thread should you wish it.

Your question about the WORD of GOD in JOHN 1:1 and my use of it can be discussed in a different thread if you wish.

However, I would like to clear up the Joseph, May and Heli "assumption" as you called it....

In Luke 3:23.(KJV) ."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,"

Your word "assumption" kind of hit me wrong. Needless to say, I went back to research it a little more and here is the answer as given to you by GOD himself....

"AS WAS SUPPOSED"   meaning..νομίζω nomízō, nom-id'-zo; from G3551; properly, to do by law (usage), i.e. to accustom (passively, be usual); by extension, to deem or regard:—suppose, thing, be wont.

So Joseph was a son to heli according to customs of Israel concerning the issues brought about by Zelophehad. A Son-in-law  adopted......

Outline of Biblical (KJV) Usage :   to hold by custom or usage, own as a custom or usage, to follow a custom or usage, it is the custom, it is the received usage , to deem, think, suppose

Hope you have a good evening.


Blade


Yes I thought you would get there sooner or later but let's not wrap it up quite so soon...

Here is a list of every usage of the word translated "supposed" in the KJV.
Check out the context of every time it is used and tell me I cannot hold the view I have; that people thought that Jesus was Joseph's actual son.

G3543
νομίζω
nomizō
Total KJV Occurrences: 15
supposed, 4
Mat_20:9-10 (2), Luk_3:23, Act_7:25, Act_21:29
supposing, 4
Luk_2:44, Act_14:19, Act_16:27, 1Ti_6:5
think, 4
Mat_5:17, Mat_10:34, Act_17:29, 1Co_7:36
suppose, 1
1Co_7:26
thought, 1
Act_8:20
wont, 1
Act_16:13

Now apply the verses I gave in support of the supposition that everyone had concerning the father of Jesus.

Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Luk 2:48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.

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,

Luk 4:22 And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not this Joseph's son?

Joh 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

Joh 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?

Next.

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,
Luk 3:24  Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,
Luk 3:25  Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,
Luk 3:26  Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:27  Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
Luk 3:28  Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,
Luk 3:29  Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
Luk 3:30  Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,
Luk 3:31  Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
Luk 3:32  Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,
Luk 3:33  Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:34  Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,
Luk 3:35  Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,
Luk 3:36  Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
Luk 3:37  Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
Luk 3:38  Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

How many of these sons were "supposed" by their contemporaries to be the son of...
In fact, isn't it true that you are indeed "supposed" or "assumed" to be the son of your father by the majority of the people who know you? How many people 'actually know' you are?

Luke, said at the beginning of his Gospel...
Luk 1:1  Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
Luk 1:2  Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
Luk 1:3  It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
Luk 1:4  That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.

In light of this statement he also said:
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,
In other words, Jesus... being as everyone supposed, the son of Joseph....

Let's be honest, the statements above demonstrate that everyone did think Jesus was the son of Joseph, including Luke.

Bladerunner

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1360
  • Karma: +1014/-0
  • My Friend
  • Location: Tennessee, USA
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
« Reply #4 on: December 16, 2019, 06:22:06 pm »
Quote
Your questioning the KJV can also be discussed in a different thread should you wish it.

Your question about the WORD of GOD in JOHN 1:1 and my use of it can be discussed in a different thread if you wish.

However, I would like to clear up the Joseph, May and Heli "assumption" as you called it....

In Luke 3:23.(KJV) ."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,"

Your word "assumption" kind of hit me wrong. Needless to say, I went back to research it a little more and here is the answer as given to you by GOD himself....

"AS WAS SUPPOSED"   meaning..νομίζω nomízō, nom-id'-zo; from G3551; properly, to do by law (usage), i.e. to accustom (passively, be usual); by extension, to deem or regard:—suppose, thing, be wont.

So Joseph was a son to heli according to customs of Israel concerning the issues brought about by Zelophehad. A Son-in-law  adopted......

Outline of Biblical (KJV) Usage :   to hold by custom or usage, own as a custom or usage, to follow a custom or usage, it is the custom, it is the received usage , to deem, think, suppose

Hope you have a good evening.


Blade


Yes I thought you would get there sooner or later but let's not wrap it up quite so soon...

Here is a list of every usage of the word translated "supposed" in the KJV.
Check out the context of every time it is used and tell me I cannot hold the view I have; that people thought that Jesus was Joseph's actual son.

G3543
νομίζω
nomizō
Total KJV Occurrences: 15
supposed, 4
Mat_20:9-10 (2), Luk_3:23, Act_7:25, Act_21:29
supposing, 4
Luk_2:44, Act_14:19, Act_16:27, 1Ti_6:5
think, 4
Mat_5:17, Mat_10:34, Act_17:29, 1Co_7:36
suppose, 1
1Co_7:26
thought, 1
Act_8:20
wont, 1
Act_16:13

Now apply the verses I gave in support of the supposition that everyone had concerning the father of Jesus.

Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Luk 2:48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.

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,

Luk 4:22 And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not this Joseph's son?

Joh 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

Joh 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?

Next.

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,
Luk 3:24  Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,
Luk 3:25  Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,
Luk 3:26  Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:27  Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
Luk 3:28  Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,
Luk 3:29  Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
Luk 3:30  Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,
Luk 3:31  Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
Luk 3:32  Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,
Luk 3:33  Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:34  Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,
Luk 3:35  Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,
Luk 3:36  Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
Luk 3:37  Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
Luk 3:38  Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

How many of these sons were "supposed" by their contemporaries to be the son of...
In fact, isn't it true that you are indeed "supposed" or "assumed" to be the son of your father by the majority of the people who know you? How many people 'actually know' you are?

Luke, said at the beginning of his Gospel...
Luk 1:1  Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
Luk 1:2  Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
Luk 1:3  It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
Luk 1:4  That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.

In light of this statement he also said:
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,
In other words, Jesus... being as everyone supposed, the son of Joseph....

Let's be honest, the statements above demonstrate that everyone did think Jesus was the son of Joseph, including Luke.

Jesus is the  legal son of Joseph...and the legal son of Heli, according to customs.....

We are at an end here........Thank you for the discussions and Hope you have a great day tomorrow and and a safe evening.

Blade
1 Cor 15:3-4.."For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

Acts 17:11.."These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."

Geoff

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Super Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 16
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
« Reply #5 on: December 16, 2019, 07:27:40 pm »
Quote
Your questioning the KJV can also be discussed in a different thread should you wish it.

Your question about the WORD of GOD in JOHN 1:1 and my use of it can be discussed in a different thread if you wish.

However, I would like to clear up the Joseph, May and Heli "assumption" as you called it....

In Luke 3:23.(KJV) ."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,"

Your word "assumption" kind of hit me wrong. Needless to say, I went back to research it a little more and here is the answer as given to you by GOD himself....

"AS WAS SUPPOSED"   meaning..νομίζω nomízō, nom-id'-zo; from G3551; properly, to do by law (usage), i.e. to accustom (passively, be usual); by extension, to deem or regard:—suppose, thing, be wont.

So Joseph was a son to heli according to customs of Israel concerning the issues brought about by Zelophehad. A Son-in-law  adopted......

Outline of Biblical (KJV) Usage :   to hold by custom or usage, own as a custom or usage, to follow a custom or usage, it is the custom, it is the received usage , to deem, think, suppose

Hope you have a good evening.


Blade


Yes I thought you would get there sooner or later but let's not wrap it up quite so soon...

Here is a list of every usage of the word translated "supposed" in the KJV.
Check out the context of every time it is used and tell me I cannot hold the view I have; that people thought that Jesus was Joseph's actual son.

G3543
νομίζω
nomizō
Total KJV Occurrences: 15
supposed, 4
Mat_20:9-10 (2), Luk_3:23, Act_7:25, Act_21:29
supposing, 4
Luk_2:44, Act_14:19, Act_16:27, 1Ti_6:5
think, 4
Mat_5:17, Mat_10:34, Act_17:29, 1Co_7:36
suppose, 1
1Co_7:26
thought, 1
Act_8:20
wont, 1
Act_16:13

Now apply the verses I gave in support of the supposition that everyone had concerning the father of Jesus.

Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Luk 2:48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.

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,

Luk 4:22 And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not this Joseph's son?

Joh 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

Joh 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?

Next.

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,
Luk 3:24  Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,
Luk 3:25  Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,
Luk 3:26  Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:27  Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
Luk 3:28  Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,
Luk 3:29  Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
Luk 3:30  Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,
Luk 3:31  Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
Luk 3:32  Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,
Luk 3:33  Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:34  Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,
Luk 3:35  Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,
Luk 3:36  Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
Luk 3:37  Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
Luk 3:38  Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

How many of these sons were "supposed" by their contemporaries to be the son of...
In fact, isn't it true that you are indeed "supposed" or "assumed" to be the son of your father by the majority of the people who know you? How many people 'actually know' you are?

Luke, said at the beginning of his Gospel...
Luk 1:1  Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
Luk 1:2  Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
Luk 1:3  It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
Luk 1:4  That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.

In light of this statement he also said:
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,
In other words, Jesus... being as everyone supposed, the son of Joseph....

Let's be honest, the statements above demonstrate that everyone did think Jesus was the son of Joseph, including Luke.

Jesus is the  legal son of Joseph...and the legal son of Heli, according to customs.....

We are at an end here........Thank you for the discussions and Hope you have a great day tomorrow and and a safe evening.

Blade

Blade.
Are you sure you haven't just partaken of my evil deeds?  :)

2Jo 1:9  Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
2Jo 1:10  If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
2Jo 1:11  For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

Bladerunner

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1360
  • Karma: +1014/-0
  • My Friend
  • Location: Tennessee, USA
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
« Reply #6 on: January 29, 2020, 07:19:24 pm »
Quote
Your questioning the KJV can also be discussed in a different thread should you wish it.

Your question about the WORD of GOD in JOHN 1:1 and my use of it can be discussed in a different thread if you wish.

However, I would like to clear up the Joseph, May and Heli "assumption" as you called it....

In Luke 3:23.(KJV) ."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,"

Your word "assumption" kind of hit me wrong. Needless to say, I went back to research it a little more and here is the answer as given to you by GOD himself....

"AS WAS SUPPOSED"   meaning..νομίζω nomízō, nom-id'-zo; from G3551; properly, to do by law (usage), i.e. to accustom (passively, be usual); by extension, to deem or regard:—suppose, thing, be wont.

So Joseph was a son to heli according to customs of Israel concerning the issues brought about by Zelophehad. A Son-in-law  adopted......

Outline of Biblical (KJV) Usage :   to hold by custom or usage, own as a custom or usage, to follow a custom or usage, it is the custom, it is the received usage , to deem, think, suppose

Hope you have a good evening.


Blade


Yes I thought you would get there sooner or later but let's not wrap it up quite so soon...

Here is a list of every usage of the word translated "supposed" in the KJV.
Check out the context of every time it is used and tell me I cannot hold the view I have; that people thought that Jesus was Joseph's actual son.

G3543
νομίζω
nomizō
Total KJV Occurrences: 15
supposed, 4
Mat_20:9-10 (2), Luk_3:23, Act_7:25, Act_21:29
supposing, 4
Luk_2:44, Act_14:19, Act_16:27, 1Ti_6:5
think, 4
Mat_5:17, Mat_10:34, Act_17:29, 1Co_7:36
suppose, 1
1Co_7:26
thought, 1
Act_8:20
wont, 1
Act_16:13

Now apply the verses I gave in support of the supposition that everyone had concerning the father of Jesus.

Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Luk 2:48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.

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,

Luk 4:22 And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not this Joseph's son?

Joh 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

Joh 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?

Next.

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,
Luk 3:24  Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,
Luk 3:25  Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,
Luk 3:26  Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:27  Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
Luk 3:28  Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,
Luk 3:29  Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
Luk 3:30  Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,
Luk 3:31  Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
Luk 3:32  Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,
Luk 3:33  Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:34  Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,
Luk 3:35  Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,
Luk 3:36  Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
Luk 3:37  Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
Luk 3:38  Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

How many of these sons were "supposed" by their contemporaries to be the son of...
In fact, isn't it true that you are indeed "supposed" or "assumed" to be the son of your father by the majority of the people who know you? How many people 'actually know' you are?

Luke, said at the beginning of his Gospel...
Luk 1:1  Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
Luk 1:2  Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
Luk 1:3  It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
Luk 1:4  That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.

In light of this statement he also said:
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,
In other words, Jesus... being as everyone supposed, the son of Joseph....

Let's be honest, the statements above demonstrate that everyone did think Jesus was the son of Joseph, including Luke.

Jesus is the  legal son of Joseph...and the legal son of Heli, according to customs.....

We are at an end here........Thank you for the discussions and Hope you have a great day tomorrow and and a safe evening.

Blade

Blade.
Are you sure you haven't just partaken of my evil deeds?  :)

2Jo 1:9  Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
2Jo 1:10  If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
2Jo 1:11  For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

OH MY? we know Jesus was born of Mary...Who was Mary's father is the question and Luke 3 tells us by using; NOT assumptions but rather deductive reasoning, that Heli adopted Mary's Husband, Joseph because of a civil law, GOD gave Israel in the Wilderness. 

Blade
1 Cor 15:3-4.."For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

Acts 17:11.."These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."

Geoff

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Super Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 16
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
« Reply #7 on: January 31, 2020, 06:34:38 am »
Quote
Your questioning the KJV can also be discussed in a different thread should you wish it.

Your question about the WORD of GOD in JOHN 1:1 and my use of it can be discussed in a different thread if you wish.

However, I would like to clear up the Joseph, May and Heli "assumption" as you called it....

In Luke 3:23.(KJV) ."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,"

Your word "assumption" kind of hit me wrong. Needless to say, I went back to research it a little more and here is the answer as given to you by GOD himself....

"AS WAS SUPPOSED"   meaning..νομίζω nomízō, nom-id'-zo; from G3551; properly, to do by law (usage), i.e. to accustom (passively, be usual); by extension, to deem or regard:—suppose, thing, be wont.

So Joseph was a son to heli according to customs of Israel concerning the issues brought about by Zelophehad. A Son-in-law  adopted......

Outline of Biblical (KJV) Usage :   to hold by custom or usage, own as a custom or usage, to follow a custom or usage, it is the custom, it is the received usage , to deem, think, suppose

Hope you have a good evening.


Blade


Yes I thought you would get there sooner or later but let's not wrap it up quite so soon...

Here is a list of every usage of the word translated "supposed" in the KJV.
Check out the context of every time it is used and tell me I cannot hold the view I have; that people thought that Jesus was Joseph's actual son.

G3543
νομίζω
nomizō
Total KJV Occurrences: 15
supposed, 4
Mat_20:9-10 (2), Luk_3:23, Act_7:25, Act_21:29
supposing, 4
Luk_2:44, Act_14:19, Act_16:27, 1Ti_6:5
think, 4
Mat_5:17, Mat_10:34, Act_17:29, 1Co_7:36
suppose, 1
1Co_7:26
thought, 1
Act_8:20
wont, 1
Act_16:13

Now apply the verses I gave in support of the supposition that everyone had concerning the father of Jesus.

Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Luk 2:48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.

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,

Luk 4:22 And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not this Joseph's son?

Joh 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

Joh 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?

Next.

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,
Luk 3:24  Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,
Luk 3:25  Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,
Luk 3:26  Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:27  Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
Luk 3:28  Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,
Luk 3:29  Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
Luk 3:30  Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,
Luk 3:31  Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
Luk 3:32  Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,
Luk 3:33  Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:34  Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,
Luk 3:35  Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,
Luk 3:36  Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
Luk 3:37  Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
Luk 3:38  Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

How many of these sons were "supposed" by their contemporaries to be the son of...
In fact, isn't it true that you are indeed "supposed" or "assumed" to be the son of your father by the majority of the people who know you? How many people 'actually know' you are?

Luke, said at the beginning of his Gospel...
Luk 1:1  Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
Luk 1:2  Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
Luk 1:3  It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
Luk 1:4  That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.

In light of this statement he also said:
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,
In other words, Jesus... being as everyone supposed, the son of Joseph....

Let's be honest, the statements above demonstrate that everyone did think Jesus was the son of Joseph, including Luke.

Jesus is the  legal son of Joseph...and the legal son of Heli, according to customs.....

We are at an end here........Thank you for the discussions and Hope you have a great day tomorrow and and a safe evening.

Blade

Blade.
Are you sure you haven't just partaken of my evil deeds?  :)

2Jo 1:9  Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
2Jo 1:10  If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
2Jo 1:11  For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

OH MY? we know Jesus was born of Mary...Who was Mary's father is the question and Luke 3 tells us by using; NOT assumptions but rather deductive reasoning, that Heli adopted Mary's Husband, Joseph because of a civil law, GOD gave Israel in the Wilderness. 

Blade

True. We know Jesus was born of Mary.
It's what Luke tells us.... that you WANT to be... indeed, have concluded MUST be, because... That's where the problem lies.
If you were to just let Luke say what he says without thinking about the because...
Why do I know this? Because I've been there myself.

I know I won't ever convince you. It's not my job.  :)
But just so you know, there's no point in you repeating yourself to me, because, as I'm sure you know, once you see something that's been there in front of you for so long, there's no going back.
That's our biggest problem with all of our theology, we know the answer all too often before we research, and therefore all the research points us in one direction...

Thanks for the discussion Blade, I know you mean well.

Bladerunner

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1360
  • Karma: +1014/-0
  • My Friend
  • Location: Tennessee, USA
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
« Reply #8 on: January 31, 2020, 05:48:19 pm »
Quote
Your questioning the KJV can also be discussed in a different thread should you wish it.

Your question about the WORD of GOD in JOHN 1:1 and my use of it can be discussed in a different thread if you wish.

However, I would like to clear up the Joseph, May and Heli "assumption" as you called it....

In Luke 3:23.(KJV) ."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,"

Your word "assumption" kind of hit me wrong. Needless to say, I went back to research it a little more and here is the answer as given to you by GOD himself....

"AS WAS SUPPOSED"   meaning..νομίζω nomízō, nom-id'-zo; from G3551; properly, to do by law (usage), i.e. to accustom (passively, be usual); by extension, to deem or regard:—suppose, thing, be wont.

So Joseph was a son to heli according to customs of Israel concerning the issues brought about by Zelophehad. A Son-in-law  adopted......

Outline of Biblical (KJV) Usage :   to hold by custom or usage, own as a custom or usage, to follow a custom or usage, it is the custom, it is the received usage , to deem, think, suppose

Hope you have a good evening.


Blade


Yes I thought you would get there sooner or later but let's not wrap it up quite so soon...

Here is a list of every usage of the word translated "supposed" in the KJV.
Check out the context of every time it is used and tell me I cannot hold the view I have; that people thought that Jesus was Joseph's actual son.

G3543
νομίζω
nomizō
Total KJV Occurrences: 15
supposed, 4
Mat_20:9-10 (2), Luk_3:23, Act_7:25, Act_21:29
supposing, 4
Luk_2:44, Act_14:19, Act_16:27, 1Ti_6:5
think, 4
Mat_5:17, Mat_10:34, Act_17:29, 1Co_7:36
suppose, 1
1Co_7:26
thought, 1
Act_8:20
wont, 1
Act_16:13

Now apply the verses I gave in support of the supposition that everyone had concerning the father of Jesus.

Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Luk 2:48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.

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,

Luk 4:22 And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not this Joseph's son?

Joh 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

Joh 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?

Next.

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,
Luk 3:24  Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,
Luk 3:25  Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,
Luk 3:26  Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:27  Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
Luk 3:28  Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,
Luk 3:29  Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
Luk 3:30  Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,
Luk 3:31  Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
Luk 3:32  Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,
Luk 3:33  Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:34  Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,
Luk 3:35  Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,
Luk 3:36  Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
Luk 3:37  Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
Luk 3:38  Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

How many of these sons were "supposed" by their contemporaries to be the son of...
In fact, isn't it true that you are indeed "supposed" or "assumed" to be the son of your father by the majority of the people who know you? How many people 'actually know' you are?

Luke, said at the beginning of his Gospel...
Luk 1:1  Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
Luk 1:2  Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
Luk 1:3  It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
Luk 1:4  That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.

In light of this statement he also said:
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,
In other words, Jesus... being as everyone supposed, the son of Joseph....

Let's be honest, the statements above demonstrate that everyone did think Jesus was the son of Joseph, including Luke.

Jesus is the  legal son of Joseph...and the legal son of Heli, according to customs.....

We are at an end here........Thank you for the discussions and Hope you have a great day tomorrow and and a safe evening.

Blade

Blade.
Are you sure you haven't just partaken of my evil deeds?  :)

2Jo 1:9  Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
2Jo 1:10  If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
2Jo 1:11  For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

OH MY? we know Jesus was born of Mary...Who was Mary's father is the question and Luke 3 tells us by using; NOT assumptions but rather deductive reasoning, that Heli adopted Mary's Husband, Joseph because of a civil law, GOD gave Israel in the Wilderness. 

Blade

True. We know Jesus was born of Mary.
It's what Luke tells us.... that you WANT to be... indeed, have concluded MUST be, because... That's where the problem lies.
If you were to just let Luke say what he says without thinking about the because...
Why do I know this? Because I've been there myself.

I know I won't ever convince you. It's not my job.  :)
But just so you know, there's no point in you repeating yourself to me, because, as I'm sure you know, once you see something that's been there in front of you for so long, there's no going back.
That's our biggest problem with all of our theology, we know the answer all too often before we research, and therefore all the research points us in one direction...

Thanks for the discussion Blade, I know you mean well.

I just don;'t understand what you are trying to say...That Heli is not Mary's Father?

are you trying to decide if there were TWO Josephs?
That Heli is Joseph's father. Luke (3:23, KJV)
That Jacob is Joseph's Father. (Mat 1:16, KJV)

What are you trying to say?

Mat 1:16 (KJV).
]."And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ."

OK, here we Know that:
 1. Jacob is the Father of Joseph? right?????
2. Joseph is the Husband of Mary?   right?????
3. Mary is the Mother of Jesus ?????   right???

Are we on the same page to this point?????

Luke 3:23..(KJV)...
"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,"

OK, Here we see that:

1. Jesus is the Son of Joseph ("as was supposed" according to customs-Adopted)
2. Joseph is the Father-in-law of Heli.
3. Joseph (the father of Jesus) is the son of Heli.

OK,   where are you at right here?


Let me add two more item to this discussion.

1. Both Matthew and Luke genealogies are identical from Adam to Abraham.


2. "The term in Luke 3:23 is nomizo in Greek: reckoned as by law. Joseph was adopted by Heli in accordance to the exception in the Torah for inheritance through brotherless sisters given to Zelophehad (Numbers 27:1-11; Joshua 17:3-6; Ezra 2:61; cf. Nehemiah 7:63; Numbers 32:41; 1 Chronicles 2:21-23, 34-35). "  (Koinonia House,The Gospel in Quadraphonic:)

I really would like to understand your rejection of whatever it is that you are trying to say...Please help me understand your postion(s) on these two scriptures..


Blade





1 Cor 15:3-4.."For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

Acts 17:11.."These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."

Mark Schmidt

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Super Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 25
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • Location: Kansas City, Missouri
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
« Reply #9 on: January 31, 2020, 10:30:54 pm »
There is a really good book in my opinion that covers the genealogy and the known historical facts of Jesus of Nazareth.  It is insightful at the same time as being controversial.   It is more academic than theological. 

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

George Orwell

Geoff

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Super Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 16
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
« Reply #10 on: February 01, 2020, 06:31:00 am »
Quote
Your questioning the KJV can also be discussed in a different thread should you wish it.

Your question about the WORD of GOD in JOHN 1:1 and my use of it can be discussed in a different thread if you wish.

However, I would like to clear up the Joseph, May and Heli "assumption" as you called it....

In Luke 3:23.(KJV) ."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,"

Your word "assumption" kind of hit me wrong. Needless to say, I went back to research it a little more and here is the answer as given to you by GOD himself....

"AS WAS SUPPOSED"   meaning..νομίζω nomízō, nom-id'-zo; from G3551; properly, to do by law (usage), i.e. to accustom (passively, be usual); by extension, to deem or regard:—suppose, thing, be wont.

So Joseph was a son to heli according to customs of Israel concerning the issues brought about by Zelophehad. A Son-in-law  adopted......

Outline of Biblical (KJV) Usage :   to hold by custom or usage, own as a custom or usage, to follow a custom or usage, it is the custom, it is the received usage , to deem, think, suppose

Hope you have a good evening.


Blade


Yes I thought you would get there sooner or later but let's not wrap it up quite so soon...

Here is a list of every usage of the word translated "supposed" in the KJV.
Check out the context of every time it is used and tell me I cannot hold the view I have; that people thought that Jesus was Joseph's actual son.

G3543
νομίζω
nomizō
Total KJV Occurrences: 15
supposed, 4
Mat_20:9-10 (2), Luk_3:23, Act_7:25, Act_21:29
supposing, 4
Luk_2:44, Act_14:19, Act_16:27, 1Ti_6:5
think, 4
Mat_5:17, Mat_10:34, Act_17:29, 1Co_7:36
suppose, 1
1Co_7:26
thought, 1
Act_8:20
wont, 1
Act_16:13

Now apply the verses I gave in support of the supposition that everyone had concerning the father of Jesus.

Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Luk 2:48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.

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,

Luk 4:22 And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not this Joseph's son?

Joh 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

Joh 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?

Next.

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,
Luk 3:24  Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,
Luk 3:25  Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,
Luk 3:26  Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:27  Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
Luk 3:28  Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,
Luk 3:29  Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
Luk 3:30  Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,
Luk 3:31  Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
Luk 3:32  Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,
Luk 3:33  Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:34  Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,
Luk 3:35  Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,
Luk 3:36  Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
Luk 3:37  Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
Luk 3:38  Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

How many of these sons were "supposed" by their contemporaries to be the son of...
In fact, isn't it true that you are indeed "supposed" or "assumed" to be the son of your father by the majority of the people who know you? How many people 'actually know' you are?

Luke, said at the beginning of his Gospel...
Luk 1:1  Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
Luk 1:2  Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
Luk 1:3  It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
Luk 1:4  That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.

In light of this statement he also said:
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,
In other words, Jesus... being as everyone supposed, the son of Joseph....

Let's be honest, the statements above demonstrate that everyone did think Jesus was the son of Joseph, including Luke.

Jesus is the  legal son of Joseph...and the legal son of Heli, according to customs.....

We are at an end here........Thank you for the discussions and Hope you have a great day tomorrow and and a safe evening.

Blade

Blade.
Are you sure you haven't just partaken of my evil deeds?  :)

2Jo 1:9  Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
2Jo 1:10  If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
2Jo 1:11  For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

OH MY? we know Jesus was born of Mary...Who was Mary's father is the question and Luke 3 tells us by using; NOT assumptions but rather deductive reasoning, that Heli adopted Mary's Husband, Joseph because of a civil law, GOD gave Israel in the Wilderness. 

Blade

True. We know Jesus was born of Mary.
It's what Luke tells us.... that you WANT to be... indeed, have concluded MUST be, because... That's where the problem lies.
If you were to just let Luke say what he says without thinking about the because...
Why do I know this? Because I've been there myself.

I know I won't ever convince you. It's not my job.  :)
But just so you know, there's no point in you repeating yourself to me, because, as I'm sure you know, once you see something that's been there in front of you for so long, there's no going back.
That's our biggest problem with all of our theology, we know the answer all too often before we research, and therefore all the research points us in one direction...

Thanks for the discussion Blade, I know you mean well.

I just don;'t understand what you are trying to say...That Heli is not Mary's Father?

are you trying to decide if there were TWO Josephs?
That Heli is Joseph's father. Luke (3:23, KJV)
That Jacob is Joseph's Father. (Mat 1:16, KJV)

What are you trying to say?

Mat 1:16 (KJV).
]."And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ."

OK, here we Know that:
 1. Jacob is the Father of Joseph? right?????
2. Joseph is the Husband of Mary?   right?????
3. Mary is the Mother of Jesus ?????   right???

Are we on the same page to this point?????

Luke 3:23..(KJV)...
"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,"

OK, Here we see that:

1. Jesus is the Son of Joseph ("as was supposed" according to customs-Adopted)
2. Joseph is the Father-in-law of Heli.
3. Joseph (the father of Jesus) is the son of Heli.

OK,   where are you at right here?


Let me add two more item to this discussion.

1. Both Matthew and Luke genealogies are identical from Adam to Abraham.


2. "The term in Luke 3:23 is nomizo in Greek: reckoned as by law. Joseph was adopted by Heli in accordance to the exception in the Torah for inheritance through brotherless sisters given to Zelophehad (Numbers 27:1-11; Joshua 17:3-6; Ezra 2:61; cf. Nehemiah 7:63; Numbers 32:41; 1 Chronicles 2:21-23, 34-35). "  (Koinonia House,The Gospel in Quadraphonic:)

I really would like to understand your rejection of whatever it is that you are trying to say...Please help me understand your postion(s) on these two scriptures..


Blade

Blade.
Okay, I'm saying that Luke is the authority I accept as the Divinely inspired version of events. If one reads the first three chapters of Luke without any preconceived notions about Jesus' parentage, taking into account the promises made to David concerning his posterity and reading the account of Mary's visitation by the angel Gabriel, one can only come to the conclusion that Jesus' conception was made possible by the power of the Holy Spirit alone. Joseph, the son of Heli was his father but had zero physical involvement in his conception.
Matthew's genealogical record is flawed in so many ways that it is impossible that it was Divinely inspired, let alone the dubious references to fulfilment of prophecy. But then, maybe you think there's a reasonable explanation based on... :)

So there you go, you asked, I gave. Make of it what you will. I'm thinking this will be goodbye on this topic... 

Geoff.

Geoff

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Super Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 16
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
« Reply #11 on: February 01, 2020, 06:36:22 am »
There is a really good book in my opinion that covers the genealogy and the known historical facts of Jesus of Nazareth.  It is insightful at the same time as being controversial.   It is more academic than theological.
And the name of that book would be?

Bladerunner

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1360
  • Karma: +1014/-0
  • My Friend
  • Location: Tennessee, USA
  • Referrals: 0
Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
« Reply #12 on: February 01, 2020, 06:29:27 pm »
Quote
Your questioning the KJV can also be discussed in a different thread should you wish it.

Your question about the WORD of GOD in JOHN 1:1 and my use of it can be discussed in a different thread if you wish.

However, I would like to clear up the Joseph, May and Heli "assumption" as you called it....

In Luke 3:23.(KJV) ."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,"

Your word "assumption" kind of hit me wrong. Needless to say, I went back to research it a little more and here is the answer as given to you by GOD himself....

"AS WAS SUPPOSED"   meaning..νομίζω nomízō, nom-id'-zo; from G3551; properly, to do by law (usage), i.e. to accustom (passively, be usual); by extension, to deem or regard:—suppose, thing, be wont.

So Joseph was a son to heli according to customs of Israel concerning the issues brought about by Zelophehad. A Son-in-law  adopted......

Outline of Biblical (KJV) Usage :   to hold by custom or usage, own as a custom or usage, to follow a custom or usage, it is the custom, it is the received usage , to deem, think, suppose

Hope you have a good evening.


Blade


Yes I thought you would get there sooner or later but let's not wrap it up quite so soon...

Here is a list of every usage of the word translated "supposed" in the KJV.
Check out the context of every time it is used and tell me I cannot hold the view I have; that people thought that Jesus was Joseph's actual son.

G3543
νομίζω
nomizō
Total KJV Occurrences: 15
supposed, 4
Mat_20:9-10 (2), Luk_3:23, Act_7:25, Act_21:29
supposing, 4
Luk_2:44, Act_14:19, Act_16:27, 1Ti_6:5
think, 4
Mat_5:17, Mat_10:34, Act_17:29, 1Co_7:36
suppose, 1
1Co_7:26
thought, 1
Act_8:20
wont, 1
Act_16:13

Now apply the verses I gave in support of the supposition that everyone had concerning the father of Jesus.

Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?

Luk 2:48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.

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,

Luk 4:22 And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not this Joseph's son?

Joh 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

Joh 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?

Next.

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,
Luk 3:24  Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,
Luk 3:25  Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,
Luk 3:26  Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:27  Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
Luk 3:28  Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,
Luk 3:29  Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
Luk 3:30  Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,
Luk 3:31  Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
Luk 3:32  Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,
Luk 3:33  Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:34  Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,
Luk 3:35  Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,
Luk 3:36  Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
Luk 3:37  Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
Luk 3:38  Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

How many of these sons were "supposed" by their contemporaries to be the son of...
In fact, isn't it true that you are indeed "supposed" or "assumed" to be the son of your father by the majority of the people who know you? How many people 'actually know' you are?

Luke, said at the beginning of his Gospel...
Luk 1:1  Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us,
Luk 1:2  Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
Luk 1:3  It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
Luk 1:4  That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.

In light of this statement he also said:
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,
In other words, Jesus... being as everyone supposed, the son of Joseph....

Let's be honest, the statements above demonstrate that everyone did think Jesus was the son of Joseph, including Luke.

Jesus is the  legal son of Joseph...and the legal son of Heli, according to customs.....

We are at an end here........Thank you for the discussions and Hope you have a great day tomorrow and and a safe evening.

Blade

Blade.
Are you sure you haven't just partaken of my evil deeds?  :)

2Jo 1:9  Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
2Jo 1:10  If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:
2Jo 1:11  For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

OH MY? we know Jesus was born of Mary...Who was Mary's father is the question and Luke 3 tells us by using; NOT assumptions but rather deductive reasoning, that Heli adopted Mary's Husband, Joseph because of a civil law, GOD gave Israel in the Wilderness. 

Blade

True. We know Jesus was born of Mary.
It's what Luke tells us.... that you WANT to be... indeed, have concluded MUST be, because... That's where the problem lies.
If you were to just let Luke say what he says without thinking about the because...
Why do I know this? Because I've been there myself.

I know I won't ever convince you. It's not my job.  :)
But just so you know, there's no point in you repeating yourself to me, because, as I'm sure you know, once you see something that's been there in front of you for so long, there's no going back.
That's our biggest problem with all of our theology, we know the answer all too often before we research, and therefore all the research points us in one direction...

Thanks for the discussion Blade, I know you mean well.

I just don;'t understand what you are trying to say...That Heli is not Mary's Father?

are you trying to decide if there were TWO Josephs?
That Heli is Joseph's father. Luke (3:23, KJV)
That Jacob is Joseph's Father. (Mat 1:16, KJV)

What are you trying to say?

Mat 1:16 (KJV).
]."And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ."

OK, here we Know that:
 1. Jacob is the Father of Joseph? right?????
2. Joseph is the Husband of Mary?   right?????
3. Mary is the Mother of Jesus ?????   right???

Are we on the same page to this point?????

Luke 3:23..(KJV)...
"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,"

OK, Here we see that:

1. Jesus is the Son of Joseph ("as was supposed" according to customs-Adopted)
2. Joseph is the Father-in-law of Heli.
3. Joseph (the father of Jesus) is the son of Heli.

OK,   where are you at right here?


Let me add two more item to this discussion.

1. Both Matthew and Luke genealogies are identical from Adam to Abraham.


2. "The term in Luke 3:23 is nomizo in Greek: reckoned as by law. Joseph was adopted by Heli in accordance to the exception in the Torah for inheritance through brotherless sisters given to Zelophehad (Numbers 27:1-11; Joshua 17:3-6; Ezra 2:61; cf. Nehemiah 7:63; Numbers 32:41; 1 Chronicles 2:21-23, 34-35). "  (Koinonia House,The Gospel in Quadraphonic:)

I really would like to understand your rejection of whatever it is that you are trying to say...Please help me understand your postion(s) on these two scriptures..


Blade

Blade.
Okay, I'm saying that Luke is the authority I accept as the Divinely inspired version of events. If one reads the first three chapters of Luke without any preconceived notions about Jesus' parentage, taking into account the promises made to David concerning his posterity and reading the account of Mary's visitation by the angel Gabriel, one can only come to the conclusion that Jesus' conception was made possible by the power of the Holy Spirit alone. Joseph, the son of Heli was his father but had zero physical involvement in his conception.
Matthew's genealogical record is flawed in so many ways that it is impossible that it was Divinely inspired, let alone the dubious references to fulfilment of prophecy. But then, maybe you think there's a reasonable explanation based on... :)

So there you go, you asked, I gave. Make of it what you will. I'm thinking this will be goodbye on this topic... 

Geoff.

If you insist Geoff we can terminate this thread. However, I assure you I was only simply trying (with an open mind) to understand you thought patterns on this subject....

Now you opened up another stream, Matthew. As you said:
"Matthew's genealogical record is flawed in so many ways that it is impossible that it was Divinely inspired, let alone the dubious references to fulfilment of prophecy. "

What is your proof of what you say...?????


"dubious references to fulfullment of Prophecy" is another stream but it can wait until another time.

Blade








1 Cor 15:3-4.."For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

Acts 17:11.."These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so."

 

+-Recent Topics

Border wall billions for Trump? by truthjourney
Today at 01:16:55 pm

Black Spring With Autumn Political Commentary by patrick jane
Today at 12:55:34 pm

Christianity Today Magazine - February 2020 by patrick jane
Today at 12:29:27 pm

Afflictions... by Lori Bolinger
Today at 09:56:30 am

Are you an overcomer? by Lori Bolinger
Today at 09:44:40 am

Fear and Loathing In The Flat Earth by patrick jane
Today at 09:32:17 am

Biblical Enclosed Flat Earth and Cosmos by patrick jane
Today at 09:31:58 am

Christ's Ways by Olde Tymer
Today at 07:50:08 am

God In The Holocaust by Olde Tymer
Today at 07:42:16 am

Biblical Theology - Video and Audio Bible Lessons - For Serious Students by patrick jane
Today at 03:58:28 am

Chuck Missler - How We Got Our Bible by Jesus Truth
Today at 03:37:22 am

Can You Debunk Flat Earth? by patrick jane
Today at 03:29:40 am

Flat Earth and Fake Space by patrick jane
Today at 03:29:07 am

1992 Los Angeles Riots - Original Uncut News Footage - VHS Archives - Rodney King - April 29th 1992 by patrick jane
Today at 02:46:38 am

Politics Today by patrick jane
February 17, 2020, 11:44:43 pm

Re: Trump 2020 - Winning !!! by patrick jane
February 17, 2020, 11:44:21 pm

Re: Politics Today by patrick jane
February 17, 2020, 11:44:07 pm

Your Favorite Music, Images and Memes by patrick jane
February 17, 2020, 08:51:58 pm