It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Originally posted by mkmasn
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by mkmasn
Who cares what the Jews say?
I rest my case.
And, it's a theory because there is no proof. Even the so called lineage doesn't prove anything.
I'm done discussing this with you.
Okay, by that logic the Nazi's said the Holocaust never happened, must not have happened correct? Address the remainder of my post. What the Jews acknowledge is irrelevant. And "doesn't prove anything"? It proves your claim was inaccurate that Jesus was not a descendant of David, His mother is a direct relative through her father Heli.
edit on 18-8-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by windword
Originally posted by mkmasn
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by mkmasn
Okay bro, if its that important for you to believe Mary was not related to David be my guest. I do think you're doing so because of ego and not wanting to admit there is something you were not aware of. Heli was Mary's father.
Again, it doesn't matter. Mary can be God, for all I care. My ego has nothing to do with it.
Jews do not believe Jesus to be their messiah because he is not from the seed of David on his father's side. That's not the only reason, but it's a very simple one, which you've insisted on drawing out.
You're stating a theory, of which there are multiple.edit on 18-8-2012 by mkmasn because: (no reason given)
It seems to me that the whole lineage question is just highlighted more, the more we understand genetics. If Jesus truly was born from a virgin, and had no father, what proof do have that God even used Mary's egg? She may have just been a surrogate for God and Mrs God, and had no genetic influence at all.
The virgin birth throws the whole lineage thing down the drain, in my opinion.
Another thing. If Jesus had this awesome God DNA, why didn't he have children and share the perfection factor with the rest of humanity. How can we hope to be Jesus like if his DNA wasn't even human, and continues to elude us genetically?edit on 18-8-2012 by windword because: (no reason given)
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,
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,
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,
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,
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,
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,
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,
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,
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,
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,
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,
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,
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,
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,
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,
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.
1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.
2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;
3 And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram;
4 And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon;
5 And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;
6 And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;
7 And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa;
8 And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;
9 And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias;
10 And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias;
11 And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:
12 And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;
13 And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor;
14 And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud;
15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;
16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
So what do you have to refute the genealogy in Luke?
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by mkmasn
The name of Joseph's father was also Heli, it was a common name. The Jewish Talmud also states that Mary's dad was named Heli. ( Chagigah 77:4). It's like two married people who both had fathers with the name of John. Jacob was Joseph's blood father, Heli was his father is law. Jacob and Heli were half-brothers, their children married. (Mary and Joseph)... both were of the tribe of Judah and the house of David.
Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by jmdewey60
Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by NewAgeMan
Paul said Jesus was resurrected, and that is the main thing and different Gospel writers can describe what they think happened when that fact was discovered and I don't think it is so defeating to their integrity that they don't match up. It could be there was an inclination to add some profundity to the telling that kind of goes over our heads today, not being in the same sort of cultural milieu as they were.
. . . the bulk of the Gospels holds water and there is most assuredly a historical Jesus present in the midst of it all, it's unmistakable.
I think it is helpful to me to know that there are little hidden messages built in and to be open to finding them. I have been reading a couple authors who have spotted those things and I seek those out (in addition to the more mainstream sort of interpreters of course).
What, you don't think Jesus completed the whole ritual and finished what he started? Don't be absurd, it's no FUN without the resurrection, and it means everything. Did he totally die DIE? I don't care, all I know in examining the whole thing is that it was meaningful and that he knew what he was doing, and that he was obediant unto death. If his resurrection was "seeded" into the minds of people like Nocodemus and Joseph of Aramathea, or even a certain Roman soldier, that they came to recognize and understanding what he was doing, made it possible, makes no difference if Jesus was himself double-blind going into the ordeal, and suffer grievously he certainly did either way. I think he made it through by a mere thread, but that's just me. Nevertheless, the whole ritual as an enactment of an eternal evolutionary process of death and resurrection still functions, within the entire frame of prophecy, to a t (literally) That it was done in conjuction with the natural order also of the clockwork and the prophetic, communicative movement of the moon, the sun and the starry skies, well, let's just say it's the whole work, whether Jesus completely and utterly DIED and came back to life, or not!
Don't you see the marvel in it, in what he did, and why?
Read the passage involving the Road to Emmeus, and note how the resurrected Jesus, while still bearing physical wounds (now well on the mend), talked with his friends and explained everything to them, while employing the art of disguise, even asking for food when he was hungry, and you'll see. He made it! He went thorugh the eye of the needle, a "camel" or water bearer, across the desert of human history!
But he didn't know precisely HOW it was going to happen, until it happened, until he woke up naked, or bandaged, in that tomb, enough water to go three days, not even knowing until it happened how or who orchestrated it ie: he left it in God's hands. Mind you, upon awakening and realizing what happened, I'm sure he danced around in that tomb while praising God and shouted out, NICODEMUS! And laughing his ass off no doubt too!
And note the men in dazzling white, who the women encountered when they went to the tomb to treat the body as per custom, and what they said (no doubt there again either) with a very big smile..
When you consider the principal at the heart of it, it doesn't matter if there ARE any bones, because it's the kind of thing you just can't make any bones about!
The Humbled and Exalted Christ
Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
~ Philippians 2:5-11
(Italics as it is written here)
www.biblegateway.com...
Originally posted by NewAgeMan
The Day of the Cross
www.bethlehemstar.net...
I wonder if the Jews became aware of the signs that accompanied Jesus' life and Great Work, if they would be convinced..?
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by mkmasn
What about the Jews who said Jesus was their Messiah? Why are they irrelevant?
Thee: Well then what about the testimony of the witnesses to the resurrection?
Me: What witnesses?
Originally posted by eight bits
bibledefender
Well, I am a little confused. You mentioned a debate, but then you didn't have much time, but then you mentioned a debate again, and now you propose a long (ten posts each) debate.
No matter. I am not a historian, so I cannot imagine anybody being so interested in what I have to say as to sit on the sidelines, unable to contribute their own views, while I recite mine in alternation with yours. Also, and maybe it's because I'm an agnostic, but I have little to gain from persuading anybody that the Resurrection didn't happen, if such a thing were even possible.
However, I would appreciate an answer to the question which I posed to you before you left for the weekend (which I hope you enjoyed), which was
Thee: Well then what about the testimony of the witnesses to the resurrection?
Me: What witnesses?
Thank you.
Originally posted by MamaJ
reply to post by bibledefender
Oh...ok. Hmmmmm. Well I would be willing to debate Reincarnation and Karma being Laws of Nature.
In my opinion one cannot prove Jesus resurrected, we were not there and there is no evidence, just heresy.
One can prove reincarnation and karma though. :-)edit on 20-8-2012 by MamaJ because: (no reason given)