ayenitre:


This conjecture is your evidence? Even the author had to have a caveat at the end. Even if David's mother had him outta wedlock that doesn't make her a harlot. One more thing, if this were true, the foundation of our faith, the progeny of Jesus which makes him earn the title 'lion of tribe of Judah' will be under scrutiny.

One thing is sure, only an enemy of christians and Jesus will want this to be so true. This is a frontal attack on our faith, a case of the enemy within.

Please read my post and comment again... Have a nice day....

Sanchez01:

And this cretin believes I'm 17. Again, Sarah did not 'give' Hagar to Abraham. She simply asked him to 'SLEEP' with her. Initially, you said there was no law at the time, now Abraham did not 'beg'. You sure are a bit shallow, my friend.


I didn't write the Scriptures. It seems Google failed you this time. Now take a read, the LAW gave men the liberty to 'roam' among the women, forbidding them to sleep with other people's wives. In reality, cases of incests, and adultery were greatly committed in the Old Testament and they were equally overlooked at the time. That does not imply that what was committed at the time was not incests and adultery.


How did he wait for God's promise? By impregnating Hagar, yeah? 1 Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. But she had an Egyptian slave named Hagar; 2 so she said to Abram, “The Lord has kept me from having children. Go, sleep with my slave; perhaps I can build a family through her.” Abram agreed to what Sarai said. (Genesis 16:1-4 NIV)
Again I ask, How did Abraham wait on God's Promise


I'm not really 'my pastor says' kinda Christian. You honestly need to devote time to studying. You sure need to.

To be both of you, it is such a shame that you clearly copy and paste without understanding what you copy. Who determines if a woman is married to man? Despite the fact that Hagar was a slave, what were the items Adam brought forward that confirmed he had moral and societal standings in mating with his wife's slave Don't forget that this same Abraham asked his servant, Eliezer, to look for a wife for Isaac from his nephew's family, and just be Eliezer went on the journey, Abraham asked him to take 'certain things' which signified the bride price paid on Rebekah. Again, what price did Abraham pay over Hagar to warrant sleeping with her?

it is because u don't know the definition of marriage and it is done in the olden days

You can't give what you don't have, SULE IS A SCAM....Take it or leave it.

Wee you keep kwiet you have the bible read and pray for revelation

Jacksonville:
Nigerians! Don't be too quick to cast your stones. Some hidden truths are known only through revelation. Take it or leave it.

It's normal ponder on this, as it isn't written where David's mum was a "harlot", but this is coming from a man of revelations. Some truths are revealed to those whom God trusts. It's left for the receiver to tell the world or not.


#Mytake

Jacksonville:
Nigerians! Don't be too quick to cast your stones. Some hidden truths are known only through revelation. Take it or leave it.

It's normal ponder on this, as it isn't written where David's mum was a "harlot", but this is coming from a man of revelations. Some truths are revealed to those whom God trusts. It's left for the receiver to tell the world or not.


#Mytake

and GOD does not trust u to reveal truth to u ryt....OKAY

Who was David’s mother?
This is where it gets interesting. No where in scripture is David’s mother mentioned by name.

If David’s mother was the adulterer, then David would not be in the bloodline of Jessie, which is the line Jesus is to be born from. It would have to be Jessie, David’s father, having an affair with another woman, in order to keep the bloodline of David correct as the Bible shows. Otherwise you would negate what the Bible says.

This explains why David was not initially included in the meeting with Samuel as technically it could be argued David was not a true son of Jessee. However, God did include David as part of Jessee’s family much in the same way Jesus was considered a son of Joseph though conceived by the Holy Spirit.


Let see it this way .... God did include David as part of Jesse's family

David had two half-sisters
(1 Chron. 2:13-16), and their father was not Jesse but Nahash (2 Sam. 17:25, 2 Sam. 10:2) who was an Ammonite king (1 Sam. 11:1; 1 Sam. 12:12). David’s mother might have been a second wife of Jesse. Perhaps the first wife of Jesse was considered superior to his second wife, because this would explain why David’s half brothers viewed themselves as superior to David and why David was not called before Samuel among the other sons – as he was possibly viewed as an illegitimate child (1 Sam. 16:11).

We can speculate further that perhaps David’s mother was not married to Jesse when she became pregnant, or maybe she was still the concubine of, or married to Nahash when she conceived David. Moreover, we can’t rule out that it might be as per this story, reminding us about Jacob and Leah + her sister Rachel. If this story is applicable, then Jesse is indeed David’s father without even knowing it due to a sneaky plan carried out by his wife, and David’s brothers would regard him as an illegitimate and hated son of their mother.
Psalm 69:8 I am become a stranger unto my brethren, and an alien unto my...... mother’s children..........— 19 Thou hast known my reproach, and my shame, and my dishonour:

It was Jewish belief children could be punished for the sins of the parents.
“in sin my mother conceived me” means exactly what it says — David’s mother conceived him in an act of sin. She committed adultery and David was the byproduct of this infidelity. Psalm 69 He explains his frustration of being punished for a sin he did not commit (v 4) – his mother’s sin. Worse, he became the object of mockery as the drunkards sang about his plight (v 26).
David was not blaming his sin on his birth, but he was simply stating that even the circumstances related to his birth were surrounded by sin,

David’s mother was different — her name was excised from the Biblical account

dominusgai:

Point of correction, not evil content, just deep Jewish practices that was irrelevant to Christianity

okay

Flexherbal:
Is it in the Bible , that she was a harlot?

Was it spelt out like that?

1.but we know that Davids mother was not Mrs Jesse.2. He was not regarded as a son by Jesse when prophect Samuel told Jesse to bring all His sons for the worship service in his house. All the other sons were present except for David.3. All the sons of David were commanders in saul 's army but David was taking care of sheep in the wilderness. 4.When david ásked question concerning goliath, his elders brother replied him with this answer" I know your stuborness, what are you doing here and who have you left those few sheeps with." 5. Which father will hear that his beloved son or brothers will hear that his brother encountered s lion and a bear someother time and still left hin to continue taking the sheeps to the wilderness.6. finally David said in sin did my mother concieve me in Psalms 51:9, you and i know that when married couple sleep together and bring fortj a child is not sin bit david said when my father and mother came together and brought me forth it happened in sin.

donfemo:
90% of the people who have made comments don't even know what they are saying. Some don't even know what the mother of David is called. Though apostle Suleiman is totally wrong

well read this: http://www.chabad.org/theJewishWoman/article_cdo/aid/280331/jewish/Nitzevet-Mother-of-David.htm

Bro, i know this link quite well, and while I cannot outrightly say it is wrong, I can only say it is outnumbered.
I did a study of the women of the bible over a year ago and while I came across this link, I also came across up to four other links claiming David's mother was a prostitute. I searched for more links to corabborate this story but could not find any.
But I found about five articles saying David's mother was a prostitute.
But still, as I did not read any actually ancient text myself, I can't claim it is wrong, only outnumbered

itsloba:

Revelations indeed, the bible is d complete revelation from God to man, it is a closed system, not an open one. That was why paul told the Corinthians not to exceed what is written. What apostle did is just an abuse of Gods word...

My first question to you is, who compiled the bible?
Second question is did you know the bible compilation did not begin with 66 books?
3rd question is do you know the bible was once more than 66 books?
4th question is do you know the Catholic church currently has a 3 by 6 km library of old scrolls they are studying and investigating the source?
5th question is do you know they are over 3 books referenced in the bible that are not part of the bible?
6th question is what happens when those books referenced are discovered? Would you doubt their validity because they where not part of the 66 books you know?
In, what is currently written but not discovered or displayed is much more that the 66 books in the bible.
They are about 4 extra books of revelations, at least 10 extra epistles of Paul. 5 extra accounts of Jesus, over 10 extra prophetic books
As I said earlier, the Catholics compiled the bible, and while they had many verified and unverified scrolls from various writers through the age, they only compiled what they deemed relevant to Christianity.
That is why if you ask a true Catholic the number of books that make up the bible, he will tell you he doesn't know as he understands that there are more written scriptures outside the bible than inside it.

Joagbaje:
Apostle was not wrong Rahab the harlot who saved the spies was the great grand mother of David . She Gave birth to Boaz ,boaz gave birth to salmon ,salmon gave birth to David father jessee. And I sure the apostle didn't say it to put David down but rather to glorify God that it doesn't matter your background God can change your story

Mat 1:5 — Mat 1:6
Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab,Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth,Obed the father of Jesse,and Jesse the father of King David.

James 2:25
Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?


But if the apostle was talking about the direct mother . I may need to check that out.

So, mother is now same as father? He said: the mother of David was an harlot!



Apparently to justify seeing him with an harlot!

Jacksonville:
Nigerians! Don't be too quick to cast your stones. Some hidden truths are known only through revelation. Take it or leave it.

[s]It's normal ponder on this, as it isn't written where David's mum was a "harlot", but this is coming from a man of revelations. Some truths are revealed to those whom God trusts. It's left for the receiver to tell the world or not.[/s]


#Mytake

I don't know when kids like you will grow up and think logically.

dominusgai:

My first question to you is, who compiled the bible?
Second question is did you know the bible compilation did not begin with 66 books?
3rd question is do you know the bible was once more than 66 books?
4th question is do you know the Catholic church currently has a 3 by 6 km library of old scrolls they are studying and investigating the source?
5th question is do you know they are over 3 books referenced in the bible that are not part of the bible?
6th question is what happens when those books referenced are
discovered? Would you doubt their validity because they where not part of the 66 books you know?
In, what is currently written but not discovered or displayed is much more that the 66 books in the bible.
They are about 4 extra books of revelations, at least 10 extra epistles of Paul. 5 extra accounts of Jesus, over 10 extra prophetic books
As I said earlier, the Catholics compiled the bible, and while they had many verified and unverified scrolls from various writers through the age, they only compiled what they deemed relevant to Christianity.
That is why if you ask a true Catholic the number of books that make up the bible, he will tell you he doesn't know as he understands that there are more written scriptures outside the bible than inside it.

All the questions you've asked i know
But do you know why most of this books are not part of the bible we currently use today?
Again, if we all have the right to recieve new revelations about narratives in the bible(just like our apostle did) then the word of God is not perfect.
According to the history of the jews, the mother of David is not an harlot .

itsloba:

All the questions you've asked i know
But do you know why most of this books are not part of the bible we currently use today?
Again, if we all have the right to recieve new revelations about narratives in the bible(just like our apostle did) then the word of God is not perfect.
According to the history of the jews, the mother of David is not an harlot .

I agree with your last point of view but I my answer to your first question is and always will be because the Catholic church dimmed the other books irrelevant to Christianity

dominusgai:

I agree with your last point of view but I my answer to your first question is and always will be because the Catholic church dimmed the other books irrelevant to Christianity

I've you read some of the supposed books, they include the gospel of judas, gospel of philip to mention a few, most of this writers are imposters. After the accession of Jesus christ, many teachings and writings are available to the people, and most of this writings are undoctrinal and do not conform with the rest of the bible.

itsloba:

I've you read some of the supposed books, they include the gospel of judas, gospel of philip to mention a few, most of this writers are imposters. After the accession of Jesus christ, many teachings and writings are available to the people, and most of this writings are undoctrinal and do not conform with the rest of the bible.

Oh I have sir, and while I agree with you that not all of them are good and surely do not conform with the rest of the bible, I can not agree with you that most are undoctrinal. I will still maintain that they are not added because they Wre deemed irrelevant to Christianity.
And the doctrine that is used as a standard was not Christ made, but man made. and it was still the Catholic church that decided the doctrine that was made standard. So at the end of the day, it ultimately was their decision the books that Wre made available in the bible and the ones that where not.

dominusgai:

Oh I have sir, and while I agree with you that not all of them are good and surely do not conform with the rest of the bible, I can not agree with you that most are undoctrinal. I will still maintain that they are not added because they Wre deemed irrelevant to Christianity.
And the doctrine that is used as a standard was not Christ made, but man made. and it was still the Catholic church that decided the doctrine that was made standard. So at the end of the day, it ultimately was their decision the books that Wre made available in the bible and the ones that where not.

And let me answer one of your questions
The bible was not complied by catholics

dragonking3:
You are the one who is actually foolish because he is right. Google is your friend and ur brain is meant for use.

https://opentheword.org/2013/08/09/king-davids-big-dark-secret/

My guy, ur foolishness no get rival if u believe those things. As for me, I believe nothing outside the Bible.

itsloba:

And let me answer one of your questions
The bible was not complied by catholics

Oh sir but it was. I did not say it was written by the Catholic church but compiled together as a book by the Catholic church. You just need to google the history of the bible with your phone.

BALLOSKI:
I don't know when kids like you will grow up and think logically.

Mr logical. I've had enough. I think it's high time u make minding your business as ur ambition.. What's it with u people? Can't u just read d post and move on?. Must you exhibit your immature nature to prove nonsense points.

I chose to ignore mentions and I won't reply another, not from you. This will seal it for today. bye, I won't be replying .

dominusgai:

Oh sir but it was. I did not say it was written by the Catholic church but compiled together as a book by the Catholic church. You just need to google the history of the bible with your phone.

By saying catholics are you refering to Constantine and the council of nicia?

itsloba:

By saying catholics are you refering to Constantine and the council of nicia?

why don't we start far back with the council of jamnia.
But for better clarity. I think the link below lists the process followed in compiling the bible.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-43/how-we-got-our-bible-christian-history-timeline.html

It is only the roman catholic that can trace a connection to this time and can lay claim to a direct descent from Peter. So as at the time of the first compilation, it was only the roman Catholic church that was in existence

dominusgai:

why don't we start far back with the council of jamnia.
But for better clarity. I think the link below lists the process followed in compiling the bible.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-43/how-we-got-our-bible-christian-history-timeline.html

It is only the roman catholic that can trace a connection to this time and can lay claim to a direct descent from Peter. So as at the time of the first compilation, it was only the roman Catholic church that was in existence

Before i read your link, did you know that 280 after the death of Jesus christ, Christainity was banned by the roman empire and the church was greately persecuted?

Joagbaje:
Apostle was not wrong Rahab the harlot who saved the spies was the great grand mother of David . She Gave birth to Boaz ,boaz gave birth to salmon ,salmon gave birth to David father jessee. And I sure the apostle didn't say it to put David down but rather to glorify God that it doesn't matter your background God can change your story

Mat 1:5 — Mat 1:6
Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab,Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth,Obed the father of Jesse,and Jesse the father of King David.

James 2:25
Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?


But if the apostle was talking about the direct mother . I may need to check that out.

The Rahab that married Salmon and gave birth to Boaz is different from Rahab the prostitute. Rahab the prostitute was believed to have married Joshua after she converted to Judaism.

Moreover, you didn't even understand the Bible verse you quoted.

itsloba:

Before i read your link, did you know that 280 after the death of Jesus christ, Christainity was banned by the roman empire and the church was greately persecuted?

Oh I know. I was an indebt Catholic before I became Pentecostal. So I know what I am saying. I was even a catechism teacher. So I am not talking from an outsiders point of view.

dominusgai:

Oh I know. I was an indebt Catholic before I became Pentecostal. So I know what I am saying. I was even a catechism teache
r. So I am not talking from an outsiders point of view.

Oh, Good..and please correct me if im wrong, the Jania council worked on the Hebrew bible (old testerment).

noetic5:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7W2S_2xmsHs

See tweet https://twitter.com/KneWKeeD/status/856618365976293378

Popular twitter influencer, Eric Okafor (aka @Knewkeed) posted a 2-minute clip of Apostle Johnson Suleman's sermon where he said that David's mother was a harlot. See the the responses from Nigerians, below

[img]https://2.bp..com/-KYjwe3dCUo0/WP7mDpdHWuI/AAAAAAAMPas/tmdlBeHKn60dbgo6B8mfp5XMGGdRZ3gGgCLcB/s640/2a.jpeg[/img]


[img]https://2.bp..com/-OLR2sWxsgUk/WP7mDuTrb6I/AAAAAAAMPaw/mlAvyz2WUpgbKMZ6y3Fg4b1BBsTz4IeKwCLcB/s640/2aa.jpeg[/img]


[img]https://1.bp..com/-pJhQ60dSuj8/WP7mFX5fXEI/AAAAAAAMPa0/gwFZftHcN1AmNw5AFqEf1N6eazleGol_wCLcB/s640/2ab.jpeg[/img]


[img]https://2.bp..com/-Cum_FpmufWE/WP7mHEuzSqI/AAAAAAAMPa8/1h1zz6_4K-8dSMe72POqR6Q0mSQcv4qFgCLcB/s640/2ABC.jpg[/img]


[img]https://4.bp..com/-FpBpBwGNCVo/WP7mHAyggfI/AAAAAAAMPbE/mPqyQklwHDU-KjXfOSrty4sO0e6VS-YGgCLcB/s640/2b.png[/img]


[img]https://4.bp..com/-v9Qo4BYdvp0/WP7mHIgp22I/AAAAAAAMPbA/fm1pJD_StjcR-kTxRO9h_Dn8LAI_BwBhACLcB/s640/2c.jpeg[/img]


[img]https://3.bp..com/-dv0detb1diY/WP7mLHx-1vI/AAAAAAAMPbI/t7GAKkip138axouLPLHrV-j0-wtOpp3TQCLcB/s640/2d.jpg[/img]



Source: http://www.latestamebonaija.com/2017/04/apostle-suleman-calls-king-davids-mum.html

Every human being was shapen in iniquity. That's like kindergarten bible teaching. i wonder the rubbish point being made here. Jesus said in the world, His disciples will have tribulation, and many are the afflictions of the righteous. It has nothing to do with foundation. Is Sule more prophet than David? Abeg, talk sense jor.

itsloba:

Oh, Good..and please correct me if im wrong, the Jania council worked on the Hebrew bible (old testerment).

kind of, but the correct term is that they worked on the old testament

RAHAB THE HARLOT ................IS NOT ...........RECHAB THE MOTHER OF BOAZ ..<<<FROM HOPE OF ISRAEL)))))



We read in Matthew 1:5 that "Salmon begot Boaz by Rahab..." Who, then, was this female ancestor of the Messiah who is stated to have married Salmon the son of Naashon, a prince of the Royal line of Judah -- sometime either before or after the Israelites occupied the Promised Land?

Every Bible translator and commentator, without exception, associates her with -- or directly identifies her as -- "Rahab the harlot" who was saved alive from the massacre at Jericho. As a result of this understanding several attempts have been made to,

(a) identify Rahab as an Israelite descendant of Serah, the daughter of Ephraim, who went to Canaan about two centuries or so before the Exodus (1 Chronicles 7:24) and built the strongholds of Beth-horon and Uzzen-sherah some 25 miles west of Jericho.

(b) clear her name of the term "harlot" by describing her as a "widow" or an "innkeeper" -- or as a "trader in flax."

These attempts, however, fall short because the term "harlot" is not only employed by Joshua in the Old Testament, but also by Paul and James in the New Testament 1,500 years later! One would think that there had been ample opportunity since Joshua's day to clear her name from that obnoxious designation had there been no justification for it. Moreover, Joshua himself was a ninth generation descendant of Ephraim (1 Chronicles 7:24-27) and would have been related to Rahab if she was, in truth, a descendant of Ephraim's daughter Sherah.

If this were the case, not only would Joshua have given his two spies careful instructions for rescuing Rahab on the grounds of consanguinity, but he also would have cleared her name of any undeserved accusations of being a harlot had they not been true.

Joshua 6:25 states that Rahab was given land in the midst of Israel in return for risking her own life by hiding the two spies that were sent to Jericho. Flavius Josephus, in his Antiquities of the Jews (Book 5, chapter 1, sections 2 and 7), records the same story but neither he nor Joshua make any mention of a marriage taking place between this Rahab and Salmon. This deafening silence is, in itself, the strongest proof that no such marriage ever took place.

The Age Problem

Let us go a step further and assume for a moment that Salmon did indeed marry Rahab the harlot within a year or so of the fall of Jericho -- and that Boaz was born a year or so after that. If such were the case, then Boaz would have been about 115 years old when he married Ruth! On the other hand, if we assume that Rahab was about 30 years of age when Jericho fell (and that Salmon did not marry her until 30 years or more later) then not only would Rahab have been at least 60 years of age and no longer able to bear children, but Boaz -- even if born 30 years after the fall of Jericho -- would still have been 85 years of age when he married Ruth.

As a result, all the evidence indicates that Salmon did not, in fact, marry Rahab the Canaanite harlot. If you research this matter in the Bible, you will find that the Bible clearly states, in plain writing, that Salmon married a different woman altogether -- a woman with a different name and without any distinguishing appellation (obnoxious or otherwise) attached to her name. It is the religious translators and commentators -- through error or agenda -- who have made the mistake in translation and identified Salmon's wife as the harlot of Jericho.

Different Names

There are two completely different names Rahab in the Old Testament that are both usually transliterated into the same name Rahab. We'll call them Rahab I (רחב) and Rahab II (רהב):

The name Rahab I in the Bible (רחב):

The famous Rahab is really Rachab (with a ch as in Bach or Loch). This Rahab is a harlot in Jericho. When Joshua sends two unnamed spies to Jericho to check out the town, their area of reconnaissance is confined mostly to the house of Rahab, who, we shall assume, also ran a youth hostel. When the townsfolk of Jericho pursue the men, Rahab hides them safely under flax on the roof. When Israel destroys the walls of Jericho, Rahab's house, now marked with a scarlet cord, remains intact and Rahab and her household are incorporated into Israel.

This Rahab is referred to in the New Testament by Paul (Hebrews 11:31) and by James (2:25), and both call her Ρααβ, which shows that the Hebrew ch-sound became a guttural stop sound in Greek: Ra'ab. This Greek version of Rahab is also the one employed by the Septuagint's version of the book of Joshua. The Vulgate reads the Latinized Raab.

The name Rahab II in the Bible (רהב):

But the Rahab who Matthew famously mentions in the genealogy of the Messiah, as the mother of Boaz of Bethlehem (Matthew 1:5) is spelled Ραχαβ: Rachab. Most commentators will report that the Rahab in the Messiah's family line is the converted Rahab the harlot of Jericho, but that is not true because Matthew uses the other version of the name Rahab (what we call Rahab II: רהב). In English these names sound the same but in Hebrew and Greek they're as different as Johnny and Ronnie.

And if Rahab the harlot of Jericho had married someone important, such as Salmon, the great-grandfather of king David (Ruth 4:20), we would have surely heard about it at some point in the fifteen hundred years or so between Rahab of Jericho and Matthew. In Hebrews 11:31 Paul says that Rahab's faith kept her from perishing along with the rest of the disobedient townsfolk. If her survival would have given her the opportunity to become the ancestor of Yeshua the Messiah, Paul would have likely made a note of that too. It seems that Matthew isn't talking about Rahab of Jericho but of an other, unknown Rahab.

Precise Identification

It has been shown time and time again that YEHOVAH God never uses two different words, or two different names in the same verse or context to refer to the same thing or person. The different words or names are always put there to draw our attention to the fact that He is referring to different things or persons. With this in mind Matthew 1:5, Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25 obviously cannot be classified as being "in the same context." Therefore, more positive and definitive methods must be used in these passages to identify the person mentioned precisely and exactly -- and to distinguish between one person and another. Thus, in Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25, the reader is told explicitly that these passages refer to Ra'ab the harlot of Jericho by,

(a) stating her name.

(b) repeating her designation as a harlot.

(c) mentioning the action which she took to help the two spies.

These are all positive marks of identification.

On the other hand, however, in Matthew 1:5 Rachab the wife of Salmon is clearly distinguished from ANY identification or association in any way with the harlot of Jericho, as follows:

(1) By the different spelling of her name in the "original" Greek,

(2) by the different pronunciation of her name,

(3) by the absence of any offensive designation attached to her name and,

(4) by the absence of any reference to Jericho or any activity that took place there.

Nor is the absence of any such additional information about Rachab designed to "cover up" possible unfavorable personal references to individual members of Israel's Royal Line and of the human ancestors of the Messiah in this genealogy. Anyone with any knowledge of the Bible knows that it does not shrink from stating unsavory "incidents" in the lives of Israel's famous people. This is ably demonstrated in the very next verse (Matthew 1:6) by the cutting reference to Bathsheba -- not by recording her name, but by bringing her name to mind only through her degrading act of adultery with King David. Again, there is the story of Judah's seduction by Tamar as related in Genesis 38:11-30.

This shows that the "Rahab" of Matthew 1:5 is definitely NOT the same person as the "Rahab" of Joshua 2 and 6, Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25. Rahab the harlot of Jericho was NOT the person who married Salmon and was NOT the great-great-grandmother of David and was NOT in the line of the Messiah.

dominusgai:

kind of, but the correct term is that they worked on the old testament

Ok.. So are you saying this Council is a catholic council?

itsloba:

Ok.. So are you saying this Council is a catholic council?

oh yes I am. it is only roman catholics that can claim a direct decent from the leadership of Peter and it wasn't till the 11th century, long after the bible was completed did the first split of the Christian church occur.

dominusgai:

oh yes I am. it is only roman catholics that can claim a direct decent from the leadership of Peter and it wasn't till the 11th century, long after the bible was completed did the first split of the Christian church occur.

So what role/infuence did Constantine had on the roman catholic?