₦airaland Forum

With respect to X not respect to Y.

captainbangz:
Multiply through the function by d/dx.
d/dx(x=5y^2 + 4y - 8 ).
Differentiate each term then make Dy/dx the subject to get
Dy/dx=1/(10y+4).

Nigeria needs reform ASAP, the sufferings don too much abeg.

No doubts they were both descendants of King David.

But get this right, Jesus Biological father isn't a descendant of David's.

Hope you know what a biological father means

MaxInDHouse:
Matthew narrated the ancestral lineage of Mary {Matthew 1:1-16} but Luke narrated the ancestral lineage of Joseph! Luke 3:23-38
Both of them were descendants of King David!
Matthew 1:6; Luke 3:31
You're free to hold onto whatever rocks your boat but know that both Mary and Joseph are descendants of King David!

Okay, in this regard let's assume Mary had male siblings.

Mary is no doubt from the lineage of David through her biological father Joachim.

But Jesus isn't regarded to be from the lineage of David because his biological father isn't a descendant of David.

On the other hand, if Joachim had no son, Jesus can inherit Mary's Father's wealth, but his ancestral lineage would still be traced from the father's side not the mother's.

Or do you care to show me anywhere that a Jew's lineage was traced from his/her maternal lineage?

Kobojunkie:
The following is what the Law says. Inheritance and ancestry can be determined either through the father or the mother. The above is contained right there in the Law of Moses and is hence the Law as far as God's Israel is concerned.

Going by the above Law, it is safe to conclude that the Law in Israel at the time stipulates that if a King should fail to have a son, his Kingdom is passed to the son of His daughter, and so on.

The guy would have gone to sleep rejoicing that he has made a sensible comment.

FRANCISTOWN:
He was not talking about tribe.
Read your Bible.
The twelve tribes of Isreal came from Jacob.
And David was of the tribe of Judah.
He was talking about the household.

Both Mary and Joseph were from the household of David the King.

Yoruba is a tribe, not a household

Was it that difficult to understand?

Oya answer this.

If Jesus was a farmer that seriously needs land for farming, assuming he doesn't have money to aquire a land of his own and he's sure his maternal family has some spare lands, can he go and drag lands with his maternal family, claiming legality of their resources and wealth

Kobojunkie:
I used the foreigner case to illustrate the fact that the Law of Moses ties directly to a person's bloodline rather than census records.

And I'm still of the opinion that in those days, people don't address people from their maternal family name. Even the bearer of the prophecy should have known this.

Kobojunkie:
Stop trying to twist my words abeg!

Your claim has all along been that even though Jesus Christ was not directly connected by blood to Joseph that He, Jesus Christ, was regarded as the Son of David because the census has Joseph listed as His father. To this, I clearly responded that the prophecy which all of the Nation of Judah was aware of even at the time was instead that the Messiah had to come directly from the bloodline of David. Mary is the only connection to David Jesus Christ could have had.

Was Joseph a foreign man/father in the land of Israel

Kobojunkie:
I
By the way, the notion that ancestry in the land was determined by the father of the child is not of truth because the foreign-born Israelites in the land — particularly those of them born to foreign fathers — were still recognized as Israelites. In the Law of Moses, there are laws that were given on how to deal with such cases, and they were in no way spared by God on the grounds that they were born to foreign men.

Even the said prophecy addressed Jesus to be from the lineage of David. But here you're claiming not to be concerned about him being addressed.

If the prophecy had not addressed him as a descendant of David lineage, we wouldn't have been digging this that much.

So the prophecy did not clarify the claim but rather makes it intricated.

Kobojunkie:
I am not the least bit concerned about the opinions of Jews. Rather, I like to stick to what is in fact written in Scripture of these things. And in Scripture, it is written that the Forever King would be a descendant of David, and also He could not be descended from Solomon because God took the opportunity away from Solomon after Solomon sinned.

By the way, the notion that ancestry in the land was determined by the father of the child is not of truth because the foreign-born Israelites in the land — particularly those of them born to foreign fathers — were still recognized as Israelites. In the Law of Moses, there are laws that were given on how to deal with such cases, and they were in no way spared by God on the grounds that they were born to foreign men.

Okay here is a quick question.

Jews who acknowledged Jesus to be from the lineage of David, who do they think made Jesus to be from the lineage of David?

Kobojunkie:
This isn't about how a child is to be addressed but of the lineage/ancestry of said child. So, I don't understand why you keep harping on and on about how a child should be addressed when we are instead interested in the bloodline of the child in question.

Again, the prophecy that was given to the people of Israel clearly stated that the King forever to come would be from the blood of David, and so the people expected an individual from the bloodline of David and not someone addressed as one from the line of David. So, when they refer to the Messiah as the son of David, they do so not because of tradition or whatever ideas you imagine there but because they in fact believe the one to come was to come from the blood of David. Same as almost every one of the Kings in the land of Judah.

In Judaism, a child is not addressed with his/her maternal family name.

Or have you seen where they addressed someone with his/her maternal family name in the bible amidst the era of Judaism

Kobojunkie:
It was a very silly response given it was a supposed rebuttal to the following comment from my person The prophecy given to David insisted that the King forever to come would be from David's own bloodline. Clearly, the connection to David had to come from His mother, and not Joseph, the man she married.

Not what I meant though, perhaps you don't even know how Josesph and Mary were related.

Not just being of the same tribe, it's beyond that.

But that's not my main argument anyway, I only said that in response to kobojunkie's comment.

petra1:
So if a Yoruba marries Yoruba they have committed incest? Which dictionary are you using

I would advice you read that your self for clarity sake!

MaxInDHouse:
Go and read Adoption in Judaism on Wikipedia!

You've said it all sir.

FRANCISTOWN:
Whether documented or not ain't the point here. You are here again with blind argument.

No one in those days in Isreal was addressed by their mother's ancestral name.

They were a addressed by their father's ancestral name. In fact, when we talk about ancestral and lineage, we are only referring to the paternity household.
Not just in Isreal but also in most African cultures
E.G
David of the household of Jesse
Josiah of the household of David.
The remnants of the household of Jeroboam
'Of the household of Judah
' of the household of Isreal
Eleazar the son of Aaron
Nahshon the son of Amminadab, of the tribe of Judah
Eliab son of Helon
Nethaneel the son of Zuar, prince of Issachar.
Eliasaph the son of Deuel and so many of them like that.

See the words of your God himself

Numbers 1:2-46
“Take a census of all the congregation of the sons of Israel, by their families, by their fathers’ households, according to the number of names, every male, head by head from twenty years old and upward, whoever is able to go out to war in Israel, you and Aaron shall number them by their armies. With you, moreover, there shall be a man of each tribe, each one head of his father’s household.
Numbers 26:2-4
“Take a census of all the congregation of the sons of Israel from twenty years old and upward, by their fathers’ households, whoever is able to go out to war in Israel.” So Moses and Eleazar the priest spoke with them in the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho, saying, “Take a census of the people from twenty years old and upward, as the Lord has commanded Moses.”Now the sons of Israel who came out of the land of Egypt were

1 Chronicles 27:1-24
Now this is the enumeration of the sons of Israel, the heads of fathers’ households...

Exodus 1:1 Now these are the names of the children of Israel, which came into Egypt; every man and his household came with Jacob.

Joshua 2:18 Behold, when we come into the land, thou shalt bind this line of scarlet thread in the window which thou didst let us down by: and thou shalt bring thy father, and thy mother, and thy brethren, and all thy father's household, home unto thee.

Leviticus 17:8 And thou shalt say unto them, Whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers which sojourn among you, that offereth a burnt offering or sacrifice...

And so much more.

In those days in Isreal, they were addressed by the name of their household, and that house hold was their father's household.

The "Thou son of David " was because they thought Joseph real fathered Jesus. You cannot be addressed by your mother's ancestral name

I wish Xtians will accept it as error

FRANCISTOWN:
Don't mind them. They won't be able give any answers.

David and Mary were cousins.

Mary was from the household of Nathan, David's son while Joseph was from the household of king Solomon but people called Jesus the son of David because they thought Joseph was his father.

Those days in Isreal, you can't be called by your mother's family name.

That "Thou son of David" was an error

"The root and offspring of David" was an error still

Was adoption known in Jewish law of the said period?

vdestro:
Adoption is also a means of lawful connection as proven by the words "isnt this the carpenter's son"?

Noted Bro.

kkins25:

no waste time bro. Kobo's beliefs don't come from analysis of the claims made in the document, but from the deliberate acceptance, no matter how odd or flawed, of the book as the divine footprint of God. There's one thing to believe in something because it's true, and it's another to believe in something because one thinks it to be true.

You'd continue to go back and forth from here. I've come to call this line of defense the "kobo-loop". At this stage, I recommend you type in CTRL+X to break out of the loop.

preciousee17:
Why asking?

To know how Jesus Christ is/was connected to David's bloodline.

Because it has been refined over millennia to be maximally effective at manipulating people by controlling their behaviors, thoughts, beliefs, fears, and emotions, always under the constant threat of an invisible boogeyman in the sky who will condemn them to eternal torture for not doing what the religious leaders tell them to do.

Yeah, despite their secrecy and hiding from religious men that wanted to persecute them, it still got them Recognition/fame regardless.

The problem now is that what illuminati was understood to be those days, differs from what people see it to be today.

It was on 1 May 1776 that Adam Weishaupt, a professor of law at the University of Ingolstadt, founded the Order of the Illuminati, a secret organisation formed to oppose religious influence on society and the abuse of power by the state by fostering a safe space for critique, debate and free speech.

preciousee17:
They might...
Or might not.

Producing satanism textbook for kids, trying to adjust the curriculum to support open immorality, sacrificial rituals, indoctrinations all planned and executed in secret sounds like a good way to become famous.
Quick question, since the 90s or so, they've been pushing their agenda secretly, people did things in secret and died in secret and we are discussing fame?

Like seriously, I just want to get your point clear, not trying to be sarcastic. But what kind of fame does someone get by doing things in secret and deliberately avoiding public appearances? (Especially their top officials)

Kobojunkie:
via His mother, of course!

So can you please humour me by showing me how he relates to King David through his mother

They might just have been existing just for fame, not supernatural acclaimed fame, but fame caused by delusional taughts.

NB: The more people think bad/immoral about something the more it booms, be it true or false.

preciousee17:
Let's focus on this illuminati cos it's like we are understanding two different POVs... You just dismissed them as conspiracy theory?
I'm talking about the illuminati that is concerned with satan-worship not the Freemasons stories
I'm talking about the illuminati that has an agenda to satanize the world - it's hard explaining if you don't already know. There's textbooks everywhere promoting satanism to children in nursery school level (browse satanism textbook for children).
There's symbols in almost every Disney cartoon aimed at kids and stuff like that.
I'm talking about the Church of Satan kinda guys.
Just dona little research, view some videos and let's dwell on them a little

Kobojunkie:
I did not. It only matters if your initial conclusion was true. But since you concede that you have no proof, then there is no point in the detail.

So now answer this plainly.

If Joseph is not the biological father of Jesus Christ, how then is Jesus Christ connected to David's bloodline?

Again, that they tag him to be from king David's lineage does it make them to be correct about his true lineage

Kobojunkie:
You want a DNA analysis sheet to prove Jesus Christ was in fact related to David? I am afraid you are 2000 years too late for that.

If the people of His time, including His enemies, knew Him as a Son of David, I think that is more than enough to go by.

Kobojunkie:
Well, why does the how matter?

Because you said so your self.🤷

The kind of evil people do then, have those kind of evil stop existing after the destruction of the world with flood?

Devils living physically with men, did the bible say this?

Assuming it happened, who even allowed the Devils to dwell physically with men

preciousee17:
Then imagine the kind of evil people were capable of... Devils living physically with men — physically.
I'm not saying you should believe, I'm just saying you should try to paint that sort of picture in your mind. It's hard to really understand it.

The ones you highlighted above still do not solve anything. How is/was he related to King David through his mom Mary?

Kobojunkie:
Of course all Israelites are not related to David. However, there is more than enough to go by to show that Jesus Christ was indeed of the line of David.

If these where the evidences I'm sorry to say that I haven't seen any tangible evidence to your assertion.

Kobojunkie:
Really?

So you mean to say that even the Angel who announced this to Mary, His mother....

... and Zechariah, the Levite who was married to Mary's cousin, also got it wrong as far as the lineage of Jesus Christ?
Interesting!

Bro, I don't have a definition of my own. It was Wiki's Definition.

So do you mean that it was only The Nephilims that were wicked?

If so why did he destroy both the Nephilims and the Non-Nephilims plus other terrestrial animals

preciousee17:
Don't worry about the incest... According to your definition, so many people in the Bible have committed incest so let's not dwell on that.

The kind of people we should try to visualize (according to the Bible) are those set of people that were referred to as Nephilims...
Imagine a crossbreed of humans with different horrible characteristics and so on...
Then imagine the kind of evil people were capable of... Devils living physically with men — physically.
I'm not saying you should believe, I'm just saying you should try to paint that sort of picture in your mind. It's hard to really understand it.

Like I said before I said what I said because of your reply.

If you say all Israelites are related, are all who from Israel related to King David?

If yes, how

Kobojunkie:
Of course they are related. All Israelites are related. But you said the relationship was an incestuous one and against God's Law, hence the reason why I put it there for you to point to exactly what part of the Law was broken.

Yes they got it wrong because they tried placing Jesus to be from David's lineage when he isn't.

You said he was related to David through Mary please provide the evidence here.

Kobojunkie:
1. How did you make it easy for me by concluding, without evidence that the relationship was incestuous?

2. Several times in the Gospel, Jesus Christ was referred to by others as the Son of David. Clearly, Jesus Christ wasn't the only son of David in the Land of Judah which happened to have been majorly inhabited since the time of Solomon by the 3 tribes of Israel — Judah, Benjamin, and Levi. But He was called a Son of David on numerous occasions. So, are you able to show that all those who did just that got it wrong about Jesus Christ?

Kobojunkie:
Below is what the Law in fact says.
What evidence do you have to support your claim that the relationship was an incestuous one?

When you said he was related to the same King David through his mother, then I taught they where gonna be related somehow.

That was why I said what I said.

I wanted to make it really easy for you, but you chose this way, now can you prove how Jesus is/was connected to David via Mary?

Kobojunkie:
Below is what the Law in fact says.
What evidence do you have to support your claim that the relationship was an incestuous one?