₦airaland Forum

Simple, it is simply Sukkot's opinion.

For Jeremiah 8:8 Kindly avoid out-of-context interpretations, Judgement for such is grave. Vs 4 shows it was the Lord speaking and Vs 11 explains what God meant: the false prophets (in Jeremiah's time) were twisting the Law and assuring them of safety (like some pastors do today) while they continued in their wickedness Jeremiah 8:6 see also Jeremiah 23:15-22,25-32. There were true Prophets too.
How do ye say, we are wise,.... Which they were continually boasting of, though they were ignorant of the judgment of the Lord, and were more stupid than the stork, turtle, crane, and swallow:

and the law of the Lord is with us? this was the foundation of their boast, because the law was given to them, and not to the nations of the world, which knew not God, and therefore they must be a wise and understanding people; and this law continued with them, they had it in their synagogues, and in their houses, and read it, and heard, or at least they might and ought to have heard and read it, and in this they trusted; of this character and cast were the Jews in the times of Christ and his apostles, Romans 2:17 to which agrees the Targum,

"how say ye, we are wise, and in the law of the Lord we trust?''

Lo, certainly in vain made he it; either the law, which was made or given in vain by the Lord to this people, since they made no better use of it, and valued themselves upon having it, without acting according to it; or the pen of the scribe, which was made by him in vain to write it, as follows:

the pen of the scribes is in vain; in vain, and to no purpose, were the scribes employed in writing out copies of the law, when either it was not heard or read, or however the things it enjoined were not put in practice; or the pen of the scribes was in vain, when employed in writing out false copies of the law, or false glosses and interpretations of it, such as were made by the Scribes and Pharisees in Christ's time, and the fathers before them, by whose traditions the word of God was made of none effect: and so the Targum,

"therefore, lo, in vain the scribe hath made the lying pen to falsify;''

that is, the Scriptures. The words may be rendered,

"verily, behold, with a lie he wrought; the pen: is the lie of the scribes (h).''

(h) "utique ecce, mendacio operatus est; stylus mendacium scribarum est", Schmidt. Approved by Reinbeck. De Accent. Heb. p. 435.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
Meanwhile I must commend your exegesis, I believe my Bible more. It shows the sincerity of the NIV committee- they were not concealing the above in a bid to 'help' the Bible's acceptability. Indeed I should find it highly ludicrous that a compendium, the various contents of which was written over a period of 16 centuries by about 40 authors who wrote at different centuries most of which were not aware of the other's writings yet there was uniformity as regards it's main Subject,majorly custodised by a nation with a chequered history of captivity, freedom, wars, dispersal, genocides and loss of monuments and other distinctives, long term denial of nation hood etc, would present sans issues such as were raised by the people quoted by Empiree.

johnydon22:
And oh the bible forgot to mention it... This is what you get when people try so hard to reconcile mythology as truth... Cain and abel were not even in the adam and eve story originally it was borrowed from the kenite people

The kenites were Cain's descendants but it is reasonable that their genealogy was common knowledge at that time, the whole earth was of one language( and had not dispersed)... before GOD scattered them Genesis 11:1,8.

Adam and Eve had other offsprings apart from Cain and Abel just as Metuselah, Enoch etc had other kids and not just the one mentioned in genealogical reckoning( which , in the OT ,never includes names of daughters). The focus on Seth is because right from the beginning God was working towards fulfilling the promise made in Genesis 3:15. just as Abraham had other kids too but the focus was on Isaac.Genesis 25:1-5.

But what else does espousal mean if not marriage Matthew 1:18 Luke 1:27, To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph. I believe this is sufficient proof if we'll be sincere. I'd wish you realize that we cant rewrite history and edit the culture of others( as it concerns sons and sons in law in genealogy) A son of Solomon marries a daughter of Nathan, though marriage identifies her with her husband's tribe, her own family tree must still be traced and here they use what's common practice for their culture which you've chosen to ignore.

Now let's see Luke 2:48,". . . And His mother said unto Him, Son, why hast Thou thus dealt with us? Behold Thy father and I have sought Thee sorrowing. Christ did not reject her declaration in fact He went with them and was subject to them. Luke 2:51 " and He went down with them and was subject unto them." Even the people realized this Matthew 21:9 . . And the multitudes . . . Cried saying Hosanna to the Son of David. David himself prophesied about Him in Psalm 110:1, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou at My Right Hand until I make Thine enemies Thy Footstool.. David did further in Psalm 2(do read through) And if we say He was a Child remember that at that age He astonished the doctors of the law with His understanding and answers. Luke 2:46,47 I believe this is sufficient proof if we'll be sincere. I'd wish you realize that we cant rewrite history and edit the culture of others( as it concerns sons and sons in law in genealogy) A son of Solomon marries a daughter of Nathan, though marriage identifies her with her husband's tribe, her own family tree must still be traced and here they use what's common practice for their culture which you've chosen to ignore. In fact, another practice was that a dead man's wife became his brother's to raise up seed for his dead brother (not for himself!) Genesis 38:7,8,9; Deut 25:5,6.I believe the omission of Cainan is what it is- an Omission. In fact there were times when there were omissions Ezra 2:62 . Yes Solomon's son took over just one tribe but the Ultimate fulfilment is Christ Revelations 22:16," I Jesus have sent Mine angel to testify unto you these things in the Churches. I Am the Root and the Offspring of David. . ," Well I believe this rests the matter objectively. I recognise your desire to give up no problem. But note that the writers of the gospels were not professional scribes writing historical books for academic purposes but Luke wrote to Theophilus that the latter may be assured of what he believed and writing to such royalty from a nation passionate for knowledge demands care else you'll be refuted (LUKE 1:3,4) John wrote thus John 20:31 But these are written that you might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God and that believing you might have life through His Name. In any case, thanks for your time.

Rilwayne001:
Jesus was refering to it in Mattew 19:6 to those that are him about divorcing ones wife Mat 19:3 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?" Jesus replied them that what God has joined together let no man put asunder, that the plan of God from the begining since Eve removed from part of Adam, then when husbad and wife are married, they are expected to remain as one. <<<< Therefore, we should understand that the 2 verses above have nothing to do with genealogy of both husband and wife but about UNITY IN MARRIAGE

Yes but it was referred to because God made them one and not even genealogists who understood this could remove one from the family tree of the other.

Joseph was not the father on Jesus, and jesus which was to come must be from the lineage of SOLOMON, mary is not a descendant of solomon, and that automatically makes it void.

The bolded needs scriptural proof. Yes Solomon had the proximate fulfilment but the Ultimate fulfilment is Christ Isaiah 9:6,7 "For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given: and the government shall be upon His shoulder and His Name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor. . . Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end , upon the throne of David and upon His kingdom..." Isaiah 11 is another prophesy, there Christ is called A Rod out of the stem of Jesse, David's father . Mary was Joseph's wife and was made one with Joseph

there should be no reason why Joseph who happened not to be his father should be used as his direct descendant

.Mary was Joseph's wife & was made one with Joseph by God (Matt 19:6),& not a foreigner like those mentioned; this clarifies it.

who is the father of Jesus christ

kindly see Luke 1:35, Matt 1:18,24,25. Pls read those. But also note that Mary said in Luke 2:48. . . "behold your father (Joseph) and I have sought you sorrowing" Jesus did not deny Mary's statement as untrue but gave a reply that was to remind her of His purpose on earth and Heavenly Father just as God becomes our Father when we give our lives to Christ and we still do not deny our earthly father. Indeed it appears you are overlooking the culture where an in-law was recognised for genealogical purpose. Well, it has been explained in previous posts. But ignoring what can be substantiated, if you'll be objective in ur search, I'm afraid lives us going in circles.

Indeed Solomon was warned not to go astray in other for him not to loose the promise, but indeed Solomon went astray but does that make his descendant lose the promise? Lemme start from 2 Samuel 7:14,15,16..35 [b] I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men,and with the stripes of the children of men: But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee. And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever...Solomon descendant, but rather a faction will be taken away and will be given to his tribesmen. but this doesn't in anyway stop the promise child from his descendent as highlighted in the underlined.

Prove of this ^^ assertion
Readin the chapter further in 1Ki 11:31,32,34, 35[b] Then he said to Jeroboam, "Take ten pieces for yourself, for this is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: 'See, I am going to tear the kingdom out of Solomon's hand and give you ten tribes. But for the sake of my servant David and the city of Jerusalem, which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel, he will have one tribe "'But I will not take the whole kingdom out of Solomon's hand; I have made him ruler all the days of his life for the sake of David my servant, whom I chose and who observed my commands and statutes. I will take the kingdom from his son's hands and give you ten tribes. I will [size=15pt] give one tribe to his son so that David my servant may always have a lamp before me in Jerusalem, [/size] the city where I chose to put my Name. <<<< The underlined says it all, so the question is, Solomon genealogy is portrayed above to bear the genealogy of the messiah after david and not[b] Nathan that you have wanted us to believe.[/b]

All others after Solomon did not inherit the promise because the original scope was all Israel 1 Chronicles 17:7,11,12 not just a tribe. Note that angel Gabriel said Luke 1:32 "HE shall be Great , and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto Him the Throne of His father David (not Solomon) and He shall reign over the house of Jacob ( note the scope, not Judah or Jerusalem alone) The bolded is not my argument rather my focus is on the marriage btwn the two by which they became one.

Rilwayne001:
So, Is Jerusalem or Nazareth part of Egypt?

Jesus was born in bethlehem >>> after 8 days he was taken to jerusalem for presentation >>> and from there they return to the city of Nazareth . Don't forget that this is the verse that followed their journey Luk 2:40-41 And the child grew and became strong; he was filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was upon him. Every year his parents went to Jerusalem for the Feast of the Passover. <<< as we can see, there was nothing like fleeing/fled to egypt in these verses, reading the chapter further, one will notice that Luke was narrating the story like he was with them, especially where he said Jesus got lost on their way from jerusalem and he was found where he was questioning and answering question from teachers. So, one will wonder how come Mr. Luke was never aware of Mr. mattew's claim of Jesus fleeing to Egypt

I appreciate your inquisitiveness! Luke 2:42 shows that the issue of Jesus getting lost happened at the age of twelve at which time, they had relocated to Nazareth Luke 2:51 (Matthew 2:23).

But, atleast they all acknowledged that he performed miracle isn't it?

Yes but not all detailed all the miracles. John, for example, focused less on Miracles but more on sayings.

The purposes of this thread is, there are some astounding occurence(s) that allegedly occured during his time. but the silence of one book upon matters related in the other, and the disagreement that is to be found among them, implies that they are the production of some unconnected individuals,

That is why I quoted John 20:30. Kindly specify your disagreements apart from that on genealogy which have been dealt with. Besides would we also declare that Christ never gave the sermon on the mount because John did not record it? Or that there was no transfiguration because John did not record same? Or that story of Lazarus and the Rich man(Luke 16:19) never existed because John , Matthew, Mark never referred to his case as Luke quoted that Jesus did?

Simply tell me the bolded is your own point of view. ??

Sorry, the source of the bolded is,"The Bible - Its Contents, (with an introduction to the Books of the Old and New Testament) by Dr William F. Kerr, Professor of Systematic Theology. But you can sample Luke and verify with Luke 1: 3," it seemed good to me also ...to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus..." Theophilus was a greek.etc

Rilwayne001:
Then Mary's genealogy should have been used directly and not that of her husband since Joseph is not the direct father of jesus, Joseph did not have sexual relations with Mary, therefore Jesus was not related to Joseph, and not a
descendant of Joseph, So, using Joseph’s genealogy here is another inconsistency. Perhaps because Joseph is the true father of Jesus christ, we have christians who hold the view that Joseph was the one that actually impregnated Mary.
Cc: Sukkot.

Genesis 2:24,Matthew 19:6 states that after marriage, the couple are not two but one flesh. Bear this in mind. The issue you have raised is dealt with in the principle stated in Numbers 36:8,7" ...every daughter that possesses an inheritance in any tribe of the children of Israel shall be wife unto one of the family of the tribe of her father...so shall not the inheritance ...of Israel remove from tribe to tribe" So both genealogies are valid since the couple were made one after marriage. And since women are not normally mentioned in most genealogies, it's only logical that her husband is used. The only times I recall women being mentioned were those from other Nations (eg Matthew points out Thamar from Canaan, Rachab from Jericho b4 conquest, Bathsheba formerly married to a Hittite) Besides why will joseph (but for the admonition of the angel) try to reject Mary if he was responsible for the pregnancy?

Then definitely Luke genealogy might is not true since is aim is to deceive the jews by making it look like Joseph was the biological father Jesus, again maybe because Joseph is his true biological father

. Luke wrote primarily to a greek by the name Theophilus (Luke 1: 3,4) and since they (greeks) were intellectuals and great thinkers and philosophers, it was needful to clarify this to him for the reasons aforestated(Messiah-ship).

Not it wasnt just David but Solomon as well
It is definitely solomon.

1Ch 22:7-10 David said to Solomon: "My son, I had it in my heart to build a house for the Name of the LORD my God. But this word of the LORD came to me: 'You have shed much blood and have fought many wars. You are not to build a house for my Name, because you have shed much blood on the earth in my sight. But you will have a son who will be a man of peace and rest, and I will give him rest from all his enemies on every side. His name will be Solomon, and I will grant Israel peace and quiet during his reign. He is the one who will build a house for my Name. He will be my son, and I will be his father. And I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel forever.' <<< 2 Samuel 7:13
He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever.


Solomon is is the only qualified descendant of David to build the temple.

Oya say another thing.

David himself warned Solomon that the promise was conditional in 1Chronicles 28:9 also see 1Kings 9:4-9," If[/b]thou will walk before me as David thy father walked,in integrity of heart and uprightness, to do according to all that I have commanded thee...[b]Then will I establish the throne of [b]thy[/b]kingdom forever. but [b]if [/b]ye shall at all turn...and will not keep my commandments... then will I cut off Israel...and this house which I have hallowed for My Name will I cast out of My Sight."

Well Solomon went after idols after some years had passed and God's verdict (after Solomon rejected God's repeated warnings 1Kings 11;9,10) 1 Kings 11:11 ," Wherefore the Lord said to Solomon, ...I will surely rend the kingdom from thee..." Since the condition of an established throne forever over Israel (not a fraction thereof viz Jerusalem and Judah who were David's tribesmen)was violated, the promise was forfeited by Solomon being the proximate fulfilment.

But since the promise ultimately pointed to Christ Isaiah 9:6,7 (because Solomon could not remain on the throne forever sans dying) then it will be fulfilled as the Ultimate fulfilment of the prophecy.Luke 1:32," He shall be great and be called the Son Of The Highest;and the Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father(used in ancestral sense) David " This was the statement made by angel Gabriel to Mary.

psychologist:
2kings 2:11
And it came to pass,As they still went on, and talked, that, Behold, there appeared a chariot of fire,and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.


now lets fast track to the Book of
John 3:13
No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven-the son of Man. NIV

Christ clearly told us here that no body has ever ascended into heaven except from him, So where was prophet elijah taken to?

Paradise also the third Heaven (2 Corinth 12:2b,4a," ... such a one caught up to the third Heaven... how that he was caught up into Paradise.)

Rilwayne001:
Where was Jesus born, was it not in Bethlehem? Is bethlehem part of Egypt.? He was born in Bethlehem and was carried to Jerusalem and not Egypt according to Luke, unless you want to tell me that Jerusalem is part of Egypt

He was taken to the Temple in Jerusalem for dedication Luke 2:21-25 eight days after His birth but Luke 2:39 shows they went back home after the dedication.

Not just in bethlehem alone: Mat 2:16 When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi.
The point is why should it belongs altogether to the book of
Matthew; not one of the rest mentions anything about it. Had such a circumstance been true, the universality of it must have made it known to all the writers, and the thing would have been too striking to have been omitted by any.

Now there were more striking occurrences that Jesus did which were not mentioned John 20:30,31 And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book. . . Point is that not all occurrences were penned down. Besides the writers of the 4 gospels had different audiences in mind. Matthew's audience was the Jews , Mark to the Romans, Luke to the Greeks , while John wrote to the Church (same as other books he was inspired to write). Hence Matthew's detailing of occurrences and prophecies was because his audience were very familiar with same.

Rilwayne001:
Who was Jesus’ father? according to the same text, Joseph did not have sexual relations with Mary, therefore Jesus was not related to Joseph, and not a descendant of Joseph, he was going to divorce Mary because she was pregnant. So, you can’t use Joseph’s genealogy.

Well, I just made use of the internet and here is what I got: " One cannot inherit tribal lineage through adoption

When I said adoption it was in the sense of recognition for genealogical purposes hence the 3 reasons I gave hence the example below might not be applicable.

Here’s an example… Let’s say that Yonatan is a Cohen (of the priestly line) and he marries Rivkah and they have a son named Yosef. Yosef is a Cohen (he inherited it by birth from his father), and when he grows up he can serve in the Temple. Now, let’s say that Yosef’s father Yonatan dies. Can Yosef still serve in the Temple when he grows up? Absolutely – he’s still a Cohen – still of the priestly line. Now let’s say his mother Rivkah marries Shlomo, from the tribe of Yehuda. Shlomo can one day serve as a King. And let’s say that Shlomo loves Yosef and decides to adopt him. Is Yosef still a Cohen? Yes. Can Yosef still serve in the Temple? Yes. Can he serve as a king? No. Even though his adopted father is from the tribe of Yehuda, Yosef is still a Cohen. Adoption doesn’t change a fact of birth.
So, if Joseph is not Jesus’ father, then his genealogy is pointless. It’s a red herring. It doesn’t make a difference, and it doesn’t matter."

but Joseph was Mary's husband and both were of David's lineage.

I don't get you here. Are you trying to say we should disregard luke?

of course not! I meant Jews or anyone who might have wanted to reject Jesus' Messiah-ship( on the Son of David prophecy) because of not being Joseph's son would be convinced since Mary was from same lineage.

If we are to go by the other genealogy, which is attributed to Mary that actually presents an additional problem applying to the last qualification.

Was Jesus a descendant of David through his son Solomon? Since Joseph is not Jesus’ father, let’s look at Mary’s genealogy. According to Luke 3:31, Mary is a descendant of David through Nathan, not Solomon.
According to 2 Samuel 7:12 – 13 He must be a direct male descendant of King David and King Solomon, his son “And when your days (David) are fulfilled, and you shall sleep with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who shall issue from your bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will make firm the throne of his kingdom forever…”

note that this prophecy was given when David was asked to defer from building a Temple (2 Samuel 7:12-16) and the promise of Throne being established forever was to David. Solomon did all the above stated as a proximate fulfilment.. Also note that the promise was to a seed from David's bowels not necessarily Solomon. If this was spoken to Solomon, then it would be a different thing. Also 2 Chronicles 7:17-22 shows that, it was highly conditional in Solomon's case because it was an inherited promise which he qualified for as one of David's seed but which was not without conditions to him[Solomon].

Another buttress to the issue of Genealogy is the fact that the sons of David mentioned by both Matthew and Luke are authenticated in 1CHRONICLES 3:5.

Rilwayne001:
2) [size=15pt] Jesus, Joseph, Mary in Egypt [/size]
The story of Herod destroying all the children under two years old, belongs altogether to the book of Matthew; not one of the rest mentions anything about it. Had such a circumstance been true, the universality of it must have made it known to all the writers, and the thing would have been too striking to have been omitted by any.

Mathew 2 verse 13 – 16: Now when they had departed. Behold an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, rise take the child and his mother and flee to Egypt and remain there till I tell you, for Herod is about to search for the child and destroy him. and he rose and took the child and his mother by night and departed for Egypt and remained there until the death of Herod.

[size=15pt] According to Luke, Jesus never stepped into Egypy [/size]

Luke 2 v 22- 40: ( a long story, I cant type) Note: following the birth of Jesus, Joseph and Mary remained in the area of Jerusalem for the presentation (about 40 days) and then returned to Nazareth without ever going to Egypt. There was no slaughter of the infants.


This writer of Mattew tells us, that Jesus escaped this slaughter because Joseph and Mary were warned by an angel to flee with him unto Egypt; but he forgot to make any provision for John, who was then under two years of age. John, however, who stayed behind, fared as well as Jesus, who fled; and, therefore, the story circumstantially belies itself...
.

Herod was told that Jesus would be born in Bethlehem (Matthew 2:5- hence his order to kill all infants was targeted at Bethlehem and it's borders only, not all Israel (Matthew 2:16) But Elizabeth,John's mum lived in," the hill country, in a city of Judah" Luke 1:39 not the same place Jesus was born.

The events in Luke 2:22-40 occurred eight days after the birth of Jesus. The order of Herod could not have come immediately after Jesus'birth because the wisemen went off to search for Christ hence Herod would have given them a space of a year etc And that's why the execution order was children under 2 years meaning ample time was given to the wisemen.

If you think the slaughter of infants, journey to Egypt was a lie what then do we say of the old testament prophecies quoted by the writers- Jeremiah 31:15; Hosea 11:1? If the death of infants seem too cruel to have happened recall what Pharaoh did to Israel's male babies!

Rilwayne001:
1) [size=15pt] The Genealogy of Jesus [/size]
The Gospel of Mark was written first, yet omits the genealogy required to prove that Jesus was foretold in Deuteronomy 18:18.

The first chapter of Matthew begins with giving a genealogy of Jesus Christ; and in the third chapter of Luke, there is also given a genealogy of Jesus Christ. Did those two agree, it would not prove the genealogy to be true, because it might, nevertheless, be a fabrication; but as they contradict each other in every particular, it proves falsehood absolutely. If Matthew speaks truth, Luke speaks falsehood, and if Luke speaks truth, Matthew speaks falsehood; and as there is no authority for believing one more than the other, there is no authority for believing either; and if they cannot be believed even in the very first thing they say and set out to prove, they are not entitled to be believed in any thing they say afterward. Truth is a uniform thing; and as to inspiration and revelation, were we to admit it, it is impossible to suppose it can be contradictory. Either, then, the men called apostles are impostors, or the books ascribed to them has been written by other persons and fathered upon them, as is the case with the Old Testament.

The book of Matthew gives, chap 1 ver 6, a genealogy by name from David up through Joseph, the husband of Mary, to Christ; and makes there to be twenty-eight generations. The book of Luke gives also a genealogy by name from Christ, through Joseph, the husband of Mary, down to David, and makes there to be forty-three generations; besides which, there are only the two names of David and Joseph that are alike in the two lists. I here insert both genealogical lists, and for the sake of perspicuity and comparison, have placed them both in the same direction, that is from Joseph down to David.

Genealogy according to Matthew.
1) Jesus Christ
2 Joseph
3 Jacob
4 Matthat 5 Eleazar 6 Eliud 7 Achim 8 Sadoc 9 Azor 10 Eliakim 11 Abiud 12 Zorobabel 13 Salathiel 14 Jechonias 15 Josias 16 Amon 17 Manasses 18 Ezekias 19 Achaz 20 Joatham 21 Ozias 22 Joram 23 Josaphat 24 Asa 25 Abia
26 Roboam
27 Solomon,
28 David*

NOTE: In Mat 1:17 Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Christ. . After counting the genealogy from exile to christ, I noticed that it was thirteen generations and not fourteen as mattew claimed up here, and that makes it another glaring contradiction.

Genealogy according to Luke.
1) jesus Christ,
2 Joseph,
3 Heli
4 Matthan, 5 Levi, 6 Melchi, 7 Janna, 8 Joseph, 9 Mattathias, 10 Amos, 11 Naum, 12 Esli, 13 Nagge, 14 Maath, 15 Mattathias, 16 Semei, 17 Joseph, 18 Juda, 19 Joanna, 20 Rhesa, 21 Zorobabel, 22 Salathiel, 23 Neri, 24 Melchi, 25 Addi, 26 Cosam, 27 Elmodam, 28 Er 29 Jose 30 Eliezer 31 Jorim 32 Matthat 33 Levi 34 Simeon 35 Juda 36 Joseph 37 Jonan 38 Eliakim 39 Melea 40 Menan 41 Mattatha
42 Nathan
43 David

Now, if these men, Matthew and Luke, set out with a falsehood between them as these two accounts show they do) in the very commencement of their history of Jesus Christ, and of whom and of what he was,

What authority (as I have before asked) is there left for believing the strange things they tell us afterward?

If they cannot be believed in their account of his natural genealogy, how are we to believe them when they tell us he was the son of God ?

If they lied in one genealogy, why are we to believe them in the other?

If his natural genealogy be manufactured, which it certainly is, why are we not to suppose that his celestial genealogy is manufactured also, and that the whole is fabulous?

Can any man of serious reflection hazard his future happiness upon the belief of a story naturally impossible, repugnant to every idea of decency, and related by persons already detected of falsehood?

Well op, the genealogy from Matthew traces from Joseph's side directly, while the genealogy traced from Mary's. The name of Joseph was mentioned in Luke's genealogy simply because he was Mary's husband. It was a practise in Jewish (Israel culture) to adopt one's son in law as a son (The internet is available for your personal research on this). I feel this practise was to ensure that: 1.Every tribe's claims to their inheritance will be preserved, and 2) Each family with daughters will not be cut off once their daughters get married. 3) Genealogy can be traced from women through their husband's adoption into the woman's family tree.
Luke's perspective was complementary else any one can reject Christ saying, since Joseph was not his biological father, then (supposing Mary was not from David's lineage) He is not the Messiah because the Latter was called the Son of David in prophecy.

Joagbaje:
Ephesians 2:15
The verse above makes it clear that Jesus has abolished the law of commandments, contained in ordinances, given to the Jews in the Old Testament. He fulfilled them and abolished them. The laws and commandments of the Old Testament are not relevant to the new creation in Christ Jesus. It’s therefore wrong for you to live your life trying to obey the Law.

Yes Jesus fulfilled the law but believers in Christ Jesus are required to walk in the Spirit...so that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us too.(Romans 8:1,4). Furthermore, Galatians 5:24,23,22 show us that walking in The Spirit entails crucifying (not indulging) the flesh and manifesting the character of Christ, not just speaking in tongues. while Gal 5.19-21 reveals that if we live a life that does not fulfil the law (by walking in the flesh) as it was in Christ, we will not inherit the kingdom of God.

[color=#990000]John 13:34,
"A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another

Love has replaced all the laws and ordinances of the Old Testament (Read Romans 13:8-10)

Love did not replace but rather it is the fulfilling of the law Romans 13:10.Love here is the one described in Gal. 5:22-24 & Ephesians 5:2-6 &1 Corinthians 13

Romans 15:4
For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.

The things written in the Old Testament have been written only for our learning; they’re not the revelations by which we live today as new creations in Christ. Now learn more of what it is to walk in love.

2Timothy 3:16,"All Scripture is given by inspiration of GOD, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof,for correction, for instruction in righteousness" corrects this view.
If you consider the Sermon on the Mount and the Command to Disciples (Matthew 10:37 - 38, Matthew 16:24), and the Epistles of the apostles you will realise that God never intended to make us Antinomians after Christ's redemptive work!

lanrezion01:
HOW RIGHt IS ETERNAL SECURITY?Pt3

The proponents of eternal security believe that a Christian cannot go to hell no matter what he/she does. They also advocate that once you're saved, you're forever saved and cannot lose your salvation. Below are some of their beliefs.

3- We cannot die If we have eternal life. John11:26.

Yes, we cannot die if we have eternal life and I believe it because the scripture say so but looking at other scriptures, we know that if you are not walking in love, the bible said such a fellow abideth in death. 1John3:14-15. To be balanced in doctrinal subjects, one must compare scriptures with scriptures and interprete a particular scripture in the light of another. You don't build doctrines on a verse and start a conference on it.

There are believers who claim that they are living in the reality of eternal life yet, they live in hatred. You must note that whatever the scripture has said about us as new creations MUST NOT be in contrast to our life style. The 'ES' teachings have played-down on the issue of Christian life style and doesn't have regard for holy living. I once heard a popular American preacher asking 'If God said without holiness no man shall see the Lord?'. Holy living is non-negotiable.

4-' The gifts of God Are without repentance. Rom11:29.

That implies that God can't take his gift from anyone he gives it. I've also said previously that we shouldn't base doctrinal beliefs on just a verse of the scripture because it is against the law of bible interpretation.

What did Jesus say in Luke 19:26? 'For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.'

So, when you read Rom11:29 in Isolation and you don't compare it with the scripture above, the truth remains hidden. I hope you know that Judas Iscariot would have been a part of the Apostolic council in the early church but because he voluntarily sold out to the devil, he lost his place amongst the twelve and he lost it. Remember, he was with Jesus during his earthly ministry but he made a choice to fall out.


To be continued...

@ op, you are right. Let me add: If there was eternal, unconditional security why:
1. did the Lord Jesus give the parable of the 10 virgins? five were wise and five foolish.
2. did the Lord Jesus constantly warn us to be watchful and to take heed to ourselves? was it an April fool stunt where no danger actually existed?
3. did the Holy Spirit inspire Paul to write of some believers who will rise up to teach damnable heresies? and Peter said their damnation slumbereth not, while Jude stated that the blackness of darkness is reserved for them. Since this is so why did these apostles say this if those believers-turned- false prophets had eternal,unconditional security? Is this, eternal sec, a selective privilege of some then?
4. did the Spirit declare that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith(of course while holding fast to religion- churchianism) giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils?
5. did Jesus say woe unto that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed, it were better for that man never to have been born?

These are days when most 'believers' are no different from antinomians - Christ has died for me so I can go on sinning and forgiveness unlimited is mine for the asking!Indeed they would be shocked to hear what Christ had to say in Revelations 2 and 3. These are the type Paul referred to when he was inspired to write," for many walk,of whom I have told you often and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ (i.e. they say self-denial is a gospel of works, when Christ taught and emphasized self-denial and bearing the cross daily!) whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly (fleshly desires) and whose glory is in their shame (ever heard people describing their unclothedness as glory of 'god' others claim we should glory in our sins which they call 'infirmities'?!!!) who mind earthly things (Phil. 3:18,19).

The passage you are referring to spoke of saints, of which all the prophets was a small fraction! The names you mentioned in the latter part and others you might know, were not the only righteous people in the old testament; there were myriads not necessarily mentioned by name. Note that apart from the earthquake etc, the resurrection of the saints took place 'after His resurrection Matthew 27:53

After His resurrection, Jesus ascended to Heaven Luke 24:50 (prophesied in Daniel 7:13 - 14, Clouds used here refers to a large gathering of saints , Heb 12:1 confirms this, also see Revelations 1:7 and 19:11,14) The saints, like Christ did, appeared for a brief period and they also ascended with Him (or should I say they ascended before He did, going by Acts 1:9, Cloud in that passage refers to the gathering of glorified saints (could not have been watery vapour).

Now John affirmed of many other signs which he (and I guess other authors) omitted not because they did not happen but, in his words,". . . these are written that you might believe that Jesus Christ is the Son Of GOD; and that believing you might have life through HIs Name John 20:30,31 also see John 21:25.

Well, the law (OT, Exodus 21:12-14) also differentiates between killing with malice or premeditated (murder) and killing by mistake, sans malice(manslaughter). The latter, being a violation of the commandment you quoted was punishable by death while the latter was resolved by the provision of cities of refuge.

Soldiers do not generally kill on the battle field due to a personal quarrel/ malice (I once saw an Afghan man taking care of an American soldier in Afghanistan) with other countries.

Rather the Army is one of the judgement-executing arm of the Executive arm of any Govt and also remember that Romans 13:4 clearly states that," For he (rulers: president, governor etc) is the minister of God to thee for good, but if thou do that which is evil. . .he (rulers) beareth not the sword (or gun) in vain, for he (rulers) is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil" Besides the soldiers (being the sword bearing arm of the executive) exercises this power against external aggression or internal insurrection that threaten the life and well being of the territory God has set them over.

There are some unscriptural things we can cling to because of peace, how about in a war situation where that person is conscripted into the army by force by the govt?

You are correct. We can never deserve God's blessings in fact,man does not deserve a GOD like Him. In deed HE works in us but we cooperate by working out the salvation He works within us Philipians 2:12. That's why we are commanded to walk in the Spirit in Galatians 5:16 else the works of the flesh,which makes us stand condemned, will be seen. Romans 5 :1 reveals that we are justified by faith but Romans 8:1 further clarifies the fact that ,though entrance into grace is by faith, freedom from condemnation can only be sustained for those who walk in the Spirit hence if we say we believe in Christ and claim to be saved but walk in the flesh, we deceive ourselves and may not make it (A careful reading of Romans 6 & 8 will clarify this). Walking in the Spirit is not referring to the glorious Baptism in the Holy Spirit but a life where the Spirit (not the flesh) is in control, such that the fruit of the Spirit is seen.Galatians 5:16-26. The case of Ananias and Sapphira in the NT Acts 5:1-11 clarifies the fact that God expects this newness of life and wont excuse sin in us; judgement may not be swift but condemnation will be its earnest. Christ's death on the cross was not meant to change God rather the grace thus provided was meant to change man. Some refer to Romans 7 as an excuse for their sinful lifestyle while claiming salvation but forget that the Solution was given in the latter verses of the same chapter and Chapter 8 is an expose on that Solution. The same Paul got this victory (described in Romans eight) and was able to write in 1 Thessalonians 2:10," you are witnesses, and God also, how holily and justly and unblameably we behaved ourselves.

The primary cause I sense is the idleness at home and the indulgence of the flesh (in eating, leisure activities etc) that comes with idleness. I'd suggest that you, as a matter of urgency, go to God in prayer confessing your need and asking Him for a visitation. Also be much in the Word- it is the primary means of revelation. Now you'll need to be hard on the flesh to do this, you can even fast as this is one of the ways that the flesh is subdued and the spirit strengthened. You dont want to head to Nysc camp without your axehead, there even the handle will sink.

Kayoski:
No regular quite time
Dont Pray
Dont study the word..
When i try.. The flesh supresses my spirit and i feel tired..

What is your past like? Was there a time when you were on fire for God? Apart from salvation, what other work of Grace have you sought for and received? How and with whom do you spend your free time with? Was there a time that these things were a delight and renewing? When exactly did you notice this spiritual declension?

Kayoski:
Thanks for your contribution and correction sir..
But the issue is "The things i want to do, i dont do. Its the opposite i do"
And i know is by grace not by strength.. For by strength shall no man prevail..
The desire is also there... But the issue is what are the practical steps i can take to daily forsake my life and live for Him.....

Let's start from here. Do you have your quiet time regularly?

I'll recommend you read about the past revivals , believers of older generations (you can try Heroes of the Holy Life by Wesley Duewel, Why Revival tarries by Oswald Smith and you can also visit Herald of His Coming on the web, they have many articles that have helped me personally etc) of course these wont replace the Word, if anything, it will stir up a desire and drive you to the Word and Prayer.

At op, The Bible talks of the power of God's grace ( not the licence to sin and get forgiven: pseudo-grace so common today) to enable us deny wordliness and ungodly lust and to live soberly,righteously and godly in this present world (Titus 2:11-14) . But grace does not work while we remain passive; we have a role play in being passionate about living for God and resisting temptation, working out the salvation which God works in us. (Phillipians 2:12,13). The World will ever prefer a Barabbas to Christ. (it's Smith Wigglesworth)

theAtheist101:
Stop patching his errors. He made a thing that GIVES him sleepless nights. Something that is purported to turned his angels against him. The same creature turned his beloved man against him. Thing even REGRETTED making man in Genesis 6.6. Something perfect would never regret his own actions. Just Face it, he made a mistake and that makes him human. A little thinking on your part would make you realise that the whole tale was concocted by a man.

Sleepless nights ? I think its the other way round. Even the devil described his restlessness in Job 1:7(going up and down and walking to and fro) he knows his time is short.

The devil didnt turn them, they made their choice to yield to his rebellion and not all yielded majority remained . Lordship over automatons is a self - deceit ; they never had any choice anyway.

Would a father say he made a mistake getting married and having kids if one of them (say out of two) becomes a criminal inspite of all that was done to make life comfortable? Yes it will grieve him but no right thinking man will say a mistake was made. All will agree that the child chose his path in life.

theAtheist101:
Why are you modifying the Bible? Who told you he arranged everything in six days? The Bible said he CREATED, not ARRANGE.

There you go again, the bible never, ever said he replaced anything. At this rate you are going, you would write your own version of the bible. Not to be me. I didn't bother to read your post to others.

That god, if he exist, is a racist. Just face the fact. Read your bible with an open mind, and you would see the book for what it truly is. Same with all other mythological nooks. They were written by men to uplift their race.

The Word I meant to use was Creation and Arrangement. By arrangement, I am referring to the setting of boundaries for the waters (which once covered the earth), the creation and positioning of the Sun and Moon etc God didnt just create, He set a boundary and place for all (read Genesis 1& 2)

And even if you feel a replacement was not mentioned hence not done, I think it perfectly reasonable to conclude that God could have made the woman have the same pair of ribs the man had afterwards; afterall there is no other prototype by which we can compare (to know the original number) other than Adam!

Calling God a racist, how has He expressed this to you? Pharaoh was destroyed for the same reason Saul, Ahab, Hophni,Phinehas, Zedekiah, Asa, and some other Israelites were destroyed (and they all had their chances). David was spared for the same reason Nineveh (under the cruel Assyria, another gentile nation) was spared. And which race exalts itself by writing 'myths' that can be secularly substantiated by it's well documented history. And what uplifts a race about reporting the many times it went into captivity (after much warning) as a result of shameful actions , and how they were delivered when they repented?

theAtheist101:
How do rationalise that god is eternal? Even Jesus didn't bother to tell us the origin of this eternal one. I would assume he never knew.

So god made a mistake giving his angels and men freewill? And who told you animals don't have freewill?

Freewill in this context refers to a choice to intelligently submit to God or not. The choice of some (not all) does not make it a mistake. There are myriads of angels in Heaven and of saints in Heaven and on earth who are on God's side. This rather shows how that God loves the Truth. Creating automatons that do only what you want by no choice of theirs, is not part of God's attributes.

ifeness:
You need to sleep Scholar8200. All your mumbling is going nowhere.

Noted, with thanks.

it's okay we learn everyday. Does your concepts of grace match the description given in Titus 2:11-12 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts we should live soberly, righteously and godly in this present world . I ask because the concluding part of your initial post presents a different perspective hence my previous questions (I'm sorry if I'm wrong let me know).The incoming of sin was not part of man's creation by God's purpose to make him more lower or 'vulnerable' . It was a disfiguring that Christ through grace came to correct not only judicially or positionally but internally else all the epistles and the sermon on the mount will be needless. Grace not only brings forgiveness but also (for those who'll seek it) power to be free. And that's why Jesus told the woman caught in adultery go and sin no more and told another sin no more lest a worse thing comes.

Mikwus:
Perhaps i don't understand your question, but i would say the gift of salvation is the greatest expression of all..........but in all God has all the answers.

it's okay we learn everyday. Does your concepts of grace match the description given in Titus 2:11-12 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts we should live soberly, righteously and godly in this present world. I ask because the concluding part of your initial post presents a different perspective hence my previous questions.

theAtheist101:
1. God created everything in under six days, claims the Jewish Bible.

2. So how did he take Adam's rib? Your stated that he took one of Adam's ribs, when Adam was sleeping. So Adam should be one short of Eve.
.

3. And yet he hardens Pharaoh's heart? That is racism.

1. Yes, everything - Arrangement of the elements, animals, plants were done in 6 days but before then, the earth (Gen 1:2) was without form and void but was in existence for, only God knows how long b4 creation, that lasted 6 days, started. 2. Not when the act was carried out by the Creator Who could've replaced the rib taken.. While on earth Jesus did similar creative miracles too and even today He still does. 3. This has been answered by a previous post.

finofaya:
Our agreement was for me to pick holes. I think you should be more concerned that there are holes to be picked. What incorrect principles have I used? We should probably just agree to disagree at this point.

Alright, thanks for your time.