Jesus - A few things I don't understand about him...

[Grahame 10]

Furthermore, both genealogies (Matt 1, 12-13) (Luke 3,27) include Salathiel (shealtiel in some versions), son of Jechonias or of Neri, his son Zorobabel, whose sons were Abiel and / or Rhesa.

Now I would not expect in ordinary domestic family tracing to find two lines of male descent separating after "King David" and then coming together again in Zorobabel (Zerubbabel in some translations). Has any forummer such an event in his family tree? I'd love to see it!

This is what the “New Bible Commentary” says about Salathiel/Shealtiel.

 

“Zerubbabel was with Matthan (Mt. 5 1:15) Zerubbabel was the leader of the Jewish community after the return from Babylonian exile. For Shealtiel see Hg. 1:1; but in 1 Ch. 3:19; (Hebrew text, not the LXX). Zerubbabel’s father is Pedaiah. According to 1 Ch. 3:17 Shealtiel was the son of Jehoiachin (graecized as Jeconiah, Mt. 1:12) and not of Neri; perhaps an adoption took place.

[dear_tony 10]

jesus could not have been white anyway, he must have been like a tanned kinda guy with olive skin etc, as a matter of fact this argument is still in favor of that jesus looked more arab/asian than white, theres no way someone who lives in that neck of woods can be pure white like many of the english think.

 

Never the less colour does not matter, i regard him as a messenger from god.

[Grahame 10]

jesus could not have been white anyway, he must have been like a tanned kinda guy with olive skin etc, as a matter of fact this argument is still in favor of that jesus looked more arab/asian than white, theres no way someone who lives in that neck of woods can be pure white like many of the english think.

 

Never the less colour does not matter, i regard him as a messenger from god.

 

That is so true, and as it says in 1 Samual 16:17: -

"But the LORD said to him, "Pay no attention to how tall and handsome he is. I have rejected him, because I do not judge as people judge. They look at the outward appearance, but I look at the heart.""

[Grahame 10]

at risk of sounding argumentative, a lot of the "fundies" say that, as the bible says Adam was the first man, we therefore have to accept that he was the first man, and that, again creation took six days, as described in the bible, and therefore that's "exactly" how it was... cos we "can't" argue against the "truth" that is the bible...

If your friends have a problem PT perhaps you would like to point out that in Cain and Abel’s day they were building walled cities, they were farming, they played the harp and the pipes and they were forging instruments of brass and iron.

 

Gen 4:16 And Cain went out from the presence of Jehovah, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch. And unto Enoch was born Irad: and Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methushael; and Methushael begat Lamech. And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah. And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents and have cattle. And his brother's name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and pipe. And Zillah, she also bare Tubal-cain, the forger of every cutting instrument of brass and iron: and the sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah.

 

This isn't "arguing with the Bible, it is understanding it.

[Kingmaker2 10]

jesus could not have been white anyway, he must have been like a tanned kinda guy with olive skin etc, as a matter of fact this argument is still in favor of that jesus looked more arab/asian than white, theres no way someone who lives in that neck of woods can be pure white like many of the english think.

 

Never the less colour does not matter, i regard him as a messenger from god.

Jesus could have been white,black,brown,yellow or even green!

If you are talking about the true son of god then anything is possible! He was the result of a virgin birth don't forget!

[artisan 10]

bare Tubal-cain, the forger of every cutting instrument of brass and iron: and the sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah.

 

.

 

Did he also ride on the danville train?

 

Or was that Virgil cain?

[Plain Talker 11]

Grahame, as an aside,:- I am lucky that, I have a bit of common sense... if someone says to me "thus saith the bible", or "thus saith set of scriptures X" I don't take it at face value. I check, especially if I think "That doesn't sound as if it IS a scripture"

 

I also have some scriptural learning (I actually came first-placed in my school, third in Sheffield, some years ago when the christian education council ran their scripture -knowlege examinations for schoolchildren in this borough.)

[glitterbug 10]

Carl Jung, who was a christian, says Jesus is a metaphor for the whole enlightened person, and we should be looking inside ourselves to become that, and not outside ourselves to worship him. Christians who worship Jesus outside themselves, are in essence, worshipping false idols. Please dont question me on that, it's my fellas point of view, its just as confusing to me! but felt it relevant to the debate. xx

[glitterbug 10]

Read architype (yes i know thats prob. the wrong spelling) instead of metaphor if you will. Any debate on this kind of stuff i will really enjoy ! (The Mad Alchemist< take care all !)

[bigwind 10]

at the end of the day the bible, like all religeous text, is a story book, albeit a very good one, allegedly first written some 2k years ago,

 

since then numerous kings ,queens & emperors have risen and fallen, most of whom realised that their subjects were taking heed of this book and believing in the scriptures there in, so to keep their subjects in line, isn't it possible if not probable that the less scrupilous rulers may just have added or removed certain passages along the way to suit their needs ?

 

to such an extent that the book we have today, bears little or no resemblance to the one written back then.

 

but as with any religeous text,the bible, in my veiw ,was only ever intended as a / a story of how 1 man could change a world, & b/ a refference or guide book not a rule book.(apart from the ten commandments). not a book to be taken literally word for word

 

just for the record until the age of 14 i was a fully fledged ,church going roman catholic. i'm now fast approaching 50 & only attend church for weddings, funnerals & christenings

[jfish1936 10]

Thank you, Grahame, for pointing out my error in skipping a line as I read, and saying Levi instead of Heli:

"Luke 3:23 says, "And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,"

 

But it still leaves Joseph, rather than Mary, as the last person before Jesus in that genealogy.

What documentary evidence is there that the Luke genealogy is Mary's?

[Grahame 10]

Thank you, Grahame, for pointing out my error in skipping a line as I read, and saying Levi instead of Heli:

"Luke 3:23 says, "And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,"

 

But it still leaves Joseph, rather than Mary, as the last person before Jesus in that genealogy.

What documentary evidence is there that the Luke genealogy is Mary's?

 

I have been off-line since Sunday, thanks to the combined efforts of Orange and Vista, or I would have replied sooner. Sorry.

 

Schofield says, “In Matthew, where unquestionably we have the genealogy of Joseph, we are told that Joseph was the son of Jacob. In what sense then could Joseph be called in Luke “the son of Heli”? The explanation is that Joseph was the son-in-law of Heli, who was like himself a descendant of David. That he should in that case be called “son of Heli” (‘son’ is not in the Greek but rightly supplied by the translators) would be in accordance with Jewish usage, (cf 1 Samual 24:16) The conclusion is therefore inevitable that in Luke we have Mary’s genealogy and Joseph was the “son of Heli” because he was espoused to Heli’s daughter. The genealogy in Luke is Mary’s whose father Heli was descended from David."

 

 

MATTHEW

Jesus, Joseph, Jacob, Matthan, Eleazar, Eliud, Achim, Sadoc, Azor, Eliakim, Abiud, Zorobabel, Salathiel, Jechonis, Josias, Amon, Manasses, Ezekias, Achaz, Joatham, Ozias, Joram, Josaphat, Asa, Abia, Roboam, Solomon, David.

 

 

LUKE

Jesus, Mary (daughter of Heli), Matthat, Levi, Melchi, Janna, Joseph, Mattathias, Amos, Naum, Esli, Nagge, Maath, Mattathias, Semei, Joseph, Juda, Joanna, Rhesa, Zorobabel, Salathiel, Neri, Melchi, Addi, Cosam, Elmodam, Er, Jose, Eliezer, Jorim, Matthat, Levi, Simeon, Juda, Joseph, Jonan, Eliakim, Melea, Menan, Mattatha, Nathan, David.

 

 

Just a personal comment regarding Zorobabel. You may know I’m interested in medieval history and from looking at family trees of the nobility I have noticed on numerous occasions where someone has married two or three times and had children by each marriage that the same name appears in several genealogies.

 

Please let me know what you think because I have something else to put to you.