can you share that?
Luke 3 does not!
in fact, that whole idea of using luke to correct matthew is foolish
back to theology
- Thread starter Bishadi
- Start date
can you share that?
Luke 3 does not!
in fact, that whole idea of using luke to correct matthew is foolish
Rather, the miracle being from the immaculate conception and birth.
I am believing it because Joseph was also a nice person properly startled by God's kid?
Depends. Was Mary a descendant of David? And, ultimately, does it really matter in any conceivable way?
Rather, the miracle being from the immaculate conception and birth.
but common sense shares 'magic is not an option'
i would rather grant Joseph the honor of accepting a child with circumstances as being miraculous, than believe Jesus was the son of God because the nicene council voted it in.
see the difference: one is practically absolute in knowing the capacity of human compassion while the other is based on the intent to create a God from a human being.
We all God's kids (we live within existence and alive because of the same 'light of life')
perhaps you think God is separate from you (perhaps why you 'left the garden')
not to me or in anything i can read unless from strange religiously bound interpretations.
most everyone knows women were practically possession back then (and why joseph was even exposed to mary, aften becoming prego; she has no people who claimed her as family)
the story changed by nicene was concieved (by men/women)
the conceptions; of misinterpretations, impositions to the writtings and intent of the dogma............... are all matters of 'created' information.
IT really DOES matter in every concievable way; as the ideology still lives corrupting the minds of many.
A correction to your thinking: in your opinion, the Nicene Council changed this story. Ultimately, it's also interpretable from the NT. Thus, your opinion is your own.
Why are you so worried about the religious observances of others? Is there some creed that isn't corrupting that you think everyone should switch to?
Why are you so worried about the religious observances of others? Is there some creed that isn't corrupting that you think everyone should switch to?
No wait. He was her cousin, although he was much older than her [married for 40 years and widdowed, before he married her, and his first marriage was late]. Their fathers were brothers, Josephs father was Heli and Marys father was Joachim [heli is sometimes referred to as Mary's father but I think its because he was her father in law]
Who screwed whom here ?.
can you share that in scriptures versus post scripture analogies?
basically, you offering an opinion (perhaps i was not the first nothing the inconsistancy of Matthew 1)
i am asking for something other than the New advent (catholic) rendition
how so.....?
each of the OPINIONS i shared are from scripture.
just because scripture doesn't point out that; that if Jesus was not of Josephs blood, then jesus is not from Josephs blood line
that is from common sense which means no one needs to tell me something else unless it can be found within the same literature.
i could care less what opinions people have if it is inconsistant with reality
i could care less what people believe.
i care what people represent as true (and be false witnessing) that can damage others (fibs are why the world is divided)
the same 'creed' most every religious teacher said; no false witnessing.
for example; Jesus said. (per bible) ..... matt 16:20 Then did he charge his disciples that they may say to no one that he is Jesus the Christ.
so if anyone calls him the Christ, then then going against Jesus himself......
basic
Not really, no. The passages you cite are being misinterpreted by you. First, the minor technicality you cling to has already been easily explained. The second passage you cite is evidence of His humility, rather than a doctrinal change. How do you explain Jesus describing God as His Father, and stating that "no one goes to the Father except through Jesus?
As for your supposed concern that other people are believing something you describe as a fib: if you are really so concerned for the well-being of others, why not let them believe as they choose? Should others be as concerned about your own religion? I imagine there are a few passages in your holy book that might cause people a great deal of concern. I certainly agree that false witnessing - by some people at least - is heinous. I can think of one such doctrine. Like a mere man, for example, that sets himself up in a holy book as an equal with God. (!) Reprehensible, isn't it?
As for your supposed concern that other people are believing something you describe as a fib: if you are really so concerned for the well-being of others, why not let them believe as they choose? Should others be as concerned about your own religion? I imagine there are a few passages in your holy book that might cause people a great deal of concern. I certainly agree that false witnessing - by some people at least - is heinous. I can think of one such doctrine. Like a mere man, for example, that sets himself up in a holy book as an equal with God. (!) Reprehensible, isn't it?
i didn't misinterpret.... i posted them from 'youngs literal translation"
would you like a link?
common sense tell anyone that jesus had no bloodline to joseph; just by the idea (belief) that mary had an immaculate conception
because if joseph had not touched mary, than matthew was incorrect to assume joseph bloodline was to david; (as the torah prophecized)
what minor part?
it claims joseph is to david's blood and that joseph did not touch mary
the OTHER idea you are trying to use is that mary was related to joseph and using a different book (luke) to address such a MISINTERPRETATION.
i am not claiming that was changed; i can see many translations and see to read it and understand it; then jesus was not of Davids Bloodline thru Joseph
God is the father to all mankind; you, me, jesus, darwin and charles manson
can't change that, so nothing special about that comment.
i tink that back when, since hercules was using that, that u and i are supposed to believe that any man can be better than another, if he be god's kid directly
notice it is the knowledge that is important, because Jesus is not here except within the spirit of what he left (by choice, he gave to mankind)
so most every human being on earth will of does know the name and the basics of what he said. I personally believe he meant 'christ'..... because not a human being alive will comprehend life without the light
like i said NO PROBLEM.. believe as you wish
but shut up when speaking (representing something as truth, but is not: false witnessing)
that is not your right, nor any on this whole globe: period!
each should be responsible for their actions; i could care less what they believe when their beliefs DO NOT IMPOSE adversely to existence.
as for my beliefs; you are reading them
which one?
Origins of species? The KJV of bible, the Youngs translation; the torah; the quran; tantric, upanishads, thoth, mayan............. Principia... tesla, bose, einstein, zoroater, confuscius, jesus, muhammad.....
i honor the four colors of mankind (all of gods childrens works)
so which to you wish to articulate in.... just because i read a book does not mean i say :GOD IS WITHIN:
i know better ( i have the biggest book ever written; the internet)
how about you?
which one?
That Maitreya guy in New mexico? Or perhaps Ted Haggard? The Pope?
If you think that some 6/66 guy (birth month/yr) is the bad guy, they you are not reading your own books.
i always like to ask; if the good guy was walking right now and you bumped into him; what would you expect?
Last edited:
You don't understand. Answer a question: is Jewish identity traced exclusively patrilineally, or also via the mother? What house was Mary of? You are making, moreover, a massive deal of a simple "adoption" in an attempt to score points.
NO. Please back up and re-think. No one is alleging the genetic relationship of Joseph to Mary. Stop trolling, please.
Well, clearly He was a nice guy. So maybe God's kid was indeed better.
Non-sequitor.
So what is the false witnessing here? That you think there's a conflict in one of the NT books? It's already been explained. So tell me what the "false witnessing" part is. Frankly, I would call it the simple failure to completely address lineage in that section, which is frankly, not what the NT is about.
Define. Whose existence? In what way? Doctrinally? Corporeally? In expression?
if the score was important; then i will be the loser
notice, i don't care about scoring points. I could care less about changing YOUR MIND.
Each will make their own.
the line to david.
most all of them
what is the NT for, then. I bet i clear it up in one line
Matt 16: 20 Then did he charge his disciples that they may say to no one that he is Jesus the Christ.
so what is your witnessing part?
All of mankind, life; GOD.
a misdirection is a 'loss to the common'
but of course...... see what Jesus charged and what people believe........... when comparing, do you see the conflicts?
Mass: the 'corporeal' (energy affixed in time; the ankh (the loop; time) basically what E=mc2 suggests as well; see fission)
Energy; light (the life between all mass)
Time: the transcendent
Meet; The trinity!
All mass, all energy, all time: the boss! (existence itself, our creater; ONE)
We live within the body.
Be a cancer (selfish) or part of the heart beat; either "contributing" to the whole; or fade to extinction
kind of basic
I thought you were pissed about 'false witness'. Were you witnessing falsely.
So what? We've talked about that.
I bet you don't. Why did he do that? Did he say "Because I'm not"? Nope.
Confucious say: kind of basic.
nope....
i don't do what i do for points or even to make someone 'less than'
i am not trying to dominate anything, anyone or choice
it is best to allow each a chance at reality and let them think but when fibs decieve and people claim, the good of it but in fact create a greater divide; then i claim foul and offer info to assist.
if i had the perfect terminology already in mind and capable; i would not be on this site or any, still in the process of learning.
the core frame; the math, the life, the light, the understanding, and the ever lasting life; they can all be combined and grounded
learning how to convey that is where i taste my own toes once in a while
and to allow that awareness to set in, then to begin the humility of perhaps being capable of addressing in an objective fashion, then progress can ensue.
ie... to realize the earth rotates, then folks began to seek the description derived in math (copernicus to a newton) so that the knowledge can evolve.
to some who wish to retain an idea rather than observing the implications (what is does to others and the rest of knowledge)
don't tell me, jesus wanted the people to fib on his behalf.
when it is quite consistent by jesus' own (as many have quoted) that HE is not the last.
He knew that and always did.
But them afterward, created a god from a man but fail to see the message the man was sharing.
Having faith is to have faith "the truth will come'
as anyone alive can see and understand, the absolute in fact, has never walked on this earth and not a ONE has EVER known the NAME
(the last word to all arguments; the name of the boss)
i aint.............. i asked you a question. (without the question mark)
now can you see why people like you and me don't get along?
you just tried to impose a fib within a question (i asked) in which you are unaware that other people claim that is why Jesus said that; that Jesus did not want any implying he was the christ while he was 'per se' finishing the prophecy
i look at it this way; if Jesus was the last (the messiah) then i would have expected him to just finish the job enabling equality to all mankind
on the first pass
twice now i asked what false witness PUNK (either answer that or go jump in a lake)
show me what false i witness
Sheesh.
because not a one was capable of conveying
not a one had the material knowledge we do today
If you call GOD an isolated entity rather than the trinity, then i can see why God is 'thinking' about it (to you)
i don't go there
Heck, why not read what (per se; SO NO FALSE witnessing) god said:
Gen 3: 22
And Jehovah God saith, `Lo, the man was as one of Us, as to the knowledge of good and evil; and now, lest he send forth his hand, and have taken also of the tree of life, and eaten, and lived to the age,' --
does that make you a god too?
You false witnessed about the line of David and its importance, PUNK. Are you blind? You know that it's not what you think it is, so why are you keeping with the falsehoods? "Not one had the material knowledge we had today" - they're Prophets of God, for crying out loud. God suddenly doesn't know?
Maybe you should go back to Theology.
1-0-1!
Maybe you should go back to Theology.
1-0-1!
pehaps you need to read matthew
Matthew 1
1 A roll of the birth of Jesus Christ, son of David, son of Abraham.
maybe luke 1
32 he shall be great, and Son of the Highest he shall be called, and the Lord God shall give him the throne of David his father,
these are trying to fulfill the prophecy of zachariah from gabriel of the OT....
If you do not know the bible, then how can you say i am false witnessing what the bible is representing?
you may not BELIEVE what the bible shares and follow a preachers idea but i am not here witnessing you or YOUR belief, nor am i witnessing what any believe other than what is written; that any can read for themselves equally
what it does, it shares that some know and some don't know, what the books is actually sharing, in its own words; then any can read for themselves a consistant frame, then most all the bible is easy
and then the real lessons start to unfold
what false hood? name one?
now YOU BE false witnessing """""""they're Prophets of God, for crying out loud"""""""""
Darwin a "prophet of God" to me!
Same with Confucius.... Muhammad, Moses, Jesus, Einstein, Copernicus and ya all, gotta LOVE Galileo........... he has outlived EVERY liar who has discredited him for centuries and will forever!
To me, all of mankind is capable of being GOOD and give of themselves for the good of life, mankind and the evolution of knowledge
as that pinnacle is when that collective of knowledge can be combined into the pure principle; the "light of life"
and that final combining frame is what to have 'faith' in; that one day it will exist.
i do every day;
and i am having to return to the basics just to converse with you.
ie.... perhaps when you can define 'life' and applying the 'light of god' you then can sit side by side
but until then, notice even the basics and the quotes of bible are all that is really necessary to share how little you really know of bible (theology)