Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Israel and their current place in God’s economy.

Apparently you didn't read my later post or those of some others. Jeconiah is NOT in Jesus bloodline. The geneology listing him in Mathew is of Joseph and Joseph wasn't Jesus' biological father. The family tree in Luke is of Mary, his biological line and Jeconiah isn't in it.
The curse does have meaning - but DNA doesn't lie. Jesus had none of his.

Zerubbabel, Shealtiel are in both..........

The two genealogies of Jesus do not jive but both clearly are the genealogy of Jesus through Joseph not Mary. Mary is not listed.

The Ebionites who were among the very first Christians did not have any belief in the virgin birth as they used the OT and the book of Matthew which in their time was minus the first 2 chapters which were added later. It is also noteworthy that 2 of the gospels do not mention the virgin birth at all.

These questions have been answered for millennia, and are easy to find in the information age: Link to answer.

I was already familiar with www.gotquestions.org. They come at things with preconceived opinions. I don't know all the answers but I'm positive the NT was meddled with and there are some doctrines such as trinitarianism that are hard to make sense of.

I remain careful and skeptical of Paul because he doesn't make much sense. That is not to say that everything he writes (if he wrote it) is false, but perjurers always concede the obvious to be true. It is when they put their "yes, but" into the mix that they lie.

And anytime someone keeps saying "I do not lie" they are lying. Check out how many times ol' Saul says the equivalent of that.

Personally, I don't criticize anything I don't admittedly understand.

Well, if something doesn't make sense it doesn't make sense and that very often indicates someone is lying, but unfortunately Paul is not around to depose on his conflicting testimony.

Are you sure that he isn’t using an accepted rhetorical technique common in the day of his writing?

I'll have to think about that. I don't remember a whole lot of "I don't lie/I'm not lying" out of anybody else. I believe I remember Jesus accusing his Jewish hierarchy of lying quite a bit though.

It is past experience that tells me when someone keeps insisting they aren't lying, they are.

I think that you’d have to understand the men who were Paul’s educators and the school of rhetoric in which he was taught.

I’ve known many conversations in which phrases such as “I’m not lying” were used to emphasize the point and spoken by men who’s honesty was not in question.

You are pulling assumptions out of your ass. The interpreters used that phrase because it was the closest in English to give the indication of someone emphasizing what they are saying is true. Meanings change over time and society. You could substitute any phraseology you like as long as it conveys someone emphasizing that what they are saying is true.

I would be happy to privately explain any of Paul's teachings as long as we can both keep a respectful demeanor. I honestly hate reading you slander Paul.

I'm sorry you feel that way. No slander intended other than to say Paul makes no sense in that he teaches a different doctrine or way than John the Baptist and his cousin Jesus did.

Really we have no idea if Paul really was the author of some of what is attributed to him. Forgeries designed to bolster the Roman/church combination might be the explanation. The first few verses of Romans 13 indicate that very thing. How could anyone give a blanket endorsement to the government and warn that after all they "bear the sword not in vain"?

No offense intended. I am naturally skeptical and something smells fishy. Just my opinion. I'm always subject to be wrong because just like you I operate with incomplete information and we are reading a history of folks long dead and it has been translated through who knows how many languages and retellings.

The OT is different. It was recorded centuries BC and is not near as vulnerable to editing. That said, I do believe the book of Matthew captured Jesus' the most accurately.

What happened in 70?

They're also in 1 Chron 3 and the lines are different in all 3. In that one, Zerubbabal is the son of Shealtiel's brother, Pedaiah. The fact is, only an expert in Jewish lineage can figure out who's who. None of us here can. Trying to discount Jesus' kingship on account of an unknown lineage is pure fallacy.

Titus

and the fulfilment of a bunch of OT prophecies.

NOT HIS Kingship, HIS ruling physically on earth............

HE is King and ruling TODAY............

The Kingdom IS, and the Temple has been 'rebuilt'..................

The old testament had an ending, it ended. Went from constant characters and events, world shattering, nation beginning/ending, bigger than life itself, dramatic... everyone knows these stories believer or not, read the bible or not.

But it ended, the biblical story of thousands of years stopped.

The new story was contained in 33 years, the biblical records were written in less than 100 years.

The bible itself stopped after that time, when before it was an ongoing continuous record of God and man.

God/man relationship was changed, worldly events and characters are no longer worthy of biblical inclusion.

The world matters less, the Spirit matters most.

Kent

The God of the universe is still working with his covenant people and the miracle of the retaking of the Jewish nation of Israel is living proof.