Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,902 Year: 4,159/9,624 Month: 1,030/974 Week: 357/286 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is Jesus of 'Cursed Lineage'
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5621 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 142 of 206 (175440)
01-10-2005 8:55 AM
Reply to: Message 137 by Abshalom
01-10-2005 12:40 AM


Re: Can We Believe Luke's Geneology?
Yep you can believe it. Herod the Great died around 4 BC, but its believed that Jesus birth by the calendar maybe off by 4 to 6 years.
Jesus needed to be called out of Egypt to fullfill this prophecy and when Herod died the Lord (young child) the Lord was called out of Egypt. kjv Matthew 2:15.
kjv Luke 2:1 Says that Augusta Ceasar made a decree that the whole world was to be taxed. This caused Jesus to be born in Bethlehem because Joesph being of the lineage of David had to report to Bethlehem kjv Luke 2:4, thus bringing about the fullfilling of the Bethlehem prophesy in respect to the Lords birthplace. kjv Micah 5:2, kjv Matthew 2:6.
http://www.radix.net/~dglenn/defs/ce.html
It's also more accurate for Christians, since today's best guesses as to when Jesus of Nazareth was born differ by four to six years from the best guesses the folks who invented our calendar had. So it is highly unlikely that Jesus was born in the year 1 CE. Which means that if one insists on calling that year AD 1, one is probably off by about five years.
This message has been edited by Tom, 01-10-2005 09:32 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by Abshalom, posted 01-10-2005 12:40 AM Abshalom has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 145 by Abshalom, posted 01-10-2005 10:53 AM johnfolton has replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5621 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 143 of 206 (175441)
01-10-2005 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 141 by arachnophilia
01-10-2005 2:39 AM


Re: Believe on His Name
Arachnophilia, Immanuel means God is with us. Emmanuel too means God with us. Enoch was translated and walked with God. I agree you should never worship a man. Jesus however is God with us. The Lord was carried up into heaven, and the apostles worshipped him. kjv Luke 24:51.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by arachnophilia, posted 01-10-2005 2:39 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by arachnophilia, posted 01-12-2005 11:36 AM johnfolton has replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5621 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 144 of 206 (175445)
01-10-2005 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 139 by arachnophilia
01-10-2005 2:30 AM


Re: Believe on His Name
no, we are not in agreement at all. deuteronomy was written several hundred years, maybe even more than a thousand, before revelation. revelation would be an addition. to even have revelation in the bible breaks this commandment in deuteronomy. get it yet?
Its Gods Words not mans words, Jesus said my Words will never pass away kjv matthew 24:35. Jesus is God the Word come in the flesh John chapter 1.
do you think god was speaking in a technicality, and he'll destroy the earth by other means, or do you think god is promising not to kill us all ever again?
Its saying he will not again destroy the earth by a flood. In fact it says before the Great Judgment from whose face heaven and earth shall pass away(at this moment in time will be fullfilled that heaven and earth will pass away but my words will not pass away kjv matthew 24:35). kjv revelation 20:11.
IT does say that there will be a new heaven and a new earth after he burns the elements with fervent heat. 2 peter 3:12-13. It says the world that was before the flood perished and that the present World is reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. 2 peter 3:6-7.
In Revelations 21:1 it says John saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by arachnophilia, posted 01-10-2005 2:30 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by arachnophilia, posted 01-12-2005 11:32 AM johnfolton has not replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5621 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 146 of 206 (175489)
01-10-2005 12:05 PM
Reply to: Message 145 by Abshalom
01-10-2005 10:53 AM


Abshalom, I see no reason Luke wouldn't of been aware of a decree that all the world should be taxed. It makes sense that all would have to go to their own city to pay this tax. Joseph city happened to be Bethlehem, and he went to be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.
Joesph being warned by an angel fled to Egypt, and when Herod the Great was dead was told to return but because of Herods son Archelaus still ruled Judah, they moved to Galilee in the city of Nazareth and Jesus became a Nazarene. kjv Matthew 2:19-23.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by Abshalom, posted 01-10-2005 10:53 AM Abshalom has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by Brian, posted 01-10-2005 12:32 PM johnfolton has replied
 Message 150 by Abshalom, posted 01-10-2005 2:22 PM johnfolton has replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5621 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 151 of 206 (175560)
01-10-2005 3:53 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by Abshalom
01-10-2005 2:22 PM


Re: Makes No Sense
Abshalom, It says that Joesph went to Bethlehem because of his lineage to the line of King David, this became his city to report. I agree Mary came along to fullfill prophecy. You also forget the children of the Lord Jesus age fullfilled yet another prophecy. kjv Jeremiah 31:15.
It makes sense they would have a census after they made this decree to tax the whole world, but appears to be two different events. You also discounted that the starting of the calendar is believed to of errored up to 6 years which accounts for Herod being alive during this taxation event, and dying shortly thereafter.
It sure wouldn't make sense for Joseph to move to Bethlehem in Judah to be a part of a census there given Herod's son knew of the prophecy of the king being born out of Bethlehem. The reason they fled was Joesph was warned by an angel, then soon after, all sons were killed of the Lord Jesus age and along the coast. kjv Jeremiah 31:15 & Matthew 2:16-18.
The Gospel of Matthew interestingly agrees that Herods son took over ruling Judah, which is likely why Joesph was warned of God in a dream so he turned aside into parts of Galilee. kjv Matthew 2:22.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by Abshalom, posted 01-10-2005 2:22 PM Abshalom has not replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5621 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 152 of 206 (175568)
01-10-2005 4:16 PM
Reply to: Message 147 by Brian
01-10-2005 12:32 PM


Brian, The King James Version Strongs says this particular phrase of words can mean " prophet". kjv Judges 13:5 is another one of those parallel prophecies, in regards to Jesus being a Nazareth from the womb. Mary was a Nazarene by birth, from Galilee.
kjv Mat 2:23 And2532 he came2064 and dwelt2730 in1519 a city4172 called3004 Nazareth:3478 that3704 it might be fulfilled4137 which was spoken4483 by1223 the3588 prophets,4396 He shall be called2564 a Nazarene.3480
G4396
προφήτης
prophetes
prof-ay'-tace
From a compound of G4253 and G5346; a foreteller (prophet); by analogy an inspired speaker; by extension a poet: - prophet.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by Brian, posted 01-10-2005 12:32 PM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by Brian, posted 01-10-2005 5:08 PM johnfolton has replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5621 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 154 of 206 (175678)
01-10-2005 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by Brian
01-10-2005 5:08 PM


Jesus of Nazareth
Brian,
The Choice Of Nazareth
The "what was spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled" in the above quote from Matthew is believed by some to be a reference to Isaiah 11:1, "There shall come forth a shoot from the stump of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots."
The original Hebrew word, pronounced nay-tser, translated into English as shoot, literally means a sprout, or branch, and figuratively a descendant. The name Nazareth is thought to be derived from the same original word, which would indicate that God either named the city Himself, or chose it to be the home town of the Messiah because of its name.
Bible Study – Christian Education Resource
It would appear nazarite means consecrated as a prince, one chosen and set apart for life, a holy life. Sounds like a priest like vow, to separate oneself for a holy life from sin. I see several verses calling him Jesus of Nazareth, though he didn't appear to make a normal Nazarite vow, it says he sanctifies himself for our behalf kjv John 17:19. It would appear at the time the Gospels were written everyone knew of the Nazarene prophecy, it appears the prophecy is Isaiah 11:1, in respect to the Nazarene, Jesus is the branch, out of the root of Jesse.
Jesus said he sanctifies himself on our behalf. kjv John 17:19 It says he is our High Priest after the order of Melchisedec. kjv Hebrew 5:10 It says he is the vine and we are the branches. If Nazareth means shoot, literally means sprout, branch. It appears that nazarite also means a vine not pruned which is interestingly similar to a branch. While Jesus is the branch of Jesse, he is the vine and we are the branches that the Father prunes so that we might bear fruit.
kjv Heb 5:8 Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
kjv Heb 5:9 And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
kjv Heb 5:10 Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.
kjv Heb 4:15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
http://www.trinityrcus.com/Sermons/LPrayer/20031228.htm
Now it is certain that Je sus was no Nazarite in the ceremonial sense, but He is the fulfillment of the sign. Just as He was no priest in the days He spent on this earth, yet He is the fulfillment of all the priests of the Old Testament.
One thing is certain: the word of Matthew, though not crystal clear to us, was certainly understood by the audience to whom he wrote.
H5139

na^zi^yr na^zir
naw-zeer', naw-zeer'
From H5144; separate, that is, consecrated (as prince, a Nazirite); hence (figuratively from the latter) an unpruned vine (like an unshorn Nazirite). (The translation, Nazarite, is by a false alliteration with Nazareth.): - Nazarite [by a false alliteration with Nazareth], separate (-d), vine undressed.
This message has been edited by Tom, 01-10-2005 23:24 AM
This message has been edited by Tom, 01-11-2005 01:04 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by Brian, posted 01-10-2005 5:08 PM Brian has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by Abshalom, posted 01-11-2005 5:52 PM johnfolton has not replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5621 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 158 of 206 (176272)
01-12-2005 2:06 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by arachnophilia
01-12-2005 11:36 AM


Re: Believe on His Name
Arachnophilia, As a christian were to acknowledge that Jesus is the Christ. 1 John 2:22-23. We become one with the Father in Christ.
Given Jesus is Christ (Emmanuel) his testimony he gave to his servant John is the Words of the Lord. Jesus said Heaven and earth shall pass away: but his words shall not pass away.
kjv Luk 21:33 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by arachnophilia, posted 01-12-2005 11:36 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by AdminAsgara, posted 01-12-2005 5:24 PM johnfolton has replied
 Message 161 by arachnophilia, posted 01-14-2005 2:07 AM johnfolton has not replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5621 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 160 of 206 (176335)
01-12-2005 6:30 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by AdminAsgara
01-12-2005 5:24 PM


Re: Believe on His Name
Ascara, Didn't like Tom, Tim, so switched to Bret. I thought this thread had died so I switched to Bret. I'll switch back to Tom so this thread makes sense, though it will be a bit confusing in a few other posts I've already made as Bret.
Whats the purpose of being allowed to have other aliases, when it replaces all the posts you posted with you new alias. I think it would be an improvement to change your software so all the posts I posted as Tom would not change to say Bret posted them. People will always know the various aliases by checking the profile, but it wouldn't be as confusing to read.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by AdminAsgara, posted 01-12-2005 5:24 PM AdminAsgara has not replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5621 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 173 of 206 (331268)
07-12-2006 6:45 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by Brian
07-12-2006 2:32 PM


Virgin Birth ( Messias means the Christ)
Jesus said he was the "son of man" because his biological father was not God(it was a virgin birth). John's Gospel says the Father sent his *only* begotten Son thus Emmanuel (The Word) already was God's Son before he also became (a son of man). 1-3 chapter of gospel of john and 1st chapter of gospel of matthew.
The Word says the Word was with God and was God. That all things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made. john chapter 1.
Christians are born again not of the will of the flesh, or the will of man, nor of the blood, but of God. john chapter 1
The apostle John asks a question in his first epistle in reference to the divinity of Jesus meaning is he the Christ. John the Baptists confessed that he was not the Christ. john 1:20 and that Jesus was the Son of God. john 1:34
The Question! Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is anti-christ that denieth the Father and the Son.
1 john 2:22.
John 1:44 says Simon Peters brother Andrew told Simon Peter that We found the Messias which is being interpreted, the Christ.
Edited by johnfolton, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by Brian, posted 07-12-2006 2:32 PM Brian has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by arachnophilia, posted 07-12-2006 7:00 PM johnfolton has replied
 Message 179 by ramoss, posted 07-13-2006 8:23 AM johnfolton has not replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5621 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 175 of 206 (331288)
07-12-2006 7:57 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by arachnophilia
07-12-2006 7:00 PM


Re: Virgin Birth ( Messias means the Christ)
Joesph was not the biological father of Jesus yet by Jewish Laws was the legal father of Jesus because of his marriage to Mary. Jesus is the legal heir to the throne of David through Joesph. He is also of the bloodline of David through Mary. This bypasses Jeconiah bloodlines yet satisfying Jesus legal right to the throne of David.
Its all about the bloodline back to David which is satisfied by the virgin birth. The bible says Joesph was not the bioligical father of Jesus, and the bible mentions he was formed from the seed of the woman.
John A Davidson mentioned in a different thread that the female frog egg can become a male without sperm. The virgin birth was the fullfillment of the virgin birth prophecy given to Ahaz to the house of Israel. It was never a sign to Ahaz but a sign given to Ahaz to the house of Israel.
supporting verses:
And he said, Hear ye now, ****O house of David***: Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also? Isaiah chapter 7
Therefore the Lord himself shall give ***you**** a sign; Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Isaiah chapter 7

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by arachnophilia, posted 07-12-2006 7:00 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by Chiroptera, posted 07-12-2006 8:12 PM johnfolton has not replied
 Message 177 by arachnophilia, posted 07-12-2006 8:12 PM johnfolton has not replied
 Message 178 by ramoss, posted 07-13-2006 8:04 AM johnfolton has replied

  
johnfolton 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5621 days)
Posts: 2024
Joined: 12-04-2005


Message 180 of 206 (331671)
07-14-2006 1:28 AM
Reply to: Message 178 by ramoss
07-13-2006 8:04 AM


Re: Virgin Birth ( Messias means the Christ)
Jesus was not a mamzer because Mary was a virgin satisfying the law in that Jesus was made of a woman, made under the law. gal 4:5-7 there was no adulturous relationship. Jesus already was the only begotten of the Father (God the Son)(The Word) before he was sent by the Father to become flesh. John 3:16-17 & John 17:5.
Sorry: Could not find where Isaiahs son or Ahaz son were named Emmanuel to fullfill the sign that Jesus fullfilled.
Jesus is the Christ (the Son) Emmanuel God with us. Matthew 1:23 and John 1:14 The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us,(and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Psalms 2:8-12 My take is its about putting your trust in the Son the only begotten Son of the Father.
Its in agreement with 1 John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jeus is the Christ? He is anti-christ that denieth the Father and the Son. In Verse 23 it says Whosoever denieth the Son, the same has not the Father: but he that acknowledges the Son hath the Father also.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by ramoss, posted 07-13-2006 8:04 AM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by ramoss, posted 07-14-2006 8:16 AM johnfolton has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024