2. Likewise, the very first page of the New Testament introduces another major contradiction: inconsistent genealogies of Jesus in Matthew and Luke. Some have "explained" this by saying that Luke is the genealogy of Mary; such a claim acknowledges error, since Luke specifically states that it is the genealogy of JOSEPH [Luke 3:23], just like Matthew [Matt 1:16]. So, either there is a contradiction (Matthew says that Jacob is the father of Joseph; Luke says Heli is the father of Joseph, and from there back to Solomon not a single name is the same; not even the same number of generations), or one of them is making an incorrect statement about a relevant fact for Jesus' claim to the House of David.
2007-11-29 01:11:26 · 22 answers · asked by TSIRHC 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I like the way some folks ignore the actual answering of the question and give their opinion...wait just like the Hebrews did when writing the bible.
2007-11-29 01:16:39 · update #1
Thanks very much Mancloud, do Christians think they will convert people by attacking them? Sheesh
2007-11-29 02:27:22 · update #2
Why doesn't someone actually answer this guys question. All we've had is people attack him or gloss over it.
If you don't agree with him, why don't you explain why rather than ignorantly insult him.
2007-11-29 01:17:22 · answer #1 · answered by Mancloud 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Of course it is. I will not for a minute dispute some of the good gems on how to live your life that the Bible contains (along with many not-so-great ones too). However, the Bible (or Koran or Book of Mormon, etc ad nauseum) as a historical document, taken with a literalist interpretation, can never even remotely stand up to the same standard set for any other book purported to be historical. So that burden of academic integrity is magically omitted so we can have a bunch of people kill and hate each other in the name of a guy who, if they got his message across correctly, seemed like a good dude who was all about NOT killing or hating anyone. I'm all for people believing whatever they want to believe. Just don't shove it down my throat.
2007-11-29 01:24:58 · answer #2 · answered by Manny 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The mistakes and contradictions in the bible are numerous. I was always interested in the books of genesis and how 1 and 2 are totally different from one another. At least most other fiction books try not to contradict themselves. The contradictions and blunders as you call them stop me from even attempting to digest any of the bibles words.
2007-11-29 01:56:05 · answer #3 · answered by Lee S 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Dear Friend,
Let us look at the two relevent sections of this scripture
First Matthew 1:15Eliud the father of Eleazar,
Eleazar the father of Matthan,
Matthan the father of Jacob,
16and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
then in Luke 3:the son of Heli, 24the son of Matthat,
the son of Levi, the son of Melki,
the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph
The greek word for husband, is very similar for father, and here was poorly translated, and is no understood by many to be Father of Mary. Mary was indeed a decendent of David through Solomon, as Joseph was through Nathan.
God Bless
2007-11-29 01:23:39 · answer #4 · answered by ianptitchener 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Many cultures see the ft as significant as they permit a physique to stroll interior the sunshine of the lamp, they permit us to project out of the darkness. In some cultures that's necessary wash or shake the dirt from ones ft formerly getting into "the dwelling house". This prevents any unclean issues from the international being carried in on our souls/soles. Even on the instant this remains carried on in some way, however not many will rejoice with it. We place doormats outdoors our dwelling house, we've some form of mat interior too some situations. oftentimes we alter our footwear into indoor ones/slippers. this custom might properly be seen interior the some distance east and in fairly some non secular practices appropriate to the temple and gods dwelling house.
2016-10-09 22:14:17 · answer #5 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Matthew and Luke probably had different sources for their histories. We should probably trust Luke's history more than Matthew's since Luke was a doctor and probably had a more thorough education than Matthew, who was a tax collector.
2007-11-29 01:18:09 · answer #6 · answered by Skunk 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The genealogy of Mary is connected to Joseph because they considered the SONS. Therefore, Joseph is Heli's SON-IN-LAW, hence his SON.
Bring something harder next time.
2007-11-29 01:17:21 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Yes, it is a blunder.
If a statement is written that and it directly contradicts a previously written statement there is no amount of explanation that will change the fact. Answering differently amounts to nothing more than accepting a lie as if it was the truth and that is a moral failure.
http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb62/Randall_Fleck/Playdough_God_GIF.gif
[][][] r u randy [][][]
.
2007-11-29 01:36:42 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
That is the only book in the world that is incongruous and irrational which believers will always deny. But what the heck!
2007-11-29 01:19:01 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Joseph was her cousin? He lied all the time in the name of holy spirit.
Not good for Mary... but that's how they tricked their girls in ancient times.
2007-11-29 01:16:15 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋