does this paradox disprove christianity?

So, im on stickam right now and I've heard this interesting argument

Jesus was born of a virgin

therefore, he cannot be the messiah because he is not of the house of david

so jesus was the son of joseph

therefore he cannot be the son of god

does this disprove christianity?

notconspiracy

You just disproved your own argument, if his mother was a virgin, joseph cannot be the father.

"therefore, he cannot be the messiah because he is not of the house of david"

you do know that "of the house of david" is another term "being jewish," which jesus was...

The overwhelming facts weigh in the favor of science. You guys obviously don't think rationally, so why would i bother trying to explain to you? You can't win an argument with a fool, the fool always thinks he's right.

And before you try and turn that around, lets just say, I never claimed to know the truth, I'm telling you all, your faith is ill-founded, don't try to preach to me that your religion is correct, because there are thousands of different religions on this planet, you can't honestly think you have it all figured out.

Rifkin-

dude religion is totally old school. it is all about philosophy now. ONLYwaiL

Why do some people insist on posting in threads that are above their level?

ahh.. i see.. so you have an original copy of all the books of the bible in thier orginal handwritten form and language? woot.

comp_atkins

No, but the bible that is used around the world is the same everywhere. The difference between denominations viewis that they either dismiss part of the text, or add and remove things to suit what they want. The former is usually the case while the latter has caused real problems

Also the difference betwenn the the "king james" bible and the"International Version"(popular one) is just the wording. It's a bit difficult to understand "ye old English thee thy thow whatever". It doesn't change what it's talking about.

What about anomalies such as the Shroud of Turin?

Never-mind the botched dating in the 1980s, the piece of tested cloth was contaminated with a newer material called a bioplastic-polymer.

The image of the shroud is both a 2d image and 3d image. At the same time. That is an impossible feat even by today's standards.The image in appears to be, in the biblical description, of Jesus of Nazareth. from the needle prick holes in the head (supposedly from thorns), to the scourging on the back and a spear mark in the side, it matches his description.

even if you don't believe it is/or in Jesus, how was it possible that it was created way back when, even though we can't reproduce it today?

Oh Risky, Fox and all the others debating, you guys are great. I usually lurk the forums from time to time and it is a breath of fresh air to see GOOD Christian debates.

So, im on stickam right now and I've heard this interesting argument

Jesus was born of a virgin

therefore, he cannot be the messiah because he is not of the house of david

so jesus was the son of joseph

therefore he cannot be the son of god

does this disprove christianity?

notconspiracy

Ever thought that Mary was from the line of David? Or they were somewhat related? Your "paradox" doesnt disprove anything. Also, what is it with people in this forum dogging on christianity so much? Where is the tolerance you guys preach about all the time?

Oh Risky and Fox, you guys are great. I usually lurk the forums from time to time and it is a breath of fresh air to see GOOD Christian debates.Delta8717

[QUOTE="Delta8717"]Oh Risky and Fox, you guys are great. I usually lurk the forums from time to time and it is a breath of fresh air to see GOOD Christian debates.foxhound_fox

[QUOTE="comp_atkins"]

ahh.. i see.. so you have an original copy of all the books of the bible in thier orginal handwritten form and language? woot.

Sparticus247

No, but the bible that is used around the world is the same everywhere. The difference between denominations viewis that they either dismiss part of the text, or add and remove things to suit what they want. The former is usually the case while the latter has caused real problems

Also the difference betwenn the the "king james" bible and the"International Version"(popular one) is just the wording. It's a bit difficult to understand "ye old English thee thy thow whatever". It doesn't change what it's talking about.

how is simply dismissing parts of it any worse than actually removing them? my point being you do not have knowledge of the editorial history of the texts, some being thousands of years old.. not to mention that a lot of the editing and translations were done by church organizations which you said you dont follow... kinda going in circles there.

[QUOTE="Rifkin-"][QUOTE="Ezgam3r"][QUOTE="Rifkin-"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

[QUOTE="lucas_kelly"]Comon sense, science, and logic disprove christianity.LJS9502_basic

Nope...they don't. But nice try.

Yes... they do. But nice thought.

You guys still on about that one? Its not my job to disprove something that ISN'T PROVEN. First, prove to me Christanity.

Christians follow Jesus Christ....therefore Christianity is. /thread.

ouch dude.

I don't know if anyone told you this but Jesus Christ died 1,974 years ago.

[QUOTE="Sparticus247"][QUOTE="comp_atkins"]

ahh.. i see.. so you have an original copy of all the books of the bible in thier orginal handwritten form and language? woot.

comp_atkins

No, but the bible that is used around the world is the same everywhere. The difference between denominations viewis that they either dismiss part of the text, or add and remove things to suit what they want. The former is usually the case while the latter has caused real problems

Also the difference betwenn the the "king james" bible and the"International Version"(popular one) is just the wording. It's a bit difficult to understand "ye old English thee thy thow whatever". It doesn't change what it's talking about.

how is simply dismissing parts of it any worse than actually removing them? my point being you do not have knowledge of the editorial history of the texts, some being thousands of years old.. not to mention that a lot of the editing and translations were done by church organizations which you said you dont follow... kinda going in circles there.

No, not exactly. Once the bible as we know it was created, it has stayed in the same form through the years. The editting that I am speaking of are the people who try to use this text to portray their personal agenda, like stating that certain books do not mater anymore, or that you have new books to add. These things are clearly against what God has intended, my referance being Revelations 22:16. We even have points in history where the scripture is used out of context to convey a personal agenda, and adding things have lead to big problems. Jim Jones is by far the most well know example.

Matthew shows lineage through Joseph as he was considered the father of Jesus according to Jewish law. Luke showed lineage through Mary....both from the lineage of David, K?LJS9502_basic

Eaxactly :)

Christians follow Jesus Christ....therefore Christianity is. /thread.

LJS9502_basic

Use that logic and Mohammad, Thor and Vishnu exist too.

So, to coin one of your own phrases - Your wrong.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Matthew shows lineage through Joseph as he was considered the father of Jesus according to Jewish law. Luke showed lineage through Mary....both from the lineage of David, K?Sparticus247

Eaxactly :)

So does that mean the immaculate conception was wrong, or does adoption count in lineage?

[QUOTE="Sparticus247"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Matthew shows lineage through Joseph as he was considered the father of Jesus according to Jewish law. Luke showed lineage through Mary....both from the lineage of David, K?RationalAtheist

Eaxactly :)

So does that mean the immaculate conception was wrong, or does adoption count in lineage?

No, he got the genes from his mother to be in the family of David.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Christians follow Jesus Christ....therefore Christianity is. /thread.

RationalAtheist

Use that logic and Mohammad, Thor and Vishnu exist too.

So, to coin one of your own phrases - Your wrong.

Christianity is a religion. This topic is narrow in scope. If you wish to address other issues do so from the start or start another thread.

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="Sparticus247"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Matthew shows lineage through Joseph as he was considered the father of Jesus according to Jewish law. Luke showed lineage through Mary....both from the lineage of David, K?Sparticus247

Eaxactly :)

So does that mean the immaculate conception was wrong, or does adoption count in lineage?

No, he got the genes from his mother to be in the family of David.

May I just draw your attention to the first line that you forgot to underline please?

[QUOTE="Sparticus247"][QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="Sparticus247"]

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Matthew shows lineage through Joseph as he was considered the father of Jesus according to Jewish law. Luke showed lineage through Mary....both from the lineage of David, K?RationalAtheist

Eaxactly :)

So does that mean the immaculate conception was wrong, or does adoption count in lineage?

No, he got the genes from his mother to be in the family of David.

May I just draw your attention to the first line that you forgot to underline please?

It doesn't matter since He had lineage from David on His mother's side as well. Read entire post slowly.

No, he got the genes from his mother to be in the family of David.

RationalAtheist

Again, I'll remind you that Mary was simply a vessell to bring the son of God into the world of man.

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

Christians follow Jesus Christ....therefore Christianity is. /thread.

LJS9502_basic

Use that logic and Mohammad, Thor and Vishnu exist too.

So, to coin one of your own phrases - Your wrong.

Christianity is a religion. This topic is narrow in scope. If you wish to address other issues do so from the start or start another thread.

Other issues? You infer by your logic that Multiple gods exist. I thought the bible mentions there was only the one god. Have you not exposed a mistake in the bible, or is your previous statement (referring to the current debate) not admissible due to it being incorrect?

It doesn't matter since He had lineage from David on His mother's side as well. Read entire post slowly.

LJS9502_basic

Where does it say that, or have you just made it up?

Other issues? You infer by your logic that Multiple gods exist. I thought the bible mentions there was only the one god. Have you not exposed a mistake in the bible, or is your previous statement (referring to the current debate) not admissible due to it being incorrect?

RationalAtheist

No...I'm simply addressing the subject of this thread. Stop trying to bring in arguments that are beyond the scope of this thread and stick to the subject. By the way....no paradox and Christianity is not disproven. Your thread is done.

As for your comment about other gods...no clue where you got that but it was not from me.:roll:

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

No, he got the genes from his mother to be in the family of David.

RiSkyBiZ-13

Again, I'll remind you that Mary was simply a vessell to bring the son of God into the world of man.

Don't misquote me!

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

It doesn't matter since He had lineage from David on His mother's side as well. Read entire post slowly.

RationalAtheist

Where does it say that, or have you just made it up?

Again...read the post. Luke.

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

Other issues? You infer by your logic that Multiple gods exist. I thought the bible mentions there was only the one god. Have you not exposed a mistake in the bible, or is your previous statement (referring to the current debate) not admissible due to it being incorrect?

LJS9502_basic

No...I'm simply addressing the subject of this thread. Stop trying to bring in arguments that are beyond the scope of this thread and stick to the subject. By the way....no paradox and Christianity is not disproven. You thread is done.

How is it not disproven?

What thread are you talking about?

About sticking to the subject....

Don't misquote me!

RationalAtheist

sorry lol

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

It doesn't matter since He had lineage from David on His mother's side as well. Read entire post slowly.

LJS9502_basic

Where does it say that, or have you just made it up?

Again...read the post. Luke.

Why do you assume I have not read the post?

Who is Luke?

ouch dude.

I don't know if anyone told you this but Jesus Christ died 1,974 years ago.

Dirijor2841

Ouch dude.....hence the following of Christians.:roll:

Why do you assume I have not read the post?

Who is Luke?

RationalAtheist

Maybe because of your subsequent questions......

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

Why do you assume I have not read the post?

Who is Luke?

LJS9502_basic

Maybe because of your subsequent questions......

Did you mean "previous", or are you a mind reader?

Did you mean "previous", or are you a mind reader?

RationalAtheist

Subsequent....as in questions subsequent to the post. Using rational thought that should be obvious.:lol:

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

It doesn't matter since He had lineage from David on His mother's side as well. Read entire post slowly.

RationalAtheist

Where does it say that, or have you just made it up?

Again I will repost this response for teh third time, please take the time to read previous posts.

David had a son named Nathan, who had a son named Mattatha, who had a son named Menna, then Melea, then Eliakim, Jonam, Joseph, Judah, Simeon, Levi, Matthat, Jorim, Eliezer, Joshua, Er, Elmadam, Cosam, Addi, Melki, Neri, Shealtiel, Zerubbabel, Rhesa, Joanan Joda, Josech, Semein, Mattathias, Maath, Naggai, Esli, Nahum, Amos, Mattathias, Joseph, Jannai, Melki, Levi, Matthat, then Eli, Followed by Mary!!

NOTE: There is also a seperate geneology of Joseph (Mary's husband) that shows he is a descendant of David as well through Soloman. This shows that Jesus was a blood descendant through Mary, and also the adopted descendent through Joseph.

Also many people mistake Mary's lineage for josephs, since, well I can't exactly remember where, there is a passage that refers to Joseph bing Eli's son. This is not the case however as it is also told earlier that Eli had no sons to call his own (meaning no boys), Joseph became the son of eli through Mary.

Why do you assume I have not read the post?

Who is Luke?

RationalAtheist

Luke is the name of the book (chapter) that esplains the lineage of Jesus through Mary

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

Did you mean "previous", or are you a mind reader?

LJS9502_basic

Subsequent....as in questions subsequent to the post. Using rational thought that should be obvious.:lol:

Subsequent, like afterwards?

Definitions of subsequent on the Web:

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

Why do you assume I have not read the post?

Who is Luke?

Sparticus247

Luke is the name of the book (chapter) that esplains the lineage of Jesus through Mary

But not Joseph...

Subsequent, like afterwards?

Definitions of subsequent on the Web:

.

RationalAtheist

Indeed....you have cracked the case.

[QUOTE="Sparticus247"][QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

Why do you assume I have not read the post?

Who is Luke?

RationalAtheist

Luke is the name of the book (chapter) that esplains the lineage of Jesus through Mary

But not Joseph...

Luke is the name of the man who wrote the book, He was a contemporary of Jesus.

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

It doesn't matter since He had lineage from David on His mother's side as well. Read entire post slowly.

Sparticus247

Where does it say that, or have you just made it up?

Again I will repost this response for teh third time, please take the time to read previous posts.

David had a son named Nathan, who had a son named Mattatha, who had a son named Menna, then Melea, then Eliakim, Jonam, Joseph, Judah, Simeon, Levi, Matthat, Jorim, Eliezer, Joshua, Er, Elmadam, Cosam, Addi, Melki, Neri, Shealtiel, Zerubbabel, Rhesa, Joanan Joda, Josech, Semein, Mattathias, Maath, Naggai, Esli, Nahum, Amos, Mattathias, Joseph, Jannai, Melki, Levi, Matthat, then Eli, Followed by Mary!!

NOTE: There is also a seperate geneology of Joseph (Mary's husband) that shows he is a descendant of David as well through Soloman. This shows that Jesus was a blood descendant through Mary, and also the adopted descendent through Joseph.

Also many people mistake Mary's lineage for josephs, since, well I can't exactly remember where, there is a passage that refers to Joseph bing Eli's son. This is not the case however as it is also told earlier that Eli had no sons to call his own (meaning no boys), Joseph became the son of eli through Mary.

No lineage on the mothers side and adopted from the fathers side, like I posted.

There have been many inferences and blood breaks made in that genealogy, especially in the last sentence.

All this evidence comes from a book written some 100 and something years after the events happened (after being transferred by word of mouth).

I find it patronising that you encourage me to re-read posts where I have already identified issues.

Sorry to shoot a little off topic here, but I just want to say that this is fun!! :)

A good heated debate can be interesting, especially since I have to work all the time. It gives me something else to think about.

No lineage on the mothers side and adopted from the fathers side, like I posted.

There have been many inferences and blood breaks made in that genealogy, especially in the last sentence.

All this evidence comes from a book written some 100 and something years after the events happened (after being transferred by word of mouth).

I find it patronising that you encourage me to re-read posts where I have already identified issues.

RationalAtheist

The lineage on His mother's side is from the lineage of David dude. Therefore, no paradox.

[QUOTE="Aznsilvrboy"][QUOTE="Iantheone"]

lol with the mormons you are born going to heavan or hell. there is nothing you can do about it, so whats the point in doing anything good if you cant change the fact you are going to heaven or hell? woo hoo we are free to as much bad as we want and it wont change a THING!

Iantheone

That's horribly wrong. I've had mormon missionaries come to my house for preaching sessions and it's not like that.

ya it is. you are born going to heaven or hell

[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]

Subsequent, like afterwards?

Definitions of subsequent on the Web:

LJS9502_basic

Indeed....you have cracked the case.

I think we're experiencing communication difficulties.

Your previous post does not make sense unless you could predict what I would write in subsequent posts.

So that makes you a mind reader, or a confusing poster.