Do you believe that all scripture really "God breathed&

[polonius]

2 Timothy 3:16-17New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)

16 All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 so that everyone who belongs to God may be proficient, equipped for every good work.

If scripture is indeed authored by God, does God make occasional errors?

A Biblical fundamentalist will frequently try to prove what they want someone to believe by quoting (at least their interpretation) of a scripture passage, and hence not consider the fact that that scripture itself may be in error.

But don't scriptural contradictions prove that not all scripture is divinely inspired (or God-breathed)?:?

[polonius]

[Replying to post 28 by polonius.advice]

Even if Elizabeth were a levite, why would that prove Jesus (Mary/Joseph) where not descendants of David?

What am I missing?

JW

RESPONSE: The Virgin Birth found in Matthew and Luke. Joseph was not the biological father. Mary was supposedly a perpetual virgin.

Those who consider the Bible to be historical have to keep their facts straight. Even more so if they claim that the Bible is divinely inspired!

[bluethread]

RESPONSE: The Virgin Birth found in Matthew and Luke. Joseph was not the biological father. Mary was supposedly a perpetual virgin.

Those who consider the Bible to be historical have to keep their facts straight. Even more so if they claim that the Bible is divinely inspired!

This is not correct. RCC doctrine states that Myriam was a perpetual virgin. The Apostolic Writings only say that she was a virgin prior to Yeshua's birth. Yoseph does not have to be the biological father. Adopted children have equal rights to hereditary children. That is what is behind Paul's "grafting" analogy.

[polonius]

RESPONSE: The Virgin Birth found in Matthew and Luke. Joseph was not the biological father. Mary was supposedly a perpetual virgin.

Those who consider the Bible to be historical have to keep their facts straight. Even more so if they claim that the Bible is divinely inspired!

This is not correct. RCC doctrine states that Myriam was a perpetual virgin. The Apostolic Writings only say that she was a virgin prior to Yeshua's birth. Yoseph does not have to be the biological father. Adopted children have equal rights to hereditary children. That is what is behind Paul's "grafting" analogy.

RESPONSE:

Adopted children have equal rights to hereditary children.

Not in the case of Jewish children.

http://www.sullivan-county.com/identity/gen_jesus.htm
There are several problems with this answer.

First of all, there is no indication from any of the records in the Christian Bible that Joseph actually adopted Jesus. However, even if a case for his adoption could be made, it is absolutely impossible to pass on one's genealogy through adoption.

For example, a priest (Kohain) is someone who is born to another priest. If your father is a priest, then you are a priest. If a priest (Kohain) adopts a boy who is the son of someone who was not a priest, that child does not become a priest through adoption.

https://judaism.stackexchange.com/quest ... ews-jewish
It is kind of similar to medical history. Although your adoptive parents are Mom and Dad, you cannot base your medical risks on their history. Same with Judaism which bases religion on ancestry, not family. " YDK Jan 13 '12 at 0:50

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 28 by polonius.advice]

Even if Elizabeth were a levite, why would that prove Jesus (Mary/Joseph) where not descendants of David?

What am I missing?

JW

RESPONSE: The Virgin Birth found in Matthew and Luke. Joseph was not the biological father. Mary was supposedly a perpetual virgin.

Those who consider the Bible to be historical have to keep their facts straight. Even more so if they claim that the Bible is divinely inspired!

Okay, thank you for sharing ... so could you answer the question (I highlighted my question in red above) it was concerning the lineage of Elizabeth?

[bluethread]

RESPONSE: The Virgin Birth found in Matthew and Luke. Joseph was not the biological father. Mary was supposedly a perpetual virgin.

Those who consider the Bible to be historical have to keep their facts straight. Even more so if they claim that the Bible is divinely inspired!

This is not correct. RCC doctrine states that Myriam was a perpetual virgin. The Apostolic Writings only say that she was a virgin prior to Yeshua's birth. Yoseph does not have to be the biological father. Adopted children have equal rights to hereditary children. That is what is behind Paul's "grafting" analogy.

RESPONSE:

Adopted children have equal rights to hereditary children.

Not in the case of Jewish children.

http://www.sullivan-county.com/identity/gen_jesus.htm
There are several problems with this answer.

First of all, there is no indication from any of the records in the Christian Bible that Joseph actually adopted Jesus. However, even if a case for his adoption could be made, it is absolutely impossible to pass on one's genealogy through adoption.

For example, a priest (Kohain) is someone who is born to another priest. If your father is a priest, then you are a priest. If a priest (Kohain) adopts a boy who is the son of someone who was not a priest, that child does not become a priest through adoption.

https://judaism.stackexchange.com/quest ... ews-jewish
It is kind of similar to medical history. Although your adoptive parents are Mom and Dad, you cannot base your medical risks on their history. Same with Judaism which bases religion on ancestry, not family. " YDK Jan 13 '12 at 0:50

First are these your views, or are you opinion shopping? I ask that because the sullivan-county.com article does not identify the author, or provide references. Also, the judaism.stackexchange.com article speaks of modern rabbinic Judaism. In the latter, the mother is considered to carry the heredity. If you are going with that, the objections to Yoseph are moot and Yeshua is of the line of David via Myriam, which you say is not acceptable. I do not hold to that modern maternal heredity view. However, it is your reference, so it would need to be consistent with the points you are making.

To the point of adoption, we see in the case of Sh'mu'el;

(1Sam. 1:1) "Now there was a certain man of Ramathaimzophim, of mount Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephrathite:"

This was Sh'mu'el's natural father and he would have been of Yehudah, being from Ephratah.

(1Sam. 1:20) "Wherefore it came to pass, when the time was come about after Hannah had conceived, that she bare a son, and called his name Sh'mu'el . . ."

This establishes Sh'mu'el as a son of Yehudah.

Yet, (1Sam. 2:11b) "the child did minister unto the LORD before Eli the priest" (1Sam. 3:15b) "and opened the doors of the house of the LORD." Also, Sh'mu'el said to Shaul, (1Sam.10:8a) "thou shalt go down before me to Gilgal; and, behold, I will come down unto thee, to offer burnt offerings, and to sacrifice sacrifices of peace offerings:"

These are things that are only permitted for Levites to do. So, why is Sh'mu'el, a son of Yehudah by birth, doing them? Because he is the adopted son of Eli the Cohen. Though we have no formal record of adoption in this case either, it is implied by context.

Now, in the present case, no argument is being made regarding adoption in the case of a Cohen specifically, but only that an adopted son receive the same rights as a son by birth, in general. So, unless some explanation can be made for Sh'mu'el, granting that Yeshua is the legal son of Yoseph is not a stretch.

[polonius]

RESPONSE: The Virgin Birth found in Matthew and Luke. Joseph was not the biological father. Mary was supposedly a perpetual virgin.

Those who consider the Bible to be historical have to keep their facts straight. Even more so if they claim that the Bible is divinely inspired!

This is not correct. RCC doctrine states that Myriam was a perpetual virgin. The Apostolic Writings only say that she was a virgin prior to Yeshua's birth. Yoseph does not have to be the biological father. Adopted children have equal rights to hereditary children. That is what is behind Paul's "grafting" analogy.

RESPONSE:

Adopted children have equal rights to hereditary children.

Not in the case of Jewish children.

http://www.sullivan-county.com/identity/gen_jesus.htm
There are several problems with this answer.

First of all, there is no indication from any of the records in the Christian Bible that Joseph actually adopted Jesus. However, even if a case for his adoption could be made, it is absolutely impossible to pass on one's genealogy through adoption.

For example, a priest (Kohain) is someone who is born to another priest. If your father is a priest, then you are a priest. If a priest (Kohain) adopts a boy who is the son of someone who was not a priest, that child does not become a priest through adoption.

https://judaism.stackexchange.com/quest ... ews-jewish
It is kind of similar to medical history. Although your adoptive parents are Mom and Dad, you cannot base your medical risks on their history. Same with Judaism which bases religion on ancestry, not family. " YDK Jan 13 '12 at 0:50

RESPONSE:

First are these your views, or are you opinion shopping? I ask that because the sullivan-county.com article does not identify the author, or provide references.

COUNTER RESPONSE: It certainly does. Check the biblical references given throughout the article!

[polonius]

Bluethread posted:

To the point of adoption, we see in the case of Sh'mu'el;

"(1Sam. 1:1) "Now there was a certain man of Ramathaimzophim, of mount Ephraim, and his name was Elkanah, the son of Jeroham, the son of Elihu, the son of Tohu, the son of Zuph, an Ephrathite:"

This was Sh'mu'el's natural father and he would have been of Yehudah, being from Ephratah.

(1Sam. 1:20) "Wherefore it came to pass, when the time was come about after Hannah had conceived, that she bare a son, and called his name Sh'mu'el . . ."

This establishes Sh'mu'el as a son of Yehudah.

Yet, (1Sam. 2:11b) "the child did minister unto the LORD before Eli the priest" (1Sam. 3:15b) "and opened the doors of the house of the LORD." Also, Sh'mu'el said to Shaul, (1Sam.10:8a) "thou shalt go down before me to Gilgal; and, behold, I will come down unto thee, to offer burnt offerings, and to sacrifice sacrifices of peace offerings:"

These are things that are only permitted for Levites to do. So, why is Sh'mu'el, a son of Yehudah by birth, doing them? Because he is the adopted son of Eli the Cohen. Though we have no formal record of adoption in this case either, it is implied by context.

Now, in the present case, no argument is being made regarding adoption in the case of a Cohen specifically, but only that an adopted son receive the same rights as a son by birth, in general. So, unless some explanation can be made for Sh'mu'el, granting that Yeshua is the legal son of Yoseph is not a stretch.

RESPONSE: I think if you check further, you will find Samuel was the son of the Levite priest Elkanah. Thus Samuel was also eligible to be a priest.

2Sam 2: 20 Then Eli would bless Elkanah and his wife, and say, May the LORD repay[f] you with children by this woman for the gift that she made to[g] the LORD; and then they would return to their home.

21 And[h] the LORD took note of Hannah; she conceived and bore three sons and two daughters. And the boy Samuel grew up in the presence of the LORD.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/5691-elkanah

According to the genealogical tables, Elkanah was, a Levite, a fact otherwise not mentioned in the books of Samuel. The fact that Elkanah, a Levite, was denominated an Ephraimite is analogous to the designation of a Levite belonging to Judah (Judges xvii. 7).

The Tribe of Levi is one of the tribes of Israel, traditionally descended from Levi, son of Jacob, or high priest of the Israelites. Moses and his brother, Aaron, were both descendants of the Tribe of Levi.

Tribe of Levi - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribe_of_Levi

Kohen or cohen (or kohain; Hebrew: ", "priest", pl. " kohanim) is the Hebrew word for priest used colloquially in reference to the Aaronic priesthood. Jewishkohanim are traditionally believed and halakhically required to be of direct patrilinealdescent from the biblical Aaron.

Kohen - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kohen

[polonius]

[Replying to post 28 by polonius.advice]

Even if Elizabeth were a levite, why would that prove Jesus (Mary/Joseph) where not descendants of David?

What am I missing?

JW

RESPONSE: The Virgin Birth found in Matthew and Luke. Joseph was not the biological father. Mary was supposedly a perpetual virgin.

Those who consider the Bible to be historical have to keep their facts straight. Even more so if they claim that the Bible is divinely inspired!

Okay, thank you for sharing ... so could you answer the question (I highlighted my question in red above) it was concerning the lineage of Elizabeth?

RESPONSE: Please reread Luke 1. Mary's blood-relative Elizabeth was a daughter of Aaron (as were Levites). Elizabeth was NOT of Davidic blood. Nor would her blood-relatives be.

[JehovahsWitness]

RESPONSE: Please reread Luke 1. Mary's blood-relative Elizabeth was a daughter of Aaron (as were Levites). [...] Nor would her blood-relatives be.

I read it very carefully and could not find the word "blood" anywhere in the passage.

LUKE 1:36
Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month.

Given the above could you answer my question?

Even if Elizabeth were a levite, why would that prove Jesus (Mary/Joseph) where not descendants of David?

[polonius]

RESPONSE: Please reread Luke 1. Mary's blood-relative Elizabeth was a daughter of Aaron (as were Levites). [...] Nor would her blood-relatives be.

I read it very carefully and could not find the word "blood" anywhere in the passage.

LUKE 1:36
Even Elizabeth your relative is going to have a child in her old age, and she who was said to be unable to conceive is in her sixth month.

Given the above could you answer my question?

Even if Elizabeth were a levite, why would that prove Jesus (Mary/Joseph) where not descendants of David?

RESPONSE:

What part of this can't you understand? Sons and daughters of Aaron are not sons and daughters of David.