answers1: have you dealt with daniel 9. 25 and foll yet??
answers2: hi, I'm going to say something that church does not want you
to hear. <br>
<br>
Evolution is correct. BUT... I am a Christian. So where is the
mistake, you ask? <br>
<br>
The mistake is in the ridiculous translation of people who want your
money... - I mean preachers. <br>
<br>
God created the Earth, It was perfect. God then sent his perfect
servant to the Earth to do a perfect job. ( That servant was Lucifer;
that job was making man. - " ... Let us make man in our image. ") <br>
<br>
Lucifer rebelled, and made an imperfect hominid. - The Cro-mags...,
Neanderthals, ( who died out. ) then at least three different human
species. ( Europeans. Asians, and Africans. ) <br>
<br>
millions of years later, God decided to do something about the
imperfection, HE created Adam, and created him perfectly. The original
plan was to "breed" the imperfection out of the hominids, by having
lots of perfect kids with his perfect wife Eve. But Adam fell - How?
you ask?... Well, one of these imperfect hominids approached Eve in
the garden, and tricked her into a sexual sin. The term serpent was
not snake-species, it was snake-in-the-grass. ( A fitting description
for a guy who is seducing a young girl. ) <br>
<br>
Genesis chp. 3 -- " Has God said that you may eat of every tree in the
garden? " That little stud wanted Eve to perform oral sex. Eve did,
then... "... the woman took the fruit thereof to her husband, and he
did eat. " The act of ingesting the imperfect DNA of the imperfect
hominid, caused Adam's perfect body to become imperfect. So, breeding
the imperfection out was no longer possible. <br>
<br>
God's next perfect person was Jesus, ( A biologically engineered human
man. ) Conceived of a virgin. ( So that he was not part of the
imperfect blood-lines of all of the other people of the Earth. ) God's
plan this time was not to breed imperfection out, but instead to
sacrifice that perfect blood, as a payment for all of the imperfection
that was here. <br>
<br>
Why did God need a payment you might ask? <br>
<br>
Before Adam fell, God gave him the authority to do his perfect job. -
Genesis chp. 2 - " ... Be fruitful and multiply, replenish and subdue
the Earth, HAVE DOMINION. " That word dominion is ownership. <br>
<br>
God gave the Earth to Adam. When Adam died, that ownership did not
pass back to God. It passed to all of the human's that followed. If
you doubt me, look at anything... It is man who dominates everything
on this world, even when God wants something done, it is man's hands
that do it. <br>
<br>
Now, in the imperfect world, God needs a man to do the act. So Jesus
did the act of sacrifice, so that God has the right to raise any of us
perfect, from the dead. BUT, Jesus' sacrifice did not give God the
ability to save ME. I must give God that ability by: <br>
<br>
Romans 10:9 and 10 is how to be covered by the blood of Jesus. <br>
<br>
"That if thou confess with thy mouth the lord Jesus, and believe in
thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be
saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with
the mouth confession is made unto salvation." <br>
<br>
No money is required, no building ( a church ) needs to entered, and
no believing in ridiculousness is needed. <br>
<br>
That confess/believe is the "permission" that God needs to raise me
perfect, just as HE had always wanted. <br>
<br>
So, evolution is real... But science has got it a little wrong when
they thought that it proves the bible wrong. In fact, it only proves
that the church doctrine/interpretation is wrong and completely
ridiculous. <br>
<br>
BUT... God is real, and using your education to interpret scripture
will give you an insight that is more powerful than anything that
church has to say. <br>
<br>
So, Jesus was a man, born outside of the imperfect blood-lines of the
Earth. He was born in Bethlehem, Israel, sometime between 7 B.C., and
5 B.C., and his father was God, the creator of the Earth. ( Joseph was
Mary's husband,and adoptive father of Jesus on this planet. ) Joseph
was also a direct descendant of King David, Joseph's adopting Jesus
gave Jesus the blood-line right to the throne of Judea. That throne is
the one that is eventually going to be the ruler-ship of the entire
world.
answers3: Joseph was the earthly father figure to Jesus. <br>
<br>
The primary reason why the geneologies in Mathew and Luke get
confusing is because <br>
In mathew it mentions Joseph's true biological father Jacob....But <br>
In Luke it mentions Joseph's father in-law Heli. <br>
By technicality when Joseph and Mary "hooked-up",Heli became Joseph's
father also. <br>
NOW.......... <br>
To understand why a virgin birth was even necessary, you need to
understand that, <br>
the messianic bloodline from Adam to Jesus had to have God's provision
and blessing to work. <br>
But, there is an account in Kings or Chronicles were God pronounces a
blood curse <br>
on Jechonias. You'd think that God had shot himself in the foot. <br>
I could only imagine the response in the councils of satan. <br>
<br>
Now Jechonias was part of the lineage from David's son Solomon down to
Joseph. <br>
But because of this curse, God went through David's other son Nathan
down to Mary Alone.
answers4: The rules of society at that time. Even an adopted son
would inherit his adoptive father's lineage. Even today the same
happens... my niece is adopted, but she is still my niece and she is
cousin to my daughter. <br>
<br>
You are incorrect in stating that lineage is only through the father.
You are thinking of kings/nobles during the Middle Ages and later in
which inheritance was father to son or closest male relative. That
was not the case in the ancient Jewish world. For that matter the
genealogy of Jesus does include other females.
answers5: You NEED To Study About Yoseph The Uncle... <br>
<br>
NEVER Feel Desperate... <br>
<br>
And Don't Thank me, Simon... <br>
<br>
Thank ABBA YAHUEH ALMIGHTY...
answers6: Even more interesting, why is Joseph virtually eradicated
from the gospels?
answers7: The genealogies in Matthew and Luke are fabrications, so you
can't tell anything factual from them. Each of those writers wanted to
show that Jesus was descended from David, so they separately made up
the respective genealogies. That is why they contradict each other.
<br>
<br>
They each provided their fabricated genealogies as showing the descent
from David through Joseph, which would have been according to the
legal descent, since Joseph was the husband of Mary. <br>
<br>
Since the genealogies are contradictory, some Bible apologists try to
say that the genealogy in Luke is actually that of Mary. However, Mary
is not even mentioned in that genealogy. If that genealogy was that of
Mary, why doesn't her name appear in it? <br>
<br>
That is especially relevant because Luke mentions Mary in the birth
stories much more than Matthew does. For example, instead of Joseph,
it is Mary whom the angel appears to concerning the coming birth of
Jesus. There are also several other narratives about Mary, indicating
the importance that Luke gave her. In that case, why wouldn't he have
mentioned Mary in the genealogy if he intended it to be hers? <br>
<br>
In any case, according to Luke, Mary was Elizabeth's cousin (suggenes
in the original Greek, which indicates a blood relative). Since
Elizabeth was of the priestly tribe of Levi, Mary would also have been
of that descent and could therefore not have been a descendant of
David. That is, if you believe what Luke says. <br>
<br>
It should be noted that Mary's name does appear in Joseph's genealogy
in Matthew, where it states that Joseph was the husband of Mary. So
if, as Bible believers claim, women were not mentioned in genealogies,
why did Matthew mention her name? And why did Luke also not mention
her name, especially considering the importance he gave her, as I
described above? <br>
<br>
Those who say that the genealogy in Luke is Mary's therefore have no
basis for saying that other than wishful thinking.
answers8: I think that what they are saying is that Jesus is
considered the son of Joseph, though he was technically not.
answers9: Joseph was just covering for the Holy Spirit
answers10: Have you seen Luke's genealogy? They don't even agree on
who Joseph's father was.
No comments:
Post a Comment