>
VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, [9], 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 12:19:27 04/04/02 Thu
Author: Abba's Son
Subject: To Adilbrand: My reply to your questions

Most of these are easy. I may take some more time to be sure on other points.

The Christmas Story:
First, you made reference to Paul's two statements about the birth of Jesus. The Romans 1:3 reference actually confirms the virgin birth. "...as to His human nature was a descendant of David,". Paul is saying a lot in what he is not saying. Because, Jesus Christ is 100% man and 100% God, Paul would have to separate his 'human naute' from his 'God nature'. Paul's letter was to the Jews at the Church at Rome. He was laying the foundation. AS for the Galatians 4:4 reference, there is no contradiction here. Jesus' birth WAS COMPLETELY NATURAL. He was born the same way you and I were. Unless of course, you were a breech baby or C-Section. Mary was likely dialated 10cm's, she likely had some severe labor pains, she gave a natural, vaginal birth to Jesus Christ. It was His conception that was supernatural!

Second, authorship. Mostly concerning Mark and Matthew. (I believe we have already talked about John, and have agreed to disagree.)

Mark was written by John Mark, the same one that Paul and Barnabas fought over. John Mark went with Barnabas and Peter. Peter assisted John Mark in the writing of the Gospel. Why no birth story? That wasn't the focus of this Gospel. It was written to tell of what He had done. Including the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.

Matthew is an anonymous gospel. While it is widely credited to Matthew the tax collector, this has not been proven. Irenaeus sated that "Matthew also issued a writeen Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect..." Now, the original manuscript we know of is in Greek. This is not a problem. Greek was the dominant language. It could have easily been translated. (Have you actually read Homer's Iliad in the Greek?) A translation makes sense. While this isn't evidence, I think this next point is thought provoking. Matthew was a comparatively little known Disciple. There seems to be no good reason to make him the author. Why not credit it to Paul, or Peter, or James or another more prominent disciple? Any forger who sought fame for his production would have chosen to publish it under the name of a more renowned author. Second, the general agreement of early writers credits Matthew with the work. As a tax collector, he certainly would have been literate enough to write the gospel. (And likely, he could have written it in both languages.)

Next. you have several instances of the birth story and possible contradictions there. I will answer all of those here.

1. Contradictions in genealogy from Barnes' Notes on the NT: "No two scriptures have caused more difficult than these, and various attempts have been made to explain them. All that can be done is to suggest the various ways in which attempts have been made to explain them. 1) It is remarked that in nothing are mistakes more likely to occur than in such tables. From similarity of names, and the various manes by which the same person is often called, and from many other causes, errors would be more likely to creep into the text. (Personal note: that's an honest evaluation) 2) Most interpreters have supposed that Matthew gives the genealogy of Joseph and Luke of Mary. Both lines go back to the Davidian heritage. 3) Jacob and Heli (Eli) could have been brothers. One may have died without an heir, and per Jewish custom, the other could have conceived a child with the others wife. Here's what we know from both lists: Jesus was a descendant of David, fulfilling prophecy. All that can be asked now is whether they copied the tables of those families correctly. It is clear that no man can prove that they did not so copy them, and, therefore, that no one can adduce them as an argument against the correctness of the NT"

2. Virgin Birth: Why wouldn't Joseph have divorced Mary unless he clearly heard from God not to? Joseph's grace eases my mind that something supernatural had happened. I believe that virgin implies never having had sex, not simply young woman.

3. The Magi, star, and Herod: My son was born a little over a year ago. We called him a "baby". He is now a "toddler". Soon, he will be a "child". The Magi had visited a child, the shepherd saw that baby. The Manger scenes we see at Christmas time with all present are incorrect. Matthew and Luke are referring to two different times. Herod was covering his tracks. He didn't know exactly when this new King would be born, he wanted to be sure the baby was killed. (Remember Moses?)

4. Bethlehem/Nazareth/Egypt/Census: Again, baby vs. child. In two years Joseph and Mary were able to return to Israel, and settle in Bethlehem. The left Nazareth to register for the census, which I believe did happen. Why would the authors lie about something that could be checked so easily? Again, here is what Barnes has to say: "There is much difficulty respecting this passage, from the fact that no such taxing of 'all the world' is mentioned by ancient writers. It should have been rendered 'the whole land.' The whole land is mentioned to show that it was not Judea only, but that it included also Galilee, the place where Mary and Joseph dwelt." I'm okay with this explanation.

Your last statement was concerning the authorship of JOhn. I continue to hold fast concerning that topic.

Will you read two books for me?
The first is "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. The title gives an obvious idea of what it is about.
The second book is "Dangerous Wonder" by Mike Yaconelli. You can probably find this at www.youthspecialties.com

Your problem is you want facts. My friend, you are stuck in the 20th century. In a post-modern world, most people don't care about facts. They don't care what you know until they know that you care. I care. That's why I've spent the time recently on this site. Dangerous Wonder is a great book about the adventure of childlike faith. Please read it. I beg you with all that is within me to read it. I can't stress enough how much you should read that book. It's about 150 pages and an easy read. I knocked it out in two days. In fact, I will buy you a copy and send it to you if you wish.

That's what I have to offer. Thank you for the opportunity to strengthen what I believe.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.