winstonjen

So Jesus only had a "God" chromosome? Would that make him half-human?

Doctor X

I will correct this:

Genetic diseases such as HD are not the fault of a person.

Naltariel:

Welcome to the forums!

You are correct that "sin" is traditionally the translation of the Greek for "missing the mark." I will leave it to the Hebrew Scholars here to explain the Hebrew conception. However, "sin" appears "first" in the NT in Mt--ala KJV:

where "sin" is the translation for hamartesei--αμαρτησει--from hamartia--αμαρτια--which is understood as a "fault" or "failure."

References:

BlueLetterBible

Liddell & Scott Greek-English Lexicon

--J.D.

[Edited because he really has absolutely no idea what he pontificates about.--Ed.]

Amlodhi

Not assuming much are they? I'd love to see that study. When was it that they compared those blood samples?

Namaste'

Amlodhi

Godless Wonder

Really? Then why do the Bible authors bother with the geneologies that try to show Jesus is of the seed of David in both Matthew and Luke? (Conflicting geneologies, I might add.)

NOGO

John, 7:8 Go ye up unto this feast: I go not up yet unto this feast: for my time is not yet full come.

7:9 When he had said these words unto them, he abode still in Galilee.

7:10 But when his brethren were gone up, then went he also up unto the feast, not openly, but as it were in secret.

Nonsense!
If you are right then it implies that "his time had come" since he specifically said that the reason for not going is that his time had not come.

Now we all know what Jesus meant by "his time had not come"

He is talking about his death which did not happen in this trip to Jerusalem.

Definitely a lie. His time had not come and he went.

Magus55

Jesus was still an embryo in Mary, and since she is a descendant of David, Jesus still holds all rights to the throne by being born of Mary.

Opera Nut

Report from the Reality Channel: Original sin creates a problem when there is no problem in reality. I'm not going to use the word "sin" because of the religious implication. I will use the word "wrong".

We are all capable of doing wrong, and we all do wrong things. Ideally, we learn from our mistakes and stop doing the wrong things. However, nobody who is human is either totally depraved or totally innocent, at least not after they are old enough to develop a moral sense. People have been stumbling through life looking for answers for thousands of years, and concepts of human rights and responsibilities are gradually improving.

Telling people that they are bad just because they are human, and are allegedly descended from two fruit munching simpletons who disobeyed god, is creating a problem where there is none.

Original sin is creating a problem where there is none.
It's problem-reaction-solution. The original "let's create a problem to sell people our quote unquote solution".

The problem is original sin. The solution is Christianity. This is communication which is no more sophisticated than a shampoo commercial or simple advertising: "You've got yucky hair! But you don't know it! Everyone else DOES!! Use our HOLY SIN-RINSING SHAMPOO AND FEEL CLEAN AGAIN!! AVAILABLE IN JEEBUS' BLOOD SCENT!! YOU CANNOT BE CLEAN UNLESS YOU USE OUR HOLY SHAMPOO!! EVERY OTHER BRAND OF SHAMPOO LEAVES YOU DIRTY!".

Yes, I know that was a gross thought, but that's literally what Xtians think in their incredibly gross and gory and horrible imagery. I'm using a commercial analogy to show how absurd Xtianity is.

==========

Footnote to last post: Oh so the mother providing the uterus, for gestation of a test tube baby, not the genetic mother, is the REAL mother of the baby?? That's a new one on me.

Godless Wonder

But the geneologies, (both of them) are of Joseph, not Mary. You had to see that coming. Of course you will assert that at least one was a geneology of Mary. So let me delineate them:

From Matthew:

Abraham
Isaac
Jacob
Phares
Esrom
Aram
Aminadam
Naasson
Salmon
Booz
Obed
Jesse
David the king
Solomon
Roboam
Abia
Asa
Josaphat
Joram
Ozias
Joatham
Achaz
Ezekias;
Manasses
Amon
Josias
Jechoniase
Salathiel
Zorobabel
Abiud
Eliakim
Azor
Sadoc
Achim
Eliud
Eleazar
Matthan
Jacob

And finally:

Matthew 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, . . .

Clearly, a geneology of Joseph.

And from Luke, (specified backwards, from Jesus, son of . . . etc. )

Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being
(as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of

Heli
Matthat
Levi
Melch
Janna
Joseph
Mattathias
Amos
Naum
Esli
Nagge
Maath
Mattathias
Semei
Joseph
Juda
Joanna
Rhesa,
Zorobabel
Salathiel
Neri
Melchi
Addi
Cosam
Elmodam
Er
Jose,
Jorim,
Matthat,
Levi,
Simeon,
Joseph,
Jonan,
Eliakim,
Melea,
Menan,
Mattatha,
Nathan,
David,
Jesse,
Obed,
Booz,
Salmon,
Naasson,
Aminadab,
Aram,
Esrom,
Phares,
Juda,
Jacob,
Abraham,
Thara,
Nachor,
Saruch,
Ragau,
Phalec,
Heber,
Sala,
Cainan,
Arphaxad,
Sem,
Noe
Lamech,
Mathusala
Enoch
Jared,
Maleleel,
Cainan,
Enos,
Seth,
Adam, which was the son of God.


The 2 geneologies are both of Joseph, who is not the father of Jesus, and who is not Mary in whose womb Jesus' fetus dwelled, and they diverge, immediately after Abraham, so at least one of them is incorrect in any case.

Notice in particular, Solomon is missing from the 2nd geneology, for example.

( But, Salmon and Booz are adjecent in both, an endorsment of Sushi and Sake? )

Magus55

Actually, according to Dr. Henry Morris, son in the "son of Heli" isn't in the original, and actually is intended as son-in-law of Heli. Other commentaries also confirm that son-in-law is the intended meaning, not son. Joseph was used instead of Mary because it was customary in Jewish culture to refer to the man, not the woman.

If we had the original hebrew, there would probably be no conflict or question about genealogies.

Godless Wonder

Ah HA! So the Bible is not inerrant then?