John A. Broussard

Nope. It's just that he wants us to know he's keeping his eye on us, despite the fact that he has to oversee several billion galaxies, containing several billion stars each, with "god knows" how many planets, with eversomany of their own cattle that need boils.


Whatever else you might say, the Bible puts it all into perspective.

jeremyp

Actually, the two stories can be harmonised simply by observing that the passage in Acts is a speech by Peter. Peter may have been mistaken but Acts faithfully recorded his words. I don't know why apologetics never use this argument, unless Peter, as the first Pope, was already meant to be infallible.

Do you not mean that hanging bodies fall feet first?

budgie

He is, however, inordinately fond of beetles.

-jim

Chris Weimer

Actually evidence points to Matthew's geneology being Mary's.

Aram is the first seven; David is the second seven; Uzziah was the third seven; Jechoniah was the fourth seven; Achim was the fifth seven; Christ, if Mary is the sixth six, is the sixth seven.

In order to make the geneology work, ανηÏ? has to be construed as father of Mary, and not husband. Then later Matthew would use the same word for Joseph Mary's husband. This probably indicates a second source working on Matthew, maybe very early on people who did not catch the numerology changed πατηÏ? to ανηÏ? in order to make it work.

Diogenes the Cynic

This is a huge reach, especially since it requires changing a crucial word and especially especially since maternal bloodlines had absolutely no meaning or significance in Jewish laws of succession. In order to be heir to the throne of David, only the patrilineage mattered. If Jesus wasn't descended from David through his father then he wasn't the Messiah. Matthew, being the most Jewish of all the Gospel authors would have known this. A plain reading shows a bloodline through Joseph and if it wasn't for the conflict with Luke, no one would ever even try to say it was Mary.

judge

This is what we find in the Aramaic of Matthew 1:16 as explained here

Chris Weimer

Judge, the overwhelming evidence that the Peshitta is worthless nullifies any arguement you might try to bring up.

Diogenes, you're working on a basic presumption that Matthew was very Jewish. The gospel doesn't accurately reflect this, especially when in light of the denunciation of Jews towards the end, the constant quoting from the LXX, and a lack of traditional Jewish understanding of Messianic references. Matthew, actually, is in accord with late redactional "orthodox Christian" thought. In fact, the redaction can be seen as very broad, and includes this one. And per Jewish custom, a person is Jewish if their mother is Jewish but their father is not, yet not Jewish if their father is but their mother is not. :thumbs:

http://www.wnyc.org/books/968

judge

OK if you have overwhelming evidence I'd like to see it.

The only evidence we seem to see here is

1. The existence of loan words...but there are even Aramaic words in the greek versions.

2.Explanations in the texts ...but these exist in the greek texts as well.

Good luck

linwood

I`ve heard this harmonization before.
The word is used literally in every context I have seen it.
Every concordance I`ve researched it in also has it`s use as literal many even regardless of content.

1) to throttle, strangle, in order to put out of the way or kill

2) to hang one's self, to end one's life by hanging

http://www.blueletterbible.org/tmp_d...8608-3162.html

I have not been able to check the reference to Aristophanes as all three copies of Vespae at my library have been listed as "missing" for months.

I would be interested in any online reference you might be able to provide.
I would also ask if you have seen this reference yourself or are merely stating something you`ve read somewhere about it?

However regardless of how Aristophanes used the word his is the only literary device I`ve come across that has allegedly used it in a figurative manner and considering I cannot verify it it is extremely weak evidence indeed.
Even if I could verify it it would be somewhat weak considering he is the only writer to use it as such and considering what it was written in (screenplay) the content would be what decided it`s use as figurative.

Anyone know where I can find a copy of Vespaes online?

linwood

That is a much better harmonization
I suppose they don`t use it because they don`t want to imply the fallabilty of Peter any more than they want to admit the inerrancy of the Bible.


Ahh, yes.
I do mean "feetfirst" my apologies.