- May 29, 2005
- 5,876
- 485
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
That doesn't make Him actually David's son. Like I said, it has to be stretched.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
That doesn't make Him actually David's son. Like I said, it has to be stretched.However, remember that the crowd often called him Son of David.
That doesn't make Him actually David's son. Like I said, it has to be stretched.
Great. Still doesn't make Him David's actual son.It is a title for Messiah in the Jewish world.
Great. Still doesn't make Him David's actual son.
Ok, but looking at how you're quoting me & replying to me, it sure looks like you're disagreeing with me.I know. You are arguing with the other guy, not me.
Ok, but looking at how you're quoting me & replying to me, it sure looks like you're disagreeing with me.
Doesn't matter, Jesus was not the son of a king.Understood.
What's the point of mentioning Jesus' lineage then, if not to name drop?
Doesn't matter. A figurative title still doesn't make Jesus the son of a king.Was "King of the Jews" an appropriate moniker?
The R-R point is, since you seem to still be ignoring it, is "son of a king". No matter how many figurative titles Jesus has, it will never change the fact that Jesus was not actually the son of any king.So, Jesus is not "King of Kings"?
You can't have your cake and eat it too.
So, the gospels are not eyewitness accounts?
Surely that the apostles and companions of such are direct witnesses or quoting from direct witnesses adds to the credibility of the accounts. They spoke of things they had seen and heard not had passed down from centuries before as with Islam. Also what we know of these witnesses shows integrity and honesty and reliability as witnesses. All ,including Mark and Luke ,but excluding John, would die a martyrs death for the sake of the faith they professed.
When discussing ancient history sources, "eyewitness account" isn't much of a player. If you throw away everything that wasn't written by someone who actually witnessed the event "eyewitness account" you have no ancient history at all...except arguably some of the New Testament.
Vox Popoli: Pop illogic and "extra proof"Extraordinary claims for Jesus require extraordinary evidence.
Except our eternal salvation doesn't depend on whether or not Aristotle lived.
Extraordinary claims for Jesus require extraordinary evidence.
I mean, there are people who claim the Holocaust never existed, and it only happened like 70 years ago.Our eternal salvation does not depend on extraordinary evidence of 2000 years ago.
And even with that, there are people who don't believe the earth is round or that astronauts went to the moon...so even extraordinary evidence is debatable.
"Proven by extraordinary evidence" is not faith, and that would not be salvational, either.
Are the gospels eyewitness testimonies to the life of Jesus?
I do believe that Luke was a travelling companion of Paul, hence Luke would have conversed with the apostles. Luke as far as I am concerned is a very reliable guide to the life of Christ. In addition to being a direct eyewitness of the early church.Almost certainly not. Mark, which the other Gospels draw from, is written with a story structure that reads like intentionally constructed mythology.
Even if you believe that it is inspired by real world events, these aren't "eyewitness testimonies" to real world events. It's a story.
eudaimonia,
Mark
I mean, there are people who claim the Holocaust never existed, and it only happened like 70 years ago.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?