Jesus through Mary

[IamAdopted]

[/SIZE]


This is another way-the only way.
Joseph was more of a key player in the coming forth of Christ into the world.

Ill try to explain what i mean;

First you had Gods promise of Messiah being born through the bloodline of King David.

Who was that?


http://javascript<b></b>:VClk('Mt 1:1')




Joseph is the bloodline







Without the bloodline of Joseph, it would not have happened--They had to be betroathed so Gods original promise will not return to him void.


Without them both believing in the original promise of God, you have no child

God declares that he makes the husband and wife one flesh, and this is how the old promise stands that Jesus is of the bloodline of David legally.

Yes and this is why Mary and Joseph had to be married as one flesh for Joseph carried in his geneology the right to rule. This is why Jesus had to be the firstborn son. For it is the firstborn son that has the right to rule. So this disprooves that Joseph had children before Jesus was born by any other person. This is why Jesus was born of Mary because she needed to be married to Jospeph in order for the this to happen.

 

[WarriorAngel]

I posted that to prove that only Jesus has risen incorruptible

Yea...?
He was the firstfruit of redemption.
I said that....and so...?c

we don't get our old bodies back. We get uncorruptable Bodies back. Our Corruptable bodies will be turned into incorruptable bodies. They will be glorified bodies.

Same bodies, no longer sinful or afflicted due to sin.

Jesus said He did everything by the power of the Father. And yes the Bible says He was taken.

Jesus had all power ... hence He did this Himself.

Exactly, there is only dust left of most people, that dust will be collected and from it, like a seed, it will be made into an incorruptible body.

See above.

NOt really, the Bible says Jesus did everything by the power of the Father, and the Bible says Jesus ascended, and was taken. Revelations says the people of God ascended:

Rev 11:12 And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.

You've got to rightly divide the word there.

Does everyone have this power ...? To rightly divide the word ...?

Jesus did everything by the power of the Father, before His ressurection..after He was in His full Glory, and did things by His own power..

18And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

Therefore, His ascension was by His own power...

We are arguing because some people want to say Mary is risen incorruptible, and the Bible say so not.

NO where does the Bible say that. Are you adding to the scriptures??

[/size]


This is another way-the only way.
Joseph was more of a key player in the coming forth of Christ into the world.

Ill try to explain what i mean;

First you had Gods promise of Messiah being born through the bloodline of King David.

Who was that?







Joseph is the bloodline







Without the bloodline of Joseph, it would not have happened--They had to be betroathed so Gods original promise will not return to him void.


Without them both believing in the original promise of God, you have no child

God declares that he makes the husband and wife one flesh, and this is how the old promise stands that Jesus is of the bloodline of David legally.

AGAIN, if Mary did not say Yes, we would not have had the Savior.
You had the Savior through the humble concession of His Mother.

You could not have Him any other way....to be born flesh, He needed a Mother.

That is the OP.

Yes and this is why Mary and Joseph had to be married as one flesh for Joseph carried in his geneology the right to rule. This is why Jesus had to be the firstborn son. For it is the firstborn son that has the right to rule. So this disprooves that Joseph had children before Jesus was born by any other person. This is why Jesus was born of Mary because she needed to be married to Jospeph in order for the this to happen.

Huge mistake here.... IMO.
First I would like to discuss this, as I may be in error...however; this is what I have picked up.

Joseph came through the promised line... however; due to a bad seed in the line, the Lord did a change up.

And though Joseph was in the tribe promised, and the Savior 'came from' the line...it was only in an adoptive sense.

NOW, you are seeming to suggest Jesus took the dna from Joseph and this is why He was born because He was conceived through Joseph...??

Did you forget that consumating the marriage had not one iota to do with the conception of Christ??

'Firstborn' was as anything else in scriptures.... it had two meanings. For instance, we know Christ was told to be the FIRSTFRUIT of the Resurrection....because He would be the Firstborn into Heaven.

NOW...does this mean God was going to send other Sons...??

Firstborn does not mean the first of many, it just means the first.
Whether or not more come along.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Yes and this is why Mary and Joseph had to be married as one flesh for Joseph carried in his geneology the right to rule. This is why Jesus had to be the firstborn son. For it is the firstborn son that has the right to rule. So this disprooves that Joseph had children before Jesus was born by any other person. This is why Jesus was born of Mary because she needed to be married to Jospeph in order for the this to happen.

Oops oops, forgot to add some more.

Mary's geneology is added into the NT too.
Because it is HER seed that would have enmity to the serpent.

Her geneology is the also from the line of the twelve tribes.

So, Jesus did indeed come from the line of David....
AND it was through the WOMAN'S SEED.
Which had nothing to do with Joseph per say...who was only there in an adoptive sense to be the guardian of the Savior.

And to fulfil the promise of the line....yet differently than expected.

God Bless.

 

[IamAdopted]

Yea...?
He was the firstfruit of redemption.
I said that....and so...?c



Same bodies, no longer sinful or afflicted due to sin.



Jesus had all power ... hence He did this Himself.



See above.


Does everyone have this power ...? To rightly divide the word ...?







NO where does the Bible say that. Are you adding to the scriptures??



AGAIN, if Mary did not say Yes, we would not have had the Savior.
You had the Savior through the humble concession of His Mother.

You could not have Him any other way....to be born flesh, He needed a Mother.

That is the OP.



Huge mistake here.... IMO.
First I would like to discuss this, as I may be in error...however; this is what I have picked up.

Joseph came through the promised line... however; due to a bad seed in the line, the Lord did a change up.

And though Joseph was in the tribe promised, and the Savior 'came from' the line...it was only in an adoptive sense.

NOW, you are seeming to suggest Jesus took the dna from Joseph and this is why He was born because He was conceived through Joseph...??

Did you forget that consumating the marriage had not one iota to do with the conception of Christ??

'Firstborn' was as anything else in scriptures.... it had two meanings. For instance, we know Christ was told to be the FIRSTFRUIT of the Resurrection....because He would be the Firstborn into Heaven.

NOW...does this mean God was going to send other Sons...??

Firstborn does not mean the first of many, it just means the first.
Whether or not more come along.

Jesus was Josephs legal son. Because Joseph and Mary were married. If Jesus had been the real son of Joseph, He never could have sat on the throne of David, because He would have been under the curse. And yet, He had to be the legal son of Joseph to have the right, so God had to devise a plan by which Jesus would be the legal heir to the throne, but, at the same time, would not be in the bloodline of David descending through Jeconiah. God did it by the virgin birth--bypassing the cursed bloodline of Jeconiah, and yet still maintaining Jesus' royal right to reign. It's a fantastic thing how God guarded every single detail without contradiction through the miracle of the virgin birth.

 

[WarriorAngel]

Jesus was Josephs legal son. Because Joseph and Mary were married. If Jesus had been the real son of Joseph, He never could have sat on the throne of David, because He would have been under the curse. And yet, He had to be the legal son of Joseph to have the right, so God had to devise a plan by which Jesus would be the legal heir to the throne, but, at the same time, would not be in the bloodline of David descending through Jeconiah. God did it by the virgin birth--bypassing the cursed bloodline of Jeconiah, and yet still maintaining Jesus' royal right to reign. It's a fantastic thing how God guarded every single detail without contradiction through the miracle of the virgin birth.

THAT is what I said...

However; He was legally Joseph's which had absolutely nothing to do with whether or not Mary and Joseph had relations.

Joseph legally adopted Him, and this would have been so even if Mary had died directly after child birth.

ALSO Mary's Seed would have enmity to the serpent...and as we know,,,,ENMITY is a complete seperation of.
The WOMAN And Her Seed [Christ] would have enmity with the serpent. [which explains her immaculate being]


AND with all things, much of the OT was set up to disguise the birth of Christ.

IF it was NOT done this way, then He would not have been crucified which is the reason for His birth.

The Bible and scriptures are complicated...or the Apostles would have recognized Christ immediately for Who He was.

And the whole towns would have known too.

DO you truly believe if they absolutely know Jesus was God, that they would have crucified Him?

WHICH is why the marriage of Joseph and Mary was not a real marriage, nor was there a need for it to be.

'Father, they know not what they do..'

BECAUSE it wasnt until the Lord took time to explain the OT after His resurrection, that anyone knew what they meant.

AND those Apostles taught others to know scriptures..so forth.

This is why we cannot discern them for ourselves.
WE are not authorities.

God Bless.

 

[IamAdopted]

THAT is what I said...

However; He was legally Joseph's which had absolutely nothing to do with whether or not Mary and Joseph had relations.

Joseph legally adopted Him, and this would have been so even if Mary had died directly after child birth.

ALSO Mary's Seed would have enmity to the serpent...and as we know,,,,ENMITY is a complete seperation of.
The WOMAN And Her Seed [Christ] would have enmity with the serpent. [which explains her immaculate being]


AND with all things, much of the OT was set up to disguise the birth of Christ.

IF it was NOT done this way, then He would not have been crucified which is the reason for His birth.

The Bible and scriptures are complicated...or the Apostles would have recognized Christ immediately for Who He was.

And the whole towns would have known too.

DO you truly believe if they absolutely know Jesus was God, that they would have crucified Him?

WHICH is why the marriage of Joseph and Mary was not a real marriage, nor was there a need for it to be.

'Father, they know not what they do..'

BECAUSE it wasnt until the Lord took time to explain the OT after His resurrection, that anyone knew what they meant.

AND those Apostles taught others to know scriptures..so forth.

This is why we cannot discern them for ourselves.
WE are not authorities.

God Bless.

Yes they had to be truly married for Jesus to have the rite of rule. This is why when it is spoken of Jesus brothers and sisters they had to be of Mary because Joseph first born whether by blood or legally would have been the only one with the rite to rule.

 

[lionroar0]

Yes they had to be truly married for Jesus to have the rite of rule. This is why when it is spoken of Jesus brothers and sisters they had to be of Mary because Joseph first born whether by blood or legally would have been the only one with the rite to rule.[/QUOTE]


That's your assumption. The Scriptures never mention other children of Mary. Only Jesus is mentioned as the child of Mary.

Peace

 

[IamAdopted]

Yes they had to be truly married for Jesus to have the rite of rule. This is why when it is spoken of Jesus brothers and sisters they had to be of Mary because Joseph first born whether by blood or legally would have been the only one with the rite to rule.[/QUOTE]


That's your assumption. The Scriptures never mention other children of Mary. Only Jesus is mentioned as the child of Mary.

Peace

The bible does mention that Jesus had brothers and sisters. They could not have been Josephs before Mary. Because Jesus had to be the firstborn either legally or blood line to have the rite to rule. So now you figure it out.

 

[Benedicta00]

The bible does mention that Jesus had brothers and sisters. They could not have been Josephs before Mary. Because Jesus had to be the firstborn either legally or blood line to have the rite to rule. So now you figure it out.

Now where do you get this little tid bit from? If it's scripture then I sure wanna see it, if it is from any other source, then i reject it as being just a teaching of man.

 

[IamAdopted]

Now where do you get this little tid bit from? If it's scripture then I sure wanna see it, if it is from any other source, then i reject it as being just a teaching of man.

Which tid bit are you speaking of?

 

[repentant]

Wow, how people like to just throw words in Scripture..

Mary had other children.
Mary and Joseph were married.
Mary and Joseph had sexual realtions.
Jesus had to be the firstborn to rule.

Anything else you want to add into Scripture..?

 

[IamAdopted]

Wow, how people like to just throw words in Scripture..

Mary had other children.
Mary and Joseph were married.
Mary and Joseph had sexual realtions.
Jesus had to be the firstborn to rule.

Anything else you want to add into Scripture..?

Read the Old Testement Repentant and you will see that this is true. It has not been added just read and studied on. Scripture interprets scripture.

 

[Benedicta00]

Which tid bit are you speaking of?

That Jesus would not have been able to rule if he didn't have biological siblings tat cam after him.

Where in the name of what's holy, is that ever said in scripture?

 

[Benedicta00]

Read the Old Testement Repentant and you will see that this is true. It has not been added just read and studied on. Scripture interprets scripture.

Please.. start us off, where can we begin to see a pattern of this where we can put the whole picture together?

 

[repentant]

Yes please, show us...prove your case..

 

[repentant]

Question..

Back when the angel of death passed through Egypt, and killed all the firstborn children that did not have blood on their doors, were children who were the only child killed?

"On that same night I will pass through Egypt and strike down every firstborn&#8212;both men and animals&#8212;and I will bring judgment on all the gods of Egypt. I am the LORD

 

[IamAdopted]

That Jesus would not have been able to rule if he didn't have biological siblings tat cam after him.

Where in the name of what's holy, is that ever said in scripture?

what? I did not say this. Go back and read it. If I did I will correct myself. What I said is that Jesus had to be the firstborn of Joseph in order for Jesus to have the right to rule. Now we all know that Jesus was not born of Joseph but when Joseph and Mary were married before Jesus was born this made Jesus Josephs son legally. Therefore Gave Jesus the right to rule and by passes the blood line of Jeconiah and the curse that came with Jeconiah. Jesus blood line came from Mary who also came through the blood line of David. Then we see later on in scripture brothers and sisters mentioned. We know they could not have been Josephs before Jesus because it was to be the firstborn son. This was just the way it was. So now you figure out how Jesus got brothers and sisters this being the case.

 

[repentant]

what? I did not say this. Go back and read it. If I did I will correct myself. What I said is that Jesus had to be the firstborn of Joseph in order for Jesus to have the right to rule. Now we all know that Jesus was not born of Joseph but when Joseph and Mary were married before Jesus was born this made Jesus Josephs son legally. Therefore Gave Jesus the right to rule and by passes the blood line of Jeconiah and the curse that came with Jeconiah. Jesus blood line came from Mary who also came through the blood line of David. Then we see later on in scripture brothers and sisters mentioned. We know they could not have been Josephs before Jesus because it was to be the firstborn son. This was just the way it was. So now you figure out how Jesus got brothers and sisters this being the case.

Just show us....no where does it say Jesus had to be a firstborn to rule. Jesus' Kingdom was not of this world, and He is the Only Begotten Son of God..

And firstborn does not imply other's came after...answer my question...

 

[Benedicta00]

what? I did not say this. Go back and read it. If I did I will correct myself. What I said is that Jesus had to be the firstborn of Joseph in order for Jesus to have the right to rule. Now we all know that Jesus was not born of Joseph but when Joseph and Mary were married before Jesus was born this made Jesus Josephs son legally. Therefore Gave Jesus the right to rule and by passes the blood line of Jeconiah and the curse that came with Jeconiah. Jesus blood line came from Mary who also came through the blood line of David. Then we see later on in scripture brothers and sisters mentioned. We know they could not have been Josephs before Jesus because it was to be the firstborn son. This was just the way it was. So now you figure out how Jesus got brothers and sisters this being the case.

Okay, so you are saying that Jesus had to be Joesphs firstborn?


Okay...

First, I don't see where the bible says Jesus would have to be the firstborn of Joseph . You are adding to scripture

Next, there is nothing that says Joseph went on and had other kids with Mary. You are adding to scripture.

Third, the brothers and sisters of the Lord is ambiguous at best. It does not say these folks were his blood siblings. You are adding to scripture when you say they are.

And Fourthly, Firstborn does not mean kids indeed followed. Paul said Jesus was the firstfruit of the resurrection and the firstborn to enter heaven- does that mean God has other begotten sons who follow Jesus?

Just like the word until, it can be used in the context of what happened until the event. It doesn't necessary say what proceeded.

Jesus said he would be with us until the end of time. We know that does not mean he will cease to be with us after time ends.

 

[repentant]

Not to mention, like I said, firstborn is not even in the original Greek..