Your view of who crucified Jesus doesn't stand.
Your view of who crucified Jesus doesn't stand.
You didn’t, and apparently still don’t know those who instigated Jesus’ crucifixion (John 8:28 KJV, John 8:37 KJV) were NOT Israelite descendants of Abraham who had been in bondage in Egypt (John 8:33 KJV). That sorta rattles the timbers, IP. Those instigators were “Abraham’s seed” (John 8:37 KJV); they just weren’t “Abraham’s children” (John 8:39 KJV). Toss that NIV, and get a KJV.
Abraham sired progeny via Hagar, Sarah, Keturah and concubines (Genesis 25:1, 2, 3, 4). “Abraham’s seed” via Keturah were not “Abraham’s children” according to Moses (Genesis 25:4 KJV). Judah, the prophesied progenitor of Messiah (Isaiah 65:9 KJV), had a Canaanitess wife (1Chronicles 2:3 KJV) who was the daughter of the Canaanite Shuah (Genesis 38:2 KJV), ‘son’ of Keturah (Genesis 25:2 KJV). Judah’s union was contrary to Deuteronomy 7:1, 2, 3, affirmed by Ezra 9:1, 2, 7 some 1,400 years later as you “have omitted the weightier matters of the law…” (Matthew 24:23 KJV).
Judah’s Canaanite father-in-law Shuah was one of “Abraham’s seed” (John 8:33 KJV, John 8:37 KJV). Shuah just wasn’t one of “Abraham’s children” according to Moses (Genesis 25:4 KJV). Jesus didn’t seem to think so either (John 8:39 KJV). Neither did Paul (Romans 9:6, 7, 8), nor did John the Baptist (Luke 3:2, 7, 8, 9). If you don’t know a lost sheep (Judah’s descendants via Tamar) from shinola (Judah’s descendants via his Canaanite wife), then discerning ancestrally who those detractors were remains quite elusive. Start with John 8:33 KJV and play the Scriptural cards out I’ve thrown on the table. This ain’t my first rodeo btw, and you’ve not SCRIPTURALLY refuted my position.
Another member here is upset about the "Jews" killing Jesus. He is Jewish.
And, you’re a new kid on the block. Ben and I have tangoed a number of times on TOL. Ben is a Sephardic “Jew”… a descendant of Judah and his Canaanitess wife. Do you think their Canaanite son Shelah was a Jew (Romans 9:6, 7, 8)? Then, I don’t suppose you have an explicit clue what Revelation 2:9, 3:9 was about. Ask Ben, a theological Jew, not an ancestral Jew, if he’s a descendant of Judah via Judah’s Canaanitess wife; or, if Ben’s a descendant of Judah and his Israelite Priestess daughter-in-law, Tamar. Don’t hold your breath, btw. Ben is NOT an Israelite Jew if he doesn’t claim Tamar as his ancestress. You obviously are clueless to that distinction, and Ben preys on your ignorance.
The alleged Jews who instigated Jesus crucifixion were not Israelite Jews: John 8:33 KJV, John 8:37 KJV, John 8:39 KJV. Jesus was an Adamite, Sethite, Shemite, Heberew (Eber), Israelite-Pharzite Jew. Jesus was a Semite. Those who instigated Jesus’ crucifixion were anti-Semites. Ben is an anti-Semite theological Jew, who I happen to hold in high esteem as a proponent of the theology Paul defected from.
But that is not the theology that Paul ends up with is it? Nor is a sub-group of Jews. Because if you'll look at Jn 8:34: It is people who sin who are slaves to sin and who killed him.
Your really are quite clueless, IP. Paul’s inclusive theology was after the arrival of Jesus, not before. Jesus was sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and you are clueless who they explicitly were, and what explicitly made them lost. The entire focus on 4,300 years of genealogy was to produce Messiah, which you dilute with your distorted notion of Isaac being immaculately conceived. Isaac’s arrival generation wasn’t prophesied in Genesis 4:24 KJV.
Now, sounding like a real “Way of the Master” follower of Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort, and ALL other long, boney fingered, Bible-thumping accusers of the brethren… you take John 8:34 KJV out of context. Jesus was NOT talking to His believers (John 8:30 KJV) in John 8:34 KJV… Jesus was talking to those non-Israelites (John 8:33 KJV) plotting His crucifixion (John 8:28 KJV, John 8:37 KJV). But, like I said… Since you don’t know who those anti-Semite, non-Israelites were, you’re clueless. Trash that NIV… you’re digging a deeper hole.
Why does that sound familiar? because it is also the terms used in Gal 4 about those who are slaves and those who are free. (There is a picture there through Hagar, but he doesn't mean any tribe or race or sect).
Like I’ve suggested, IP… get a KJV and trash the NIV. The words “slave” and “slaves” were only used once each in the entire KJV: Jeremiah 2:14 KJV, and Revelation 18:13 KJV
John 8:34 KJV didn’t use the word ‘slave’ as found in the NIV: John 8:34 NIV. A servant is a free, willing, unfettered, and unencumbered participant. A slave performs the same deed against his will, unwillingly, fettered, and encumbered or coerced in some physical or other manner with risks of detriment for not participating. Do you think those non-Israelites plotting Jesus’ crucifixion were coerced in John 8:33 KJV? Then, they weren’t slaves to sin (John 8:34 NIV); they were servants of sin (John 8:34 KJV). And, they were fulfilling Genesis 3:14 KJV, Genesis 3:15 KJV helping Jesus fulfill John 10:17 KJV John 10:18 KJV.
Therefore, your notion that John 8:34 KJV had any correlation in the least with Galatians 4:22 KJV, Galatians 4:23 KJV, Galatians 4:24 KJV is utterly abased and unfounded.
Those circumcised, non-Israelite, anti-Semite, Canaanite/Shelanites who instigated Jesus’ crucifixion were Abraham’s seed who’d infiltrated the Jewish synagogues. There is utterly NO record the Ishmaelites had anything to do with Jewish religion in those days. Any wonder why the Muslims despise those anti-Semite alleged Jews who also trashed the Ishmaelites with their statement in John 8:41 KJV? There is NO provision in Mosaic Law for a surrogate wife/mother, as was Hagar. The fact Abraham had other progeny via Keturah has totally blind-sided you.
…that's why none of your complicated geneological analysis hits the mark, as you can see from the paragraph after they were called illegitimate. It doesn't have a thing to do with what you said. It is children of the devil or not.
I’ve already taken the position those non-Israelites (John 8:33 KJV) who instigated Jesus’ crucifixion (John 8:38 KJV, John 8:37 KJV), who you are clueless about, fulfilled Genesis 3:14 KJV, Genesis 3:15 KJV. Doesn’t Genesis 3:15 KJV correlate perfectly with John 8:44 KJV? That’s simple enough. It is you who cannot connect the dots. They weren’t just children of the devil btw… they were descendants of Cain. But, you can’t come to this distinction with an NIV. So, if there’s one thing I hate… it’s playing a battle of truth with a one-armed opponent.
Maybe when your head quits spinning, you can document your position. Real simple, IP: Descendants of Abraham, and never in bondage to any man (John 8:33 KJV). That wasn’t Hagar btw, unless she had a sex change. Weren’t the Israelites in bondage to the wicked Pharaoh and his gang in Egypt? John 8:41 KJV further rules out Jesus’ dialogue in John 8 being with the Ishmaelites. The fact is… you don’t have a clue who specifically instigated Jesus’ crucifixion, and you’re grasping at straws trying to correlate John 8:34 KJV with Galatians 4 in your bogus theory Isaac was an immaculately conceived begotten of God.
In order for your theory to be true, Jn 8 would have exploded into internecine fighting on the spot from v44 on. It would never read as it does with "The Jews" answering in one unified voice. Not a chance.
You don’t reckon Matthew 23:13, 14, 15, 23, 25, 27, 29 was a bit more incendiary? You evidently haven’t captured the notion there were those Jews who believed Jesus (John 8:30 KJV) during that dialogue. During said dialogue there is NO record in the KJV “The Jews” answered in “one unified voice.” Another NIV perversion of the truth, IP?
The way you sound must be what Paul was speaking of about the useless inquiries into genealogies in letters to his understudies, Timothy, Titus, etc.
There’s nothing endless about Genesis 4:24 KJV prophesying Jesus’ arrival generation. Who’s waiting on Messiah to be born?
You may have a point on begotten; I'll check the original. I don't know how Adam and Eve are classed, then. As for immaculate, that has to do with virginity. I'm sure that was not meant. But as I said, I'm trying to reflect Gal 4:23 that the conception was contrasted with the usual.
As I’ve already addressed, Adam was “formed of the dust of the ground, and (the Lord) breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul” (Genesis 3:7 KJV). As far as immaculate is concerned, Mary was a virgin, Sarah most definitely not. Ishmael was conceived according to the flesh as usual, Isaac was miraculously conceived according to the promise (Galatians 4:23 KJV). Said promise is found in Genesis 18:14 KJV. Abraham was the biological father of both. Keturah’s children were children of the flesh, also (Romans 9:6 KJV, Romans 9:7 KJV, Romans 9:8 KJV, Romans 9:9 KJV). The difference is Hagar was an Egyptian, and Keturah was a Canaanite.
I've never heard that the name of Jesus is based on a pure ancestry, with several colorful characters found in it.
Clearly, as you’ve already exemplified by tarnishing the immaculate conception of Jesus, you’ve never been baptized in the ‘name’ of Jesus. Only One was perfect, btw. How do you reconcile Ruth, an alleged blood Moabite, being the wife of Boaz, when Solomon lost a kingdom hooking up with Moabite hotties? Ruth was not a blood Moabite; she was a geographical Moabite born after Reuben inherited that land north of the Arnon River that was never a possession of Moab. Your NIV lists Rahab the harlot in the ancestry of Jesus in Matthew 1:5 NIV, and the KJV lists a female named RaCHAB (Matthew 1:5 KJV)… as different as Rachel and Raquel. Rahab the harlot would have been about 60 years old when Salmon came along. David’s first progeny via Bathsheba, conceived out of wedlock, was still born. Any other colorful characters you’d like to discuss as you tarnish the name of Jesus, His ancestry?
I don't know how you live in places like Ur (<Iraq) or Haran (<Iran) for 300 years and are called Ebers. It's a stretch to me.
They were Hebrews. Geographics didn’t change their ancestral title. Ask Abraham in his infamous quest for a wife for Isaac: Genesis 24:2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. Consider Isaac’s and Rebekah’s dire quest for a wife for Jacob with particular interest in v. 4: Genesis 27:46, 28:1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Hebrews, IP.
So, the upshot: you've villified faith as the definition of the man of faith. Genealogy and descendancy is totally important to you, enough to create imaginary conflicts running in the background of Jesus account, because it is being read in NIV.
Your ignorance of Abraham’s faith, found in Genesis 24:3, 4, becomes you. Genealogy and descendancy was totally important to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Genealogy and descendancy was totally important to God in Genesis 21:12 KJV, Deuteronomy 7:1, 2, 3, corroborated by Ezra 9:1, 2, 7, corroborated by Paul in Romans 9:6, 7, 8, 9, 10, speaking of genealogy and descendancy. The generations of Jesus was prophesied in Genesis 4:24 KJV. The NT began with the genealogy of Jesus from Abraham. Luke brought the genealogy of Jesus from God forward (Luke 3:38 KJV), all 77-fold inclusive generations (Luke 3:23 KJV). And, you think genealogy and ancestry is of no significance among all those ‘who begat who’s’, and who was the son/father of whom in Genesis 10, Numbers, Chronicles…?
So, let me ask you once again: Could Jesus just as easily have been the progeny of any ole virgin, such as a virgin descendant of Judah and his Canaanite wife?
Most of all I notice that Christ the Seed is missing from your account, Gal 3:16. Which is too bad because those who have faith are blessed with Abraham the man of faith, a community where there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave or free, male or female.
"If you belong to Christ, you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." 3:29.
I simply didn’t discuss Galatians 3:16 KJV. You failed to notice Abraham’s faith was exemplified in his infamous quest for a wife for Isaac: genealogy (Romans 9:6, 7, 8, 9, 10). Isaac carried forth Abraham’s faith in his dire quest for a wife for Jacob: genealogy. Their faith was fulfilled in the arrival of Jesus: John 8:56 KJV. Faith was fulfilled in Jesus according to Paul in Hebrews 12:2 KJV. Abraham’s faith was exemplified in his infamous quest for a wife for Isaac resulting God’s Son’s arrival via unadulterated ancestry, without spot or blemish. You have no problem denying Jesus’ ancestry, his ‘name’… just like those non-Israelites (John 8:33 KJV) who instigated Jesus’ crucifixion, btw (John 8:13, 19, 28, 37, John 8:41 KJV).
Considering Paul’s mention that you bring forth, can you explain Abraham’s infamous quest for a wife of Isaac, then? Certainly not genealogy, right? It wasn’t until AFTER Jesus’ arrival that Paul said, “If you belong to Christ, you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Galatians 3:29 KJV). Paul didn’t say if you belong to ABRAHAM you are heirs according to the promise… because Abraham also sired progeny via Hagar, Keturah, and concubines. Was Ishmael born of the promise? No, he was born of the flesh. Were Keturah’s sons born of the promise? No, her sons were born of the flesh. Was Isaac born of the promise? Sure, and Jesus was the 77-fold end generation, Isaac among them, prophesied in Genesis 4:24 KJV. Don’t you think you’re being a bit hypocritical rebuking the notion of genealogy and descendancy, and talking about Jesus being the promised Seed, and turn right around bringing up the “colorful characters” in Jesus ancestry, then?
Could Jesus just as easily have been the progeny of any ole virgin including a Canaanite virgin descendant of Judah and his Canaanite wife? Abraham didn’t think so.
kayaker
