Joseph's two dads

Author: Barney

Posts

Total: 83
#61
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret

But I eagerly wait you evidence that Luke was a Greek.


Ha Ha. I don't have to prove what is the status quo.


No evidence then. Why doesn't that surprise anyone..at all.


And I am not going to be bothered doing it for you. You know as well as I do that he was a Greek. 

On the contrary. I  believe Luke was  Jew with a capitol J.


As for Jesus - of the line of David. I think we both agree with that. 

GOOD! As was Joseph.  So how then can Jesus also be a priest  when he had no connection to the house/tribe of Levi,  Aaron and "his decedents" .

 “Only the tribe of Levi you shall not number, nor shall you take their census among the sons of Israel. But you shall appoint the Levites over the tabernacle of the testimony, and over all its furnishings and over all that belongs to it. They shall carry the tabernacle and all its furnishings, and they shall take care of it; they shall also camp around the tabernacle.

“For they [the Levites] are wholly given over to Me from among the children of Israel; instead of those that open the womb all the firstborn of Israel I have taken them for Myself . . .” The monopoly of the priesthood was given to Aaron

 You want it all ways yet  Jesus himself makes it clear that he hasn't come to "change the law". Mattew 5:17

 The books of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers maintain that Aaron received from God a monopoly over the priesthood for himself and his male descendants (Exodus 28:). The family of Aaron had the exclusive right and responsibility to make offerings on the altar to Yahweh.



Jesus being baptised or ordained as a priest - does not make him a Levite Priest.

Ok then what kind of priest was he?   Keeping in mind the orders of god and also and that it was  his law that Jesus coming to "fulfill".

And let us not forget that you haven't even proven that Jesus's baptism by John was a ritual anointing Jesus king,  prophet and priest as you have claimed several times now here>>#2










#62
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret



.
TRADESECRET, A BIBLE 2ND CLASS WOMAN, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO,  Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3,


YOUR EMBARRASSING “WOMAN” QUOTE IN POST #55: “Not true.  Luke was a Gentile. There is not a scrap of evidence otherwise.”

Using your words, PROVE YOUR PROPOSITION ABOVE BIBLICALLY BEYOND ANY DOUBT! WE WILL BE WAITING!


Tradesecret, listen up Hell bound 2nd class Bible woman, it is no wonder why Jesus’ words despise your female gender, where we men who are to please Jesus are to have nothing to do with your disgusting and ungodly gender, other than to make you the Bible fools that you truly are in this forum, praise Jesus’ TRUE words listed below: 

“I find more bitter than death the woman who is a snare, whose heart is a trap and whose hands are chains. The man who pleases God will escape her, but the sinner she will ensnare.” (Ecclesiastes 7:26)

Tradesecret, it is no wonder that you embarrassinly HID YOUR FEMALE GENDER for so long in your biography, but you made a great mistake “in coming out of the closet”  to actually admit that you are a Bible 2nd class woman on this prestigious Religion Forum, just how stupid was that? You obviously don’t understand your 2nd class woman status in the Bible, but don’t worry dear, I will show what Jesus truly thinks of you being a woman, as if your Bible stupidity wasn’t enough! LOL



.
#63
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
But I eagerly wait you evidence that Luke was a Greek.


Ha Ha. I don't have to prove what is the status quo.


No evidence then. Why doesn't that surprise anyone..at all.


And I am not going to be bothered doing it for you. You know as well as I do that he was a Greek. 

On the contrary. I  believe Luke was  Jew with a capitol J.

I am not going to bother with your games.  You looked at the commentaries and you know what they say. This is why you said "not all the commentaries will agree with you". https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4858/post-links/206623 Luke is a Greek name.  Luke wrote in a more classical style of Greek than the Jewish writers did. Luke is traditionally a Gentile by all of the early church and the consensus of the church. I said all of the commentaries. I have never seen anywhere but you declaring otherwise, sorry and the Brother, otherwise.  There is NO evidence that he was Jew or even a Hellenized Jew.  I cannot prove or disprove a negative.  This means that you must believe in blind faith that Luke was Jew. 


As for Jesus - of the line of David. I think we both agree with that. 

GOOD! As was Joseph.  So how then can Jesus also be a priest  when he had no connection to the house/tribe of Levi,  Aaron and "his decedents" .
Let me refer you back to the following:




 “Only the tribe of Levi you shall not number, nor shall you take their census among the sons of Israel. But you shall appoint the Levites over the tabernacle of the testimony, and over all its furnishings and over all that belongs to it. They shall carry the tabernacle and all its furnishings, and they shall take care of it; they shall also camp around the tabernacle.
What do you think that has to with Jesus?

“For they [the Levites] are wholly given over to Me from among the children of Israel; instead of those that open the womb all the firstborn of Israel I have taken them for Myself . . .” The monopoly of the priesthood was given to Aaron
Again, what you think that this verse is saying about Jesus?

 You want it all ways yet  Jesus himself makes it clear that he hasn't come to "change the law". Mattew 5:17
What law do you think  I am suggesting Jesus has changed? 

 The books of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers maintain that Aaron received from God a monopoly over the priesthood for himself and his male descendants (Exodus 28:). The family of Aaron had the exclusive right and responsibility to make offerings on the altar to Yahweh.
Where does it say this?  Don't just assert it.  I will wait patiently for your response. 


Jesus being baptised or ordained as a priest - does not make him a Levite Priest.

Ok then what kind of priest was he?   Keeping in mind the orders of god and also and that it was  his law that Jesus coming to "fulfill".
See above. I have discussed this before.  


And let us not forget that you haven't even proven that Jesus's baptism by John was a ritual anointing Jesus king,  prophet and priest as you have claimed several times now here>>#2
I have shown the link to the priesthood. Jesus was without sin but needed to baptised to fulfil the law.  I pointed us back to the law in the OT which describes age, male, and water ceremony.  Unless you can demonstrate as to why this is not the case - the question and link is established.  

As for the kingship - my reference initially was in relation to king's being anointed by a prophet.  Most of Israel considered John the B a prophet. Jesus did. Jesus was of the line of David.  It was witnessed by the crowd, but more importantly by God the Father, and the Holy Spirit.  Is there more than this necessary to answer the question.  Obviously, the state of Israel did not accept it at the time. Nor did Jesus ever lay any right as the king of Israel.  


#64
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherDThomas
So again I see you have no case at all in the Bible  to prove

  • Mary was a Levite
  • Luke was a Jew

Both your assertions which I denied.


#65
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret

But I eagerly wait you evidence that Luke was a Greek.


Ha Ha. I don't have to prove what is the status quo.


No evidence then. Why doesn't that surprise anyone..at all.


And I am not going to be bothered doing it for you. You know as well as I do that he was a Greek. 

On the contrary. I  believe Luke was  Jew with a capitol J.

I am not going to bother with your games.

 Then don't . I will put that down as another claim that you have failed to prove.



  You looked at the commentaries and you know what they say.

 I do and I have found (1) that you were wrong in your claim concerning "all commentators agreeing that Luke was gentile Greek"  &  (2) many commentators suggest with reasonable evidence that Luke was indeed a Jew. 


 Luke is a Greek name.

Who is arguing different. Many Hellenised Jews took Greek names.  You are conveniently forgetting Palestine was taken by Alexander the Great in  about 332 B.C. 

 
 Luke wrote in a more classical style of Greek than the Jewish writers did.
it matters not . Luke knew far more about the OT and referenced it more often than all the other three authors.


Luke is traditionally a Gentile by all of the early church and the consensus of the church.

 There you go again. Wild and wide assumptions. 


I said all of the commentaries. I have never seen anywhere but you declaring otherwise, sorry and the Brother, otherwise.  There is NO evidence that he was Jew or even a Hellenized Jew.  I cannot prove or disprove a negative.  This means that you must believe in blind faith that Luke was Jew. 


 “Only the tribe of Levi you shall not number, nor shall you take their census among the sons of Israel. But you shall appoint the Levites over the tabernacle of the testimony, and over all its furnishings and over all that belongs to it. They shall carry the tabernacle and all its furnishings, and they shall take care of it; they shall also camp around the tabernacle.
What do you think that has to with Jesus?


Exactly the same as this>>> The books of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers maintain that Aaron received from God a monopoly over the priesthood for himself and his male descendants (Exodus 28:). The family of Aaron had the exclusive right and responsibility to make offerings on the altar to Yahweh.


What law do you think  I am suggesting Jesus has changed? 

 I am not suggesting that Jesus changed anything. I have said he admit to coming  "NOT" to change the law.. I am suggesting that YOU have or are  attempting to deny what is written.  You have claimed Jesus was - among other things, baptised a priest by John.  You have also suggested Mary his mother wasn't a Levite.  I am simply asking you then how could Jesus be a priest if Mary wasn't a Levite and Joseph was  of  Judah.   WHEN WE TAKING INTO ACCOUNT GODS LAWS .  You just want to avoid the fact that god exclusively gave "Aaron and his descendants the monopoly on all thing priestly and religion related. 

 The books of Exodus, Leviticus and Numbers maintain that Aaron received from God a monopoly over the priesthood for himself and his male descendants (Exodus 28:). The family of Aaron had the exclusive right and responsibility to make offerings on the altar to Yahweh.
Where does it say this?  Don't just assert it.  I will wait patiently for your response. 

,See above. Already given you just want to ignore it. And for speed,  you could always look here too>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron#:~:text=High%20Priest,-See%20also%3A%20High&text=The%20books%20of%20Exodus%2C%20Leviticus,on%20the%20altar%20to%20Yahweh.



Jesus being baptised or ordained as a priest - does not make him a Levite Priest.

Ok then what kind of priest was he?   Keeping in mind the orders of god and also and that it was  his law that Jesus coming to "fulfill".
See above. I have discussed this before.

I missed it. I have gone  back and looked. So be kind enough to remind me. What kind of priest was Jesus? 


And let us not forget that you haven't even proven that Jesus's baptism by John was a ritual anointing Jesus king,  prophet and priest as you have claimed several times now here>>#2
I have shown the link to the priesthood.

Nope. Jesus - you say - "was baptised prophet, King and Priest". You have shown no evidence of this and  certainly not shown his link to the true Levitical priesthood through any bloodline.  



Jesus was without sin but needed to baptised to fulfil the law. 

Yes,  well, we tried that one on another thread didn't we. You failed miserably on that one too. Such as > #31 You made all sorts of claims on that thread then disappeared, didn't you?


As for the kingship

Well the bible makes it clear twice that Jesus was of the line of Judah ,  and so a possible heir to the throne, so no one is arguing that. No. It the priestly sticking point we are discussing and  there doesn't appear to be a link to the Levite tribe at all does there, which according to scripture is a requirement to be a priest. The priest that you say Jesus was? 
 
There are a few clues to this dilemma but it would be unfair to state anything as fact not to mention completely wrong to and certainly not something I couldn't prove. And isn't it odd that Jesus can be associated with  all these Levite characters yet the bible stays silent as to if or not Jesus himself was a Levite ?
But I often wonder could  The Magdalene maybe the key to this enigma?

 I said all of the commentaries.


 You started here #47 

And said this >>>>> "  Luke was a Greek Doctor.   Every commentator affirms this.  But since you reject this - please provide even one credible sources who agrees with you? here>>> #55





#66
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret



.
TRADESECRET, A BIBLE 2ND CLASS WOMAN, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO,  Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3, 


REPEAT #2 from not addressing my post #62!

YOUR EMBARRASSING “WOMAN” QUOTE IN POST #55: “Not true.  Luke was a Gentile. There is not a scrap of evidence otherwise.”

Using your words, PROVE YOUR PROPOSITION ABOVE BIBLICALLY BEYOND ANY DOUBT! WE WILL BE WAITING!


You state that you do not RUNAWAY, but as shown in not addressing my post #62, in fact, you do RUNAWAY from proving biblically your point that Luke was a Gentile!  As we are told, Jesus’ direct words in the Bible are disparaging toward your weaker gender as a woman, is this why you have to RUN AWAY from a man's post?

You continue to slap Jesus in the face just by your ungodly presence as a 2nd class woman within this Religion forum that was structured for MEN ONLY as Jesus implies within the Bible, because you are the weaker vessel in His creation, praise Jesus’ true words!   “Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered.” (1 Peter 3:7)

Always remember dear, this is what Jesus thinks of you being a woman because your gender is the cause of the original sin that has made Jesus’ existence miserable in having to create Hell to place the sinners within!   “I find more bitter than death the woman who is a snare, whose heart is a trap and whose hands are chains. The man who pleases God will escape her, but the sinner she will ensnare.” (Ecclesiastes 7:26)


**********  P.S., Tradesecret, don't think the membership is not seeing you RUN AWAY by not mentioning what Jesus' inspired words state in disparaging the female gender! Priceless silence on your part!  Shhhh, mums the word uh?  LOL ***********



.
#67
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret






.
TRADESECRET, A BIBLE 2ND CLASS WOMAN, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO,  Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3, 

YOUR FEEBLE QUOTE OF BIBLE IGNORANCE ONCE AGAIN:

"So again I see you have no case at all in the Bible  to prove

  • Mary was a Levite
  • Luke was a Jew
Both your assertions which I denied."


Addressing your post #64 as you being a disparaged Bible 2nd class woman, tell me if you've heard this adage before? " You don't get something for nothing, yes?"  Therefore I will easily Bible Slap you Silly®️ and show you that Mary was in fact a Levite, and that Luke was a Jew, SUBSEQUENT to you addressing EVERY RUNAWAY POST of yours listed below that have been directed by me to you!   Understood biblically disparaged woman and Bible fool?


YOU MAY BEGIN: 

1.  You still need to address the other half of this runaway post:

2.  You haven’t addressed why you continue to slap Jesus in the face by not defending the faith to particular posts of mine that show that you should:

3.  You are still running away from this post showing that Jesus did sin, where your Bible ignorance says he didn’t:

4.  Because of this post saving your sorry biblical ignorant ass, you have yet to thank me:

5.  We could make millions off of your complete Bible ignorance and the subsequent comedy of same, no response from you:


6.  You have cowardly run away from this post to you FOUR TIMES, I REPEAT, FOUR TIMES IN YOUR THREAD, where you were wrong once again in your perceived knowledge of Jesus not interfering with the suffering of His creation, where in biblical FACT, Jesus did interfere:  






7. It was blatantly shown in how utterly Bible and Zoology ignorant you truly are relative to the Noah’s Ark narrative, of which you have run away from this post:

8.  YOU have sheepishly run away from this revealing post in showing exactly who you embarrassingly are in this forum, bar none, WHY?:  

9. You have yet to tell us why Jesus is not flooding the world again because the sin is thousands of times greater per capita in the world now: 

10. Since you remain in my thread regarding everyone is saved, even non-believers, you have run away from said topic post directed to you below:

11.  Still no response from you in this running away from Jesus inspired post:

12. You never answered a simple request in how Jesus allegedly showed mercy upon innocent zygotes, fetus’ and babies by Him killing them: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4726-evidence-in-a-religious-forum?page=9&post_number=213

13. This runaway post of yours relates to you being a POE/Parody, because no true Christian would make fun of the faith like you do:

14. Here you erroneously state that Jesus is not superhuman as God, where He only created a billions of light years large universe which is in fact superhuman, LIAR:

15.  You ran away from me addressing the FACT that you stated the Bible contains FICTION!

16. You have yet to address you wanting me to quit showing you to be the Bible fool upon this forum, and by telling the moderators as well, but in not addressing your runaway posts in the meantime

17. You ran away from me correcting you upon the fact that “anyone” is used by Jesus that curses their parents, and not ADULTS like you stated!

18. You RAN AWAY from me correcting you once again in relation to Jesus being the #1 Abortionist of all time! https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4827-what-should-we-make-of-the-passover-and-god-killing-his-peoples-first-born-kids?page=2&post_number=30

19. Here you ran away from me correcting you AGAIN in that you say when unlawful acts were present, it was through judges that gave the punishment, whereas you were WRONG once again as I showed you!https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4827-what-should-we-make-of-the-passover-and-god-killing-his-peoples-first-born-kids?page=2&post_number=31

20.  I gave you a deal NOT to make you the complete Bible fool, but you threw it away and will not discuss why you did this! 

21.  You RAN AWAY from the biblical axiom that for Jesus to be the Messiah, he had to be through the fruit of the loins of King David!

22.  You RAN AWAY from me “schooling” you again, this time on the topic of Jesus’ genealogies

23.  You have yet to address your complete RUN AWAY status on DEBATEART religion forum!


AT THIS TIME, THE DEFEATIST TRADESECRET AS A COWARDLY WOMAN THROWS IN THE TOWEL IN DEFEAT AGAINST THE SUPERIOR BIBLE KNOWLEDGE OF  BROTHER D. THOMAS, PRAISE JESUS!   IT IS NO WONDER THAT JESUS SAID THE WOMAN IS A WEAKER VESSEL THAN THE MAN (1 PETER 3:7), PRAISE!



.

#68
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherDThomas
 Therefore I will easily show you that Mary was in fact a Levite, and that Luke was a Jew, SUBSEQUENT to you addressing EVERY POST of yours listed below that have been directed by me to you!   
SO, this is your way of saying you can't prove it?  

Ok. 

This of course demonstrates yet another post you won't answer or can't answer. Unlike you, though I don't keep a score.  I always thought the person who kept score reveals much about themselves.   Intriguing really. 
#69
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherDThomas
YOU STATE JESUS WAS ADOPTED BY JOSEPH, THEREFORE HIS KING DAVID LINAGE,

: “Joseph was not Jesus' biological parent. Joseph was Jesus' adopted parent. Joseph adopted Jesus into his family. This gave Jesus all of the rights and inheritances and titles that belonged to Joseph. This is the teaching of the Bible and the teaching of Christianity. The greater point is that Jesus by being adopted into the family of David is entitled and welcome to the title Son of David.”

First thing, Joseph is Jesus’ “Step-Father” where he was not His “Paternal Father” and in no way could he adopt Jesus and fulfill the requirements for being the Messiah, understood, Bible fool?  Leaving Joseph's bloodline to King David aside, which was a direct precursor for Jesus being the Messiah, Joseph could never pass to Jesus his paternal blood line in any way whatsoever because Joseph descended from Jeconiah (Matthew 1:11) and fell under the curse of that king that none of his descendants could ever sit as king upon the throne of David. (Jeremiah 22:30; 36:30). 
You do realize don't you, that paternal parents do not need to adopt their children? Step parents very often adopt children.   Of course Joseph could adopt Jesus.  He married Mary - and knew that Jesus was not his biological child. He also heard the news of the angel and understood what needed to be done. Adopting Jesus is not passing his blood line - it is passing all of his rights and entitlements.  Jeconiah was a son of David - do you deny this? Joseph was in the blood line of David. Do you deny this? It is not as though Joseph was acting on any inheritance he received from David except he was the Son of David.  Yes, he went back to Bethlehem. And so Jesus was born in Bethlehem.  But Jesus as an adopted son of Joseph could rightly call himself a son of David.  This is the point.  So your reference to Jeconiah is a red herring.  


Barring the biblical axiom above, in addition let me continue, tell the membership what don’t you understand regarding that biblically Jesus’ linage had to be DIRECTLY from the “fruit of the loins according to the flesh” of King David to become the Messiah! Since Joseph did not pass Davids’ bloodline onto Jesus because of the Celestial Impregnation, he is discarded and out of the picture, period, understood Biblical fool? 

What you fail to recognize is that both Matthew and Luke provide genealogies.  Both go back to David.  But both are different. Jesus is a child of Mary.  She was not born into a vacuum.  Did Luke or Matthew get the lines mixed up? I suppose that is one possibility and obviously because of your bias the way you would naturally see things.  Yet, others see things differently. And this includes experts of biblical material - one of which you are not.  There is sense that Jesus has two parents - and one of those at least was human.  I say Mary's bloodline is reflected in Luke.  Many agree - many don't. For me however, I am prepared to accept the bloodline goes back to David - although not in the kingly line. Hence your argument is refuted. 


"Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;" (Romans 1:3). 

“Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;” (Acts 2:30)



Confirmed.





#70
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherDThomas

POST #32, YOUR COMPLETE BIBLE IGNORANCE IS SHOWING ONCE AGAIN IN STATING MARY IS FROM THE LINE OF DAVID: “Was Mary a Levite? I have not heard this thought before. Mary however did come from the fruit of David, just from a different line than Solomon.”

You have never heard the biblical FACT that Mary was a Levite, and why am I not surprised because you have shown such biblical ignorance many times before!   When you insidiously "try" and use Mary as a genealogy of Jesus, you forget that BOTH genealogies of Jesus in Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke 3:23-38 are through Joseph as biblically shown, period!  Mary in being a Levite takes her out of the consideration of Jesus’ genealogy altogether,
I don't believe Mary was a Levite.  If she was Jesus and his disciples would have made that claim. They did not.  Hence, your last comment makes no sense. 


Nowhere in the third Gospel, or in the entire New Testament for that matter, is there a claim that Mary was a descendant of the House of David. On the contrary, Luke plainly asserts that it is Joseph who was from the House of David, not Mary. “To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin’s name was Mary.” (Luke 1:27)
I would refute that. I think Luke makes the claim. 


In fact, Luke claims that Mary was the cousin of Elizabeth, who he says was a descendant of Aaron the high priest, (Luke 1:5)  placing her in the tribe of Levi, not David’s tribe of Judah. Moreover, in Luke 2:4, the author writes that the reason it was necessary for Joseph and Mary to return to Bethlehem was because it was Joseph, not Mary, who was from the House of David. "And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; because he was of the house and lineage of David." (Luke 2:4)
Yes, Mary is the cousin of Elizabeth. This means that either Mary's mother or father was a sister or brother of Elizabeth's mother or father. And this is only if cousin here means first cousin and not second or third or fourth.  It is plausible given the age of Elizabeth as being older that she was actually a second cousin and not a first cousin. This would mean that Mary's parents might have been the nephew or niece of Elizabeth's parents.  Zechariah clearly a Levite - Elizabeth is descended from Aaron. Thanks for pointing that out. I learned something today.  But it is a pretty big stretch to say Mary was also a descendant of Aaron.  There just is not enough evidence to rest that on.  Elizabeth had two parents - one was from Aaron - the other one we don't know.  We don't know the exact relationship of cousin between Mary and Elizabeth.  If they were first cousins - it still is only a small chance of Aaronic connection.  If second cousins which seems quite plausible given their age difference - then even more remote.  The fact that neither Jesus nor his disciples nor anyone else attempts to claim Jesus as a Levite - and actually suggest very strongly that he is not - would seem to throw that connection out the window. 



 



#71
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@BrotherDThomas


2.  You haven’t addressed why you continue to slap Jesus in the face by not defending the faith to particular posts of mine that show that you should:



3.  You are still running away from this post showing that Jesus did sin, where your Bible ignorance says he didn’t:
Responded:


4.  Because of this post saving your sorry biblical ignorant ass, you have yet to thank me:

Response of no need to respond to patheticness: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4754/post-links/207052


5.  We could make millions off of your complete Bible ignorance and the subsequent comedy of same, no response from you:
No need to comment or respond to: 


6.  You have cowardly run away from this post to you FOUR TIMES, I REPEAT, FOUR TIMES IN YOUR THREAD, where you were wrong once again in your perceived knowledge of Jesus not interfering with the suffering of His creation, where in biblical FACT, Jesus did interfere:  




I did not run away. I was not responding to you - because you were trolling me. Responded: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4726/post-links/207094

7. It was blatantly shown in how utterly Bible and Zoology ignorant you truly are relative to the Noah’s Ark narrative, of which you have run away from this post:

responded:

8.  YOU have sheepishly run away from this revealing post in showing exactly who you embarrassingly are in this forum, bar none, WHY?:  
Responded: 


9. You have yet to tell us why Jesus is not flooding the world again because the sin is thousands of times greater per capita in the world now: 
10. Since you remain in my thread regarding everyone is saved, even non-believers, you have run away from said topic post directed to you below:
12. You never answered a simple request in how Jesus allegedly showed mercy upon innocent zygotes, fetus’ and babies by Him killing them: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4726-evidence-in-a-religious-forum?page=9&post_number=213
responded even though it was not necessary https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4726/post-links/207122

13. This runaway post of yours relates to you being a POE/Parody, because no true Christian would make fun of the faith like you do:
This is simply repeating no. 8. I have already responded - refers to number 8.

14. Here you erroneously state that Jesus is not superhuman as God, where He only created a billions of light years large universe which is in fact superhuman, LIAR:

15.  You ran away from me addressing the FACT that you stated the Bible contains FICTION!
responded:


16. You have yet to address you wanting me to quit showing you to be the Bible fool upon this forum, and by telling the moderators as well, but in not addressing your runaway posts in the meantime
17. You ran away from me correcting you upon the fact that “anyone” is used by Jesus that curses their parents, and not ADULTS like you stated!
18. You RAN AWAY from me correcting you once again in relation to Jesus being the #1 Abortionist of all time! https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4827-what-should-we-make-of-the-passover-and-god-killing-his-peoples-first-born-kids?page=2&post_number=30

19. Here you ran away from me correcting you AGAIN in that you say when unlawful acts were present, it was through judges that gave the punishment, whereas you were WRONG once again as I showed you!https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/4827-what-should-we-make-of-the-passover-and-god-killing-his-peoples-first-born-kids?page=2&post_number=31

Responded : 

20.  I gave you a deal NOT to make you the complete Bible fool, but you threw it away and will not discuss why you did this! 
21.  You RAN AWAY from the biblical axiom that for Jesus to be the Messiah, he had to be through the fruit of the loins of King David!
Responded:


22.  You RAN AWAY from me “schooling” you again, this time on the topic of Jesus’ genealogies





23.  You have yet to address your complete RUN AWAY status on DEBATEART religion forum!


I have addressed it now. Why don't we just keep it simple now. 



#72
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret



.
TRADESECRET, A BIBLE 2ND CLASS WOMAN, the Debate Runaway on Jesus' true MO,  Bible denier of Jesus being the Trinity God in the OT, the runaway to what division of Christianity he follows, the pseudo-christian that has committed the Unpardonable Sin, the number 1 Bible ignorant fool regarding Noah's ark, the pseudo-christian that says kids that curse their parents should be killed, states there is FICTION within the scriptures, and is guilty of Revelation 22:18-19 and 2 Timothy 4:3, 


ADDRESSING YOUR WANTING POST #69 IN YOUR WISHFUL THINKING WHERE YOU CALL JESUS A LIAR: “But Jesus as an adopted son of Joseph could rightly call himself a son of David.  This is the point.  So your reference to Jeconiah is a red herring.  

JESUS’ DIRECT WORDS STATING YOU ARE WRONG AGAIN AS YOU CALL HIM A LIAR! BLASPHEME!

"Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;" (Romans 1:3). 

“Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;” (Acts 2:30)

I suggest that you take a remedial Sex Education Class to understand what “made of the seed of David” and “that of the fruit of his loins” actually means, to understand that Jesus's words state explicitly what they say to become the Messiah, you bible ignorant woman fool!  What did we expect from a lesser vessel woman other than more Bible ignorance? LOL



ADDRESSING YOUR IGNORANT POST #70 QUOTE: “I don't believe Mary was a Levite.  If she was Jesus and his disciples would have made that claim. They did not.  Hence, your last comment makes no sense.”

Your circular reasoning is duly noted as a notable fallacy, where you assume as a wishful thinking premise, the conclusion in which you wish to reach without any biblical vouchsafing! NOT! Besides; Luke 3 is Joseph’s geneolegy: “He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli ……”  GET IT BIBLE FOOL?  Nowhere does Luke 3:23 make any claim that this was Mary’s bloodline! To help you with your reading understanding, I suggest you take this K-12 "Reading Comprehension Class" post haste in the following link, you can thank me later:


Your existence within this forum is LAUGHABLE, but at the same time, it is needed for me to show others in what a true pseudo-christian looks and acts like! LOL


What Jesus' inspired words within the Bible thinks of the 2nd class woman: "so that they may encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, so that the word of God will not be dishonored." (Titus 2:4-5)
.
#73
BrotherDThomas
BrotherDThomas's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,140
3
3
7
BrotherDThomas's avatar
BrotherDThomas
3
3
7
-->
@Tradesecret



ADDRESSING YOUR EVER SO EMBARRASSING POST # 71, and I am sorry that it probably took you 2-3 weeks in "trying" to refute the 23 posts! 

Listen dear despised woman, in all of your “assumed refutations” in numbers 1 through 18, they were as weak as you are in being a woman (1 Peter 3:7), whereas I was looking for substantial refuations and NOT MORE RUNAWAY RESPONSES, CLICHES, RAMBLING ATTORNEY MUMBO-JUMBO, AND BIBLE IGNORANCE, that you embarrassingly gave as assumed refutations, therefore your comical and severely wanting response did not count! UNDERSTOOD?

Now, I will be off line again because I will be visting an Indian Reservation, even though I do not have a reservation per se,  that does not have cell nor internet connections. Consider yourself lucky in this time period in the fact that you can take a break from me making you the continued bible fool that I have shown to the membership. When I return, and along with others, you will once again be made the most ignorant Bible fool this forum has ever seen, and why you continue to show yourself herein is irrational and not logical whatsoever, but again, you are a woman that does not think properly as per the Bible and Jesus’ true words state, praise!

IMPORTANT, PAY CLOSE ATTENTION: To “try” and save yourself further embarrassment, I want you to come up with a lot of child like excuses relating to me in allegedly being away from the internet again, therefore this forum as well, okay?  Being a Bible 2nd class woman as a weaker vessel (1 Peter 3:7), have a MAN help you with said excuses, okay?  Now, make the excuses memorable this time, use a lot of adjectives and bold type, understood? Good!

When you perform this insidious act of yours once again, it truly shows the membership in how desparate you are that the ONLY way you can engage me, is when I am gone for awhile from this forum! LOL. You are as predictable as your blatant Bible ignorance!  READY? BEGIN!


YOUR LAST WHIMPERING WOMANLY QUOTE: "I have addressed it now. Why don't we just keep it simple now." 

NOT!  As is shown ad infinitum, you as a woman cannot keep up with me as your superior man counterpart, therefore, I am not to be held responsible for your lack thereof, understood?  How embarrassing as a mere woman would it be to come up with yet another lame excuse on your part to RUN AWAY AGAIN from me! LOL


What Jesus' inspired words within the Bible thinks of the 2nd class woman: "And when the king's decree which he shall make shall be published throughout all his empire, (for it is great,) all the wives shall give to their husbands honour, both to great and small." (Esther 1:20)


**********  P.S., Tradesecret, don't think the membership is not seeing you RUN AWAY by not mentioning what Jesus' inspired words state in disparaging the female gender! Priceless silence on your part!  Shhhh, mums the word uh?  LOL ***********


.

#74
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
I am still curious as to how you miss my point about Jesus being a priest in the order of Melchizadek.  I have referred to it many times.  I even linked it for you. 

Jesus was not a Levite Priest.  No one in the NT suggests he was. I do not think he was.  The book of Hebrews denies that he was.  

I have accepted in principle that Aaron's priesthood had a monopoly in Israel for Israel, at least until the temple was destroyed.  Jesus was baptized by John who was of the Levite line.  And I am of the view that John baptized him to fulfill the law of the OT so as to do all righteousness.  

Yet as I have pointed out - Jesus was from the tribe of Judah. Hebrews 7:14 "For it clear that our Lord descended from Judah and in regard to that tribe Moses said nothing about priests". 

I pointed you back to Melchizadek who also was a priest of GOD as indeed was Moses' Father.  This priesthood was not a Jewish priesthood. It did not pretend to be one - and yet was honored by God in the OT and also by the writer of the book of Hebrews.  Nowhere in the OT or the NT is this particular priesthood condemned by God nor is it said to have no authority.  

Jesus needed to be baptized by a priest - but this does not necessarily make him an Aaronic Priest or a Levite - especially given he was not Levite. Yet, John's baptism did infer Jesus' priesthood - the question is if not Levi, then what? And the answer is provided in Hebrews. 

This priesthood is far older than the Levites and has standing before the king of kings.  By becoming part of this priesthood rather than the Levitical one it placed Jesus into an order that does not rely upon bulls and goats. But one who serves in the throne room of heaven. 
#75
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,081
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Tradesecret
So let's get back to basics.

Considering for a moment that a bible at some point is a fairly accurate record of events and people.

Who  was Jesus?

Son of man or son of a god.

Above, you clearly suggest that Jesus was descended from,  mankind.
#76
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
Jesus was not a Levite Priest.


This is where your bible ignorance stands out stark.

 Yes so you keep saying he was not a levite but no one knows for sure because like many many other things, the bible is silent on the matter. . BUT, you keep ignoring gods own fkn laws don't you?  although you have recognised gods ordination of  Aaron and HIS descendants/Levites. concentrate on the word - DECENDANTS - at least for 30 seconds.

I have asked you then what kind of priest was if not a levite?  You haven't replied. 



I pointed you back to Melchizadek who also was a priest of GOD as indeed was Moses' Father.

 It doesn't matter  one iota what "Moses father was".  What matters is the FACT that god had handed down - during the Exodus - to Arron and his descendants,  the sole control of the of religion practices and the priesthood.

You even tell us this: 

Jesus was baptized by John who was of the Levite line.  And I am of the view that John baptized him to fulfill the law of the OT so as to do all righteousness.  


 Did John - a Levite -  break any of those religious laws of GOD  when he baptised Jesus? YES OR NO?
#77
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Who  was Jesus?

Son of man or son of a god.

Above, you clearly suggest that Jesus was descended from,  mankind.
My view is that the bible teaches that Jesus was Son of Man and equally Son of God.  

His Mother is Mary. From Mary he is able to claim he a Son of Man all the way back to Adam. 

His Father is God, the Holy Spirit. From God he is able to claim divinity.

His step - father and adopted father is Joseph. From Joseph through adoption, he is able to claim to be the Son of David. 

- The Christian tradition teaches Jesus is Fully God and Fully Man.  Not half each - but fully each.  Jesus is of course also the second person of the Trinity.  Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. 

Interestingly the term Son of Man - seems to be a reference to Daniel 7. I prefer understanding who the Son of Man is from Ezekiel.  There Ezekiel referred to himself - on many occasions as the Son of Man. Typically it was referring to himself as man - but also in relation to his role as a priest.  It is therefore a possibility that Jesus often referred to himself by this title since he understood his role as a priest. 

Others start with the picture in Daniel 7 and suggest that the Son of Man was almost a super - hero. I am not persuaded that is its meaning. Nevertheless, it is an interesting picture. 
#78
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
Jesus was not a Levite Priest.


This is where your bible ignorance stands out stark.

 Yes so you keep saying he was not a levite but no one knows for sure because like many many other things, the bible is silent on the matter. . BUT, you keep ignoring gods own fkn laws don't you?  although you have recognised gods ordination of  Aaron and HIS descendants/Levites. concentrate on the word - DECENDANTS - at least for 30 seconds.

I have asked you then what kind of priest was if not a levite?  You haven't replied. 
And I have answered and answered and answered - MELCHIZADEK, MELCHIZADEK, MELCHICZADEK. Can you not read? Jesus is of the order of Melchizadek. The Book of Hebrews knows for sure. I already quoted the text. You just ignore it. You choose not to know. This choice of your is clearly a lie. 


I pointed you back to Melchizadek who also was a priest of GOD as indeed was Moses' Father.

 It doesn't matter  one iota what "Moses father was".  What matters is the FACT that god had handed down - during the Exodus - to Arron and his descendants,  the sole control of the of religion practices and the priesthood.

Perhaps for you it does not matter. For me it does. You are the one who claims that the Exodus priesthood is the all and powerful.  Not me. So You prove it.  I said in principle I agree- but in principle is obviously a qualification.  The book  of Hebrews clearly has a problem with your position. You just ignore this. It tells us that Jesus is not a Levite. Moses Father is relevant.  He was a priest of God. What Order was he in? I suggest it is also Melchizadek. Can I prove this? No. But if there were several priests at around the same time - who were priests of GOD, then it is reasonable to assume that it was part of an Order.  


You even tell us this: 

Jesus was baptized by John who was of the Levite line.  And I am of the view that John baptized him to fulfill the law of the OT so as to do all righteousness.  


 Did John - a Levite -  break any of those religious laws of GOD  when he baptised Jesus? YES OR NO?
John never broke the law. Not in relation to baptizing Jesus anyway.  But where in the OT does it tell us that a Levite Priest is not allowed to ordain or baptize a non-levite to a priesthood? John the Baptist was an unusual priest.  He was known as a prophet not as a priest. HE did not hang around with the priests and pretty much considered the hierarchy of the Israel Church heretics. We only know he is a Levite because his father and mother were from Aaron's line. His father being the high priest.  John pretty much did his own thing.  Did he ever break any of the laws? Probably - but in relation to the baptism? I think not. But that begs the bigger question - why not? I just don't see where the Levites are forbidden from baptizing people - and John clearly did - for many more people than Jesus - many who were neither Levites nor from the tribe of Judah. But none of the other baptisms - were ordaining the priest. 

You are the one getting your knickers into a knot. You want to focus on Exodus and the Levites. I want to focus on Hebrews and on Jesus.  You are the one who has no knowledge and continually demonstrates it. 



#79
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
His Mother is Mary. From Mary he is able to claim he a Son of Man all the way back to Adam. 

Indeed son of a man born of a woman. 

John never broke the law. Not in relation to baptizing Jesus anyway. 

You just make shite up on the hoof. You simply have no evidence for your claim at all. 

But where in the OT does it tell us that a Levite Priest is not allowed to ordain or baptize a non-levite to a priesthood?

If it is a biblical fact that if the laws of god were adhered to by John the  baptist, then Jesus would have had to have been a Levite LIKE JOHN HIMSELF!. The role of the  priesthood was handed down by god himself to Levites-  Arron and his descendants.<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< I find it amazing that you accept this as the bible dictates yet won't even entertain the idea that Jesus ( maybe via Mary?) was a Levite.  So either John broke these godly laws or he didn't.

 Stop inventing things. The true answer is that - like me , you don't know. So stop pretending that you do.  I find it odd though that Jesus would surround himself and  abide among these Levites at his center of operations (Bethany) and not be a fkn Levite himself.









#80
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
Just because you want it to be the case so badly, does not make it so. 

Address the writer to the Hebrews.  You keep having a go at me - but you won't touch that one at all. Everytime you just skip right on past.  

It is not me with the blinkers on - it is you. 

Hebrews clearly states Jesus is not a Levite - If he was then there would be no need to talk about the order of Melchizadek. The fact is the Levitical Order is but a shadow of the true order. And the true Order supercedes the Levitical one.  

In other words - it is greater and better than the Levitical one.  It is an Order that has authority not just over Jews, but over the Gentiles, and even to Heaven itself. 

That is the message you want to reject.  

So Jesus hang around his mother's family? No big deal. I have lots of family as well - some who are Christians and some who are not.  I hang around all of them - it does not mean that I am either a Christian or a non-Christian because I hang around with them - and even like them.  Surely it is a long stretch to suggest that because Jesus hung around with his levite family that this makes him a levite. Is that what you are putting? That hanging around someone makes you one. Duh. 

John did not break a law in baptizing Jesus - but does not it mean that Jesus was ordained a Levite Priest. This is nonsense - and if it was the case - why is that the Pharisees or the other religious leaders in the community never picked up on it? Are you suggesting that rulers and the leaders of the religious church of the time just ignored such an important fact? If you are correct then the Jewish leaders are even dumber than we are led to believe - why would they ask him for his authority if they knew? Why would they accuse him of having no teaching or just being a carpetner from Nazareth? Yes these are questions - you not only cannot answer - but will refuse to answer - I call that running away - just like you did in your own topic when you refused to tell us where the bible says you have to be baptized to baptise someone else. Run away. 

For the record - who ordained Aaron? 
#81
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
Just because you want it to be the case so badly, does not make it so. 

 I know. And I can also admit that  I don't know. What I don't do is pretend to know something by making shite up that cannot be supported by any evidence.


Address the writer to the Hebrews.  You keep having a go at me - but you won't touch that one at all. Everytime you just skip right on past.  

 I am,  as you put it  "having a go at you" because you keep ignoring  your own gods laws and dictates.  Your god handed down the priesthood to Aaron and his descendants exclusively. 


It is not me with the blinkers on - it is you.

 I have read what god in the bible has said on the matter of the priesthood and its heirs. I haven't invented anything. 


Hebrews clearly states Jesus is not a Levite -

 Well you say many things are "clearly stated in the scriptures" when they are anything but clearly stated.

 For instance you  tell us that the evidence that John baptised Jesus "a king, prophet  and priest"  " is there and it is clear".  But this is an outright lie, because isn't it? #18 IN FACT, nothing is mentioned at all about priests, kings or prophets, is there. But what is mentioned  and in the very same chapter are "sins" and "repentance".


Another example is your out right bullshite lies is  that  "  In the NT we know that John and his disciples baptized" . #13 No evidence again.

But it is very clearly stated in the scriptures that all matters religious and priestly were god given to Aaron and his descendant only, wasn't it?


This was interesting. 

"According to Matthew's genealogy there were three Davidic Kings who had Levite mothers. They are as follows: (1) Abijah whose mother was Michaiah the daughter of the Levite Uriel - 2 Chronicles 13:1-2, (2) Jatham whose mother was Jerushah the daughter of the Levite Zadok - 2 Chronicles 27:1, and (3) Hezekiah whose mother was Abijah the daughter of the Levite Zechariah - 2 Chronicles 29:1. It was as a Levitical priest that Jesus performed 2,000 years ago, and that was why He went to Jerusalem in the Kingdom of Judah to make the priestly sacrifice". 


 




#82
Tradesecret
Tradesecret's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 3,437
3
2
6
Tradesecret's avatar
Tradesecret
3
2
6
-->
@Stephen
Thanks for the quote. But you still need to address the letter to the Hebrews.  

I will take the words of that letter over and above your inference that the OT Law gives exclusive rights to the Levites.  

Yet, as I said I agreed in principle - but another interesting thing you seem to forget is that Jesus is the great high priest - to the world not just the Jews.  Perhaps this is one of the reasons that the Levitical order was not sufficient and required the older and more ancient order of Melchizadek. 

I know you like to focus on Jesus being to the Jews only - yet his mission clearly engaged with more than the Jews. 

You don't know what my God teaches - you throw things out - and think you know - but ignore what I tell you. It is like you want my God to believe certain things and conveniently forget the thing I raise about my own belief.  


#83
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,617
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Tradesecret
Thanks for the quote. But you still need to address the letter to the Hebrews.  


Why? 

It makes no difference. It is your baby sunshine , you have made all the claims , not me. You keep forgetting that. I have simply repeated what YOUR god has dictated on the matter..  You just want to ignore it. But looking at what you have produced it look like someone has disobeyed THE LAW OF GOD or was about to.