Do you agree or not on that
jesus true father would have been known if they had DNA tests back then ?
instead of this garbage about god's son .
who was jesus father ?
Posts
Total:
59
-->
@Lunar108
Yes, if the Maury tv show was on then, he would have looked at the dna test results and said, " God, you are not the Father!"
-->
@Lunar108
"Garbage" eh?
Oh I'm sure you'll attract constructive conversation with that tact.
(Sarcasm)
-->
@Lunar108
This is actually a surprisingly good point.
Maybe we can still get the DNA. A section of the Holy Umbilical Cord believed to remain from the birth of Christ is currently in the Archbasilica of St. John Lateran.
That would be a Maury show that everyone would watch.
-->
@Bones
This is actually a surprisingly good point.
So are many things that you never point out are good points. I make good points more than you can count. When you point out a good point that doesn't align with your own bias, then we will know to be impressed.
-->
@EtrnlVw
So are many things that you never point out are good points.
I'm not a computer. I do not have the capacity to sift though every claim that has ever been made.
When you point out a good point that doesn't align with your own bias, then we will know to be impressed.
Well it's not up to me to impress me, that's the person I'm debating's job. I will admit, I have been impressed with points made from my oppositions - a notable case was Benjamin's rebuttal to my personhood argument.
-->
@Bones
I'm not a computer. I do not have the capacity to sift though every claim that has ever been made
You do have the capacity to sift through posts you've read. You're telling me that this was one of the only points that left you impressed? you're easily amused.
Well it's not up to me to impress me, that's the person I'm debating's job. I will admit, I have been impressed with points made from my oppositions - a notable case was Benjamin's rebuttal to my personhood argument.
I will note the caliber of responses you're impressed by. Maybe there's not much point in discussing anything with you in the future, seems like you're more interested in thinking you're right rather than finding truth. If I make a good point you ignore it, if I make a point you feel like you can offer a rebuttal to you reply. That seems to be the nature of our exchanges. I waste my time while you narrow down my arguments to fulfill your agenda.
-->
@EtrnlVw
I see that you're into targeting people for what they agree/disagree with instead of targeting their arguments
IF you are going to target them for agreeing with me why not discuss this with me :
===============================================================
and unless marry -the holy mother- was a shemale where did the y chromosome came from? I highly doubt that number of chromosomes of god would be the same
as that of humans for it to be able to cause a human woman pregnant .
let me give you an example , can you make a female ape bear your offspring ?
it should be the same unless god is but a mere human the same as us
-->
@Lunar108
Well stated.
-->
@EtrnlVw
I'm not a computer. I do not have the capacity to sift though every claim that has ever been madeYou do have the capacity to sift through posts you've read. You're telling me that this was one of the only points that left you impressed? you're easily amused.
I did not say that this was the only post which I was impressed by. It’s not my fault that theist don’t impress me.
I will note the caliber of responses you're impressed by.
K
Maybe there's not much point in discussing anything with you in the future, seems like you're more interested in thinking you're right rather than finding truth.
K if that’s how you feel.
If I make a good point you ignore it, if I make a point you feel like you can offer a rebuttal to you reply.
I only reply when I feel like it is worth my time. If you really believe that your points are so good that they push me into a position where I am stumped, then let’s debate. I see that you frequently type long responses, so time is obviously not an issue.
-->
@Lunar108
who was jesus father ?
"the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit" said Rabbi David Kimhi - " therefore, with reference to this god whom you call Father, Son and Holy Spirit, - that part which you call the Father must be prior to that which you call Son, for if they were always coexistent would have to be called twin brothers.
More over, if the Son is the Father what of Mary getting pregnant? Is this not an incestuous congregation? The Father has sex with the mother to conceive the Son who is also the Father.....so technically the Son, who is also the father, had sex with his mother"...
-->
@Lunar108
I'm guessing that it was one of daft Joe's Brothers.
The charismatic one with the big whotsit.
I'm thinking that Mary riding a Donkey was intended as a metaphor.
-->
@Bones
I only reply when I feel like it is worth my time. If you really believe that your points are so good that they push me into a position where I am stumped, then let’s debate. I see that you frequently type long responses, so time is obviously not an issue.
Look, I don't want to hurt your feelings I think you're a cool dude. Your debates are garbage, have you even read over them? you could learn more here in the forums if you stop trying to prove yourself right. You keep threatening people with debates but it's silly, I'm right here, if you want to show me something all you have to do is reply to me. Pull your head out of your azz and analyze what I'm writing to you.
I rarely post anything without there being significance, but you have to drop the "I don't want to believe in God" act and get real about wanting to know what is true and what is not. I'm not here to feed you dogma, man I just want you to consider the truth about reality. I'll give you everything you need to fulfill your intellectual curiosities.... I'll show you there is an answer to all your dilemmas but if you resist by assuming you can debate everything you will remain in the dark because of your own ignorance and stubbornness. You can't beat me, and I'm not looking to beat you. I'll show you that in every challenge you present....the question is...is what do you really want?
-->
@Lunar108
IF you are going to target them for agreeing with me why not discuss this with me
I've given you the opportunity to discuss anything you want, anytime you want. My beliefs are not hinged upon any virgin birth, so it has no relevance to me.
-->
@EtrnlVw
I only reply when I feel like it is worth my time. If you really believe that your points are so good that they push me into a position where I am stumped, then let’s debate. I see that you frequently type long responses, so time is obviously not an issue.Look, I don't want to hurt your feelings I think you're a cool dude. Your debates are garbage, have you even read over them?
Challenge sent. Don't be a pussy.
God got Mary pregnant = jesus.
I feel i should also use the word ( begotten ) somewhere, but god got mary pregnant,. Thus the bay bay jesus.
Unlessssssssssss
Jesus is god and or god is jesus.
-->
@Lunar108
who was jesus father ?
And to add to my post above at #12
Some sources describes
Jesus as “a bastard son of an adulteress” describing Jesus as
“ben Pantera” (son of-Pantera) a corruption of the
Greek word/name parthenos. Pantera was said to
be a Roman archer from Sidon in Phoenicia but had served in Syria.
One has to wonder and ask why the silence from Mark and John concerning the "virgin
birth"?
-->
@Stephen
who was jesus father ?"the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit" said Rabbi David Kimhi - " therefore, with reference to this god whom you call Father, Son and Holy Spirit, - that part which you call the Father must be prior to that which you call Son, for if they were always coexistent would have to be called twin brothers.More over, if the Son is the Father what of Mary getting pregnant? Is this not an incestuous congregation? The Father has sex with the mother to conceive the Son who is also the Father.....so technically the Son, who is also the father, had sex with his mother"...
Typical strawman statements. Should we be surprised?
The names of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are not given as a sense of biology. Or because one fathered the other. Or one was a biological child of another. Their titles reflect who they are - not in the typical human sense of father, and son.
This is one of the reasons why the Holy Spirit is the one who breathed on Mary. So that there would not be a conflation between the title and the biology.
God did not have sex with Mary. God breathed on her in a similar fashion as God breathed into Adam and he became a living soul. There was nothing sexual about it. The bible never in any place suggests God had sex with Mary. Nowhere.
It is the pagan gods who have sex with humans. The God of the Bible is completely other. There is no comparison.
The Father is eternal. The Son is eternally begotten. The Spirit is eternally proceeding. Each are eternal. No part of God was before another part of God.
-->
@Stephen
And to add to my post above at #12Some sources describes Jesus as “a bastard son of an adulteress” describing Jesus as “ben Pantera” (son of-Pantera) a corruption of the Greek word/name parthenos. Pantera was said to be a Roman archer from Sidon in Phoenicia but had served in Syria.
Sources or source? What are these so called sources? And what level of credibility were they given by the church in the early church?
One has to wonder and ask why the silence from Mark and John concerning the "virgin birth"?
Wonder away - But the fact that one gospel mentions it and another does not mean anything more than the author was writing to different audiences where such prophecies are more important than other means of expressing the argument. The virgin birth was more important to those coming from a Jewish background than those coming from a Roman background. It did not make it unimportant or it would never have been reported. I know you don't care about the author's intent or the author's audience. But that is your problem - not mine.
Each of the gospels had a specific purpose for their writing. They were not written to be a chronological textbook about the life and times of Jesus. Yes, they describe certain parts of his life. But not every part. Why do none of the gospel writers not talk about Jesus life between 12 and 30? Why does only one mention his 12 year old trip to Jerusalem? Searching out the answers to these questions are a good thing to do. I don't have an issue with that. I am pleased you take time to read the bible.
Yet, I think you read the bible not to find it truth, but rather to prove it a lie. Therefore, you will be one of those people who are always reading but never coming to the truth. I think that is sad. Yet - at least while there is life, there is hope. Even for you.
-->
@Tradesecret
This is one of the reasons why the Holy Spirit is the one who breathed on Mary.
I bet he did. And heavy too.
Why do none of the gospel writers not talk about Jesus life between 12 and 30?
Why not indeed. Are you going to share with us the childhood period of Jesus born of a virgin, Reverend "Tradey"?
Or between the time he spent Egypt and showing up at the temple at the age of 12?
Why does only one mention his 12 year old trip to Jerusalem?
Ah yes. An absolute wonderful story of how the BOTH parents to none other than the son of god managed to lose their holy charge - a gift from god himself - for three days!? They didn't even notice that this immaculately conceived child was missing until after traveling a WHOLE DAY before they even realised he was missing.!
Searching out the answers to these questions are a good thing to do. I don't have an issue with that. I am pleased you take time to read the bible.
Don't patronise me you jumped up pompous bible dunce.
Yet, I think you read the bible not to find it truth, but rather to prove it a lie.
Or both. You haven't even considered that have you, Reverend - what a wonderful memory I possess - "Tradey" Tradesecrete.? #52
You won't forget this now will you, Reverend "Tradey"
-->
@Tradesecret
@Lunar108
Who was Jesus father ?
And following on from both my posts above at #12 & #18 I shall in his absence offer this comment relevant to this thread from Brother D Thomas.
"You say that the Trinity is another way of saying Jesus is one with His word and spirit? So it is Jesus, His word, and His spirit, but nonetheless, there are also three divine persons: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. Yet these three divine persons are distinct from one another: the Father is not the Son, the Father is not the Holy Spirit, and the Son is not the Holy Spirit. However, there is exactly one God (1 Timothy 2:5), therefore Christ is His own Father and His own Son. The Holy Ghost is neither Father nor Son, but both in spirit. The Son was begotten by the Father through Celestial impregnation through incest, but existed before He was begotten. Jesus is just as old as His Father, and the Father is just as young as His Son. The Holy Ghost proceeded from the Father and Son, but He is of the same age as the other two! #11 BrotherDThomas Added02.26.21 04:59PM
10 days later
-->
@Tradesecret
And to add to my post above at #12Some sources describes Jesus as “a bastard son of an adulteress” describing Jesus as “ben Pantera” (son of-Pantera) a corruption of the Greek word/name parthenos. Pantera was said to be a Roman archer from Sidon in Phoenicia but had served in Syria.Sources or source? What are these so called sources?
Seriously!? After all of your years of studying ancient Greek and Hebrew manuscripts and translating them into English, you are telling us that you had never , ever come across this hypothesis?
Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera (/pænˈtɛrə/; c. 22 BC – AD 40) was a Roman-Phoenician soldier born in Sidon, whose tombstone was found in Bingerbrück, Germany, in 1859. A historical connection from this soldier to Jesus has long been hypothesized by numerous scholars, based on the claim of the ancient Greek philosopher Celsus, who, according to Christian writer Origen in his "Against Celsus" (Greek Κατὰ Κέλσου, Kata Kelsou; Latin Contra Celsum), was the author of a work entitled The True Word (Greek Λόγος Ἀληθής, Logos Alēthēs).
Celsus' work was lost, but in Origen's account of it Jesus was depicted as the result of an affair between his mother Mary and a Roman soldier. He said she was "convicted of adultery and had a child by a certain soldier named Pantera".[1][2] According to James Tabor, Tiberius Pantera could have been serving in the region at the time of Jesus's conception.[1] Both the ancient Talmud and medieval Jewish writings and sayings reinforced this notion, referring to "Yeshu ben Pantera", which translates as "Jesus, son of Pantera". Tabor's hypothesis is considered highly unlikely by mainstream scholars given that there is little other evidence to support Pantera's paternity outside of the Greek and Jewish texts.[3][4]
Tradesecret wrote: "I
study the original languages, translate them to English", #25
And what level of credibility were they given by the church in the early church?
Irrelevant, Reverend.
And it appears once again that all of your years spent kneeling at the feet of those academics has been totally wasted on you.
Tradesecret wrote: "I studied and was tutored by academics, scholars, and priests and fathers from the Orthodox Church".
Why does only one mention his 12 year old trip to Jerusalem?
Ah yes. An absolute wonderful story of how the BOTH parents to none other than the son of god managed to lose their holy charge - a gift from god himself - for three days!? They didn't even notice that this immaculately conceived child was missing until after traveling a WHOLE DAY before they even realised he was missing.!
Interesting that Monty Python's Life Of Brian actually alluded to the - Jesus as “a bastard son of an adulteress” describing Jesus as “ben Pantera” (son of-Pantera) a Roman centurion hypothesis that I posted about above #18 & detailed here >> #23.
It appears that the " Jesus, bastard son of an adulteress was fathered by a Roman soldier” theory hadn't been missed by these Oxford and Cambridge educated comic greats either.
Watch . Your father was a Roman, "Naughtius Maximus".
-->
@Lunar108
Do you agree or not on thatjesus true father would have been known if they had DNA tests back then ?instead of this garbage about god's son .
It's not really that simple is it? DNA tests work on a deductive principle. If Jesus was tested, for them to know who the father was would also require the father's DNA. If Joseph was tested or the Roman Centurion and both came back negative, this wouldn't prove God to be the Father.
A DNA test will only prove useful if the test was able to identify a divine gene. What does one look like? Would the result look strange? Or would it simply give the mother's background? If it came back with what we term human sequencing, would that disqualify God as the Father? And how would that be corroborated?
The most a DNA test could do would be able to identify a specific father if that father also provided DNA. If no specific Father was identified then - it simply leaves the question - to require further investigation.
In other words, the entire notion of DNA or paternity testing presumes much in this particular topic.
The Bible indicates Mary was of age to get married. It reveals that Joseph of Nazareth was not the biological father, but only a covenantal father. It provides no evidence whatsoever that she was raped. Or that the father was a Roman soldier. It tells us only that God the Spirit, (not even God the Father) breathed into her - the same picture we have of God breathing into Adam. Adam the first Man. Jesus the last Man. Both were something new. There was no sexual language in either of the two beginnings.
A DNA test if it was available at the time might have provided some interesting studies - but I doubt it would have give us much more information. I doubt very much we would have the same result as Anakin or Luke Skywalker with their off the chart readings of "the force" Midi-chlorians. Personally I think the entire notion that God put ever be put under a microscope or into a test tube "beggars belief".
So the answer to your question is No, I don't agree it would have resolved anything.
-->
@Stephen
I never said I did not know about this theory. Please find the link to any place I have said I did not know about it.
I asked you for your sources.
And as per usual, you provide us with a wikapedia source. Ok. I can see that is about the extent of your source. wikapedia is useful sometimes - and at other times it is a convenient place to find quick information.
Hence, I have no need to take it any further.
Even your wikapedia reference indicates that mainstream scholars find it highly unlikely.
And to add to my post above at #12Some sources describes Jesus as “a bastard son of an adulteress” describing Jesus as “ben Pantera” (son of-Pantera) a corruption of the Greek word/name parthenos. Pantera was said to be a Roman archer from Sidon in Phoenicia but had served in Syria.Sources or source? What are these so called sources?Seriously!? After all of your years of studying ancient Greek and Hebrew manuscripts and translating them into English, you are telling us that you had never , ever come across this hypothesis?Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera (/pænˈtɛrə/; c. 22 BC – AD 40) was a Roman-Phoenician soldier born in Sidon, whose tombstone was found in Bingerbrück, Germany, in 1859. A historical connection from this soldier to Jesus has long been hypothesized by numerous scholars, based on the claim of the ancient Greek philosopher Celsus, who, according to Christian writer Origen in his "Against Celsus" (Greek Κατὰ Κέλσου, Kata Kelsou; Latin Contra Celsum), was the author of a work entitled The True Word (Greek Λόγος Ἀληθής, Logos Alēthēs).Celsus' work was lost, but in Origen's account of it Jesus was depicted as the result of an affair between his mother Mary and a Roman soldier. He said she was "convicted of adultery and had a child by a certain soldier named Pantera".[1][2] According to James Tabor, Tiberius Pantera could have been serving in the region at the time of Jesus's conception.[1] Both the ancient Talmud and medieval Jewish writings and sayings reinforced this notion, referring to "Yeshu ben Pantera", which translates as "Jesus, son of Pantera". Tabor's hypothesis is considered highly unlikely by mainstream scholars given that there is little other evidence to support Pantera's paternity outside of the Greek and Jewish texts.[3][4]Tradesecret wrote: "I study the original languages, translate them to English", #25And what level of credibility were they given by the church in the early church?Irrelevant, Reverend.And it appears once again that all of your years spent kneeling at the feet of those academics has been totally wasted on you.Tradesecret wrote: "I studied and was tutored by academics, scholars, and priests and fathers from the Orthodox Church".Why does only one mention his 12 year old trip to Jerusalem?Ah yes. An absolute wonderful story of how the BOTH parents to none other than the son of god managed to lose their holy charge - a gift from god himself - for three days!? They didn't even notice that this immaculately conceived child was missing until after traveling a WHOLE DAY before they even realised he was missing.!I never said I did not know about this theory.
Behave yourself Reverend. You didn't have a clue. If you had you would have simply attempted to debunk it instead of asking for my "sources".
And as per usual, you provide us with a wikapedia source. Ok. I can see that is about the extent of your source
Yes Wikipedia, the same Wikipedia that you bemoan and decry when anyone else uses it as a reference source. #180
ONLY NOW do you say that you knew about this "theory" so what were your sources/ lets see them.
Let me tell you Reverend. I learned about this hypothesis when I was still at school, and decades before Wikipedia was even dreamed of . just like these boys had obviously learned about it.
Interesting that Monty Python's Life Of Brian actually alluded to the - Jesus as “a bastard son of an adulteress” describing Jesus as “ben Pantera” (son of-Pantera) a Roman centurion hypothesis that I posted about above #18 & detailed here >> #23.
It appears that the " Jesus, bastard son of an adulteress was fathered by a Roman soldier” theory hadn't been missed by these Oxford and Cambridge educated comic greats either.
Watch . Your father was a Roman, "Naughtius Maximus".
-->
@Stephen
@Tradesecret
All that we can be pretty sure of, was that Jesus the boy/man, was the son of a man and a woman.
That's based upon an actual Jesus person of course.
Though, if the Middle eastern folk tales are purely fictional, then the Jesus character can be the son of anything that one cares to make up.
And DNA and Wikipedia hang ups are a waste of time.
Though I am aware of how much you enjoy each others company.
So sorry for the interjection.
But spare a thought for daft Joe.
He should have taken a tip from loose Mary,
And stuck to riding donkeys,
And got the hell out of town.
Must have cost a small fortune,
Stable hire and carpentry lessons.
And what did the lad end up doing?
Wandered about all day getting all spiritual,
With his boy friends.
Got himself arrested, and subsequently,
Nailed to a post.
Jesus Christ!!!!!
Exclaimed Joe.
-->
@Stephen
LOL @ Stephen. How desperate you look when once again you simply fall into your own little hole.
Asking for your sources is something I ask you very often. Why? Because you just make stuff up. And you can't source things properly anyway.
I notice once again you fail to produce such a source. Surprise surprise.
And its just delightful - that you twist words - how desperate you are!
You are the one who is making assumptions - as per usual. I don't decry wikapedia. I explained that again - yet you intentionally omit to repeat that.
LOL @ your foolishness. Displayed for all to see.
-->
@Tradesecret
And as per usual, you provide us with a wikapedia source. Ok. I can see that is about the extent of your source
Yes Wikipedia, the same Wikipedia that you bemoan and decry when anyone else uses it as a reference source. HERE>> #182
Let me tell you Reverend. I learned about this hypothesis when I was still at school, and decades before Wikipedia was even dreamed of .
AND ONLY NOW do you say that you knew about this "theory" so what were your sources. Lets see them and be sure they predate Wikipedia.
Even your wikapedia reference indicates that mainstream scholars find it highly unlikely.
Who knows,? Its a hypothesis , you bible dunce. It also shows where this particular hypothesis originated too.
Now lets us see your sources pre Wikipedia?
I notice once again you fail to produce such a source.
You asked for a source. I gave you a source, did you miss it?
HERE YOU GO>.#23
Stephen wrote: And to add to my post above at #12 Some sources describes Jesus as “a bastard son of an adulteress” describing Jesus as “ben Pantera” (son of-Pantera) a corruption of the Greek word/name parthenos. Pantera was said to be a Roman archer from Sidon in Phoenicia but had served in Syria.Tradesecret wrote: Sources or source? What are these so called sources?
Seriously!? After all of your years of studying ancient Greek and Hebrew manuscripts and translating them into English, you are telling us that you had never , ever come across this hypothesis?
Tiberius Julius Abdes Pantera (/pænˈtɛrə/; c. 22 BC – AD 40) was a Roman-Phoenician soldier born in Sidon, whose tombstone was found in Bingerbrück, Germany, in 1859. A historical connection from this soldier to Jesus has long been hypothesized by numerous scholars, based on the claim of the ancient Greek philosopher Celsus, who, according to Christian writer Origen in his "Against Celsus" (Greek Κατὰ Κέλσου, Kata Kelsou; Latin Contra Celsum), was the author of a work entitled The True Word (Greek Λόγος Ἀληθής, Logos Alēthēs).
Celsus' work was lost, but in Origen's account of it Jesus was depicted as the result of an affair between his mother Mary and a Roman soldier. He said she was "convicted of adultery and had a child by a certain soldier named Pantera".[1][2] According to James Tabor, Tiberius Pantera could have been serving in the region at the time of Jesus's conception.[1] Both the ancient Talmud and medieval Jewish writings and sayings reinforced this notion, referring to "Yeshu ben Pantera", which translates as "Jesus, son of Pantera". Tabor's hypothesis is considered highly unlikely by mainstream scholars given that there is little other evidence to support Pantera's paternity outside of the Greek and Jewish texts.[3][4]
I studied and was tutored by academics, scholars, and priests and fathers from the Orthodox Church"."I know the bible backwards - and frontwards - in Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic ","I have been taught to memorise since a very early age"
My arse. Stop telling fk lies. Or simply tell your other persona to stop telling lies in your name and on your behalf.
Did you miss the brilliant 2 minute Python sketch from 1979 that ACTUALLY alludes to the bastard son Jesus who's father was a Roman hypothesis?
Watch . Your father was a Roman, "Naughtius Maximus".