Announcement

Collapse

Deeper Waters Forum Guidelines

Notice – The ministries featured in this section of TheologyWeb are guests of this site and in some cases not bargaining for the rough and tumble world of debate forums, though sometimes they are. Additionally, this area is frequented and highlighted for guests who also very often are not acclimated to debate fora. As such, the rules of conduct here will be more strict than in the general forum. This will be something within the discretion of the Moderators and the Ministry Representative, but we simply ask that you conduct yourselves in a manner considerate of the fact that these ministries are our invited guests. You can always feel free to start a related thread in general forum without such extra restrictions. Thank you.

Deeper Waters is founded on the belief that the Christian community has long been in the shallow end of Christianity while there are treasures of the deep waiting to be discovered. Too many in the shallow end are not prepared when they go out beyond those waters and are quickly devoured by sharks. We wish to aid Christians to equip them to navigate the deeper waters of the ocean of truth and come up with treasure in the end.

We also wish to give special aid to those often neglected, that is, the disabled community. This is especially so since our founders are both on the autism spectrum and have a special desire to reach those on that spectrum. While they are a special emphasis, we seek to help others with any disability realize that God can use them and that they are as the Psalmist says, fearfully and wonderfully made.

General TheologyWeb forum rules: here.
See more
See less

Innerancy.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by ReformedApologist View Post
    I doubt you will get an answer to your question. He just spams and when his questions are answered he moves on to the next one. I don't think he understands what a monologue is to be honest.
    This question relates to Islam. I am here discussing if the Bible errs only.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by ReformedApologist View Post
      You have already been addressed in the other forum. Why you feel the need to keep spamming and once we have answered your questions you continue to just move on to the next point is beyond me. Quit being an idiot and btw the way you still have failed to answer Sparkle's that you have been asked numerous times.
      I want to hear others views as well.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Same Hakeem View Post
        According to the prophecy in Jeremiah 22:30, no descendant of Coniah will sit upon the throne of David and ruling in Judah. Jesus was a descendant of Coniah according to Matthew 1:11 and will sit upon the throne of David according to Luke 1:32. When Jesus sits upon the throne of David, the prophecy in Jeremiah 22:30 will become false.

        The above referred verses are as follows;

        "Thus says the Lord:
        ‘Write this man down as childless,
        A man who shall not prosper in his days;
        For none of his descendants shall prosper,
        Sitting on the throne of David,
        And ruling anymore in Judah.’ ” (Jeremiah 22:30)

        "Josiah begot [a]Jeconiah and his brothers about the time they were carried away to Babylon. (Matthew 1:11)

        Footnotes:
        Matthew 1:11 Or Coniah or Jehoiachin"

        “He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David " (Luke 1:32).

        https://www.biblegateway.com/passage...2&version=NKJV

        In NLT, the footnote of Jeremiah 22:24 states “Hebrew Coniah, a variant spelling of Jehoiachin; also in 22:28.”
        https://www.biblegateway.com/passage...24&version=NLT
        You can either

        1. Argue that the genealogies in Matthew and Luke are both Joseph's and therefore Jesus couldn't have been a physical descendant of David since Joseph wasn't Jesus' biological father,

        or

        2. Argue that the prophecy about the descendants of Jeconiah never sitting on the throne of David is falsified if Jesus sits upon the throne of David.


        You cannot argue both at the same time without contradicting yourself.

        -----

        But even if we ignore the way you blatantly contradict yourself, there are a few things we can note about the "prophecy". One is that it says that "a man who shall not prosper in his days", which seems to limit the "curse" to Jeconiah's own lifetime and the immediate future, and doesn't say anything about any descendants far off in the future after Jeconiah has died:

        Source: Craigie, P. C. (2002). Vol. 26: Word Biblical Commentary : Jeremiah 1-25.

        "The image in v 30 shifts to that of a scribe, whether a census taker (as Holladay suggests) or land register (as Carroll suggests) or a scribe tallying prisoners of war to be taken to Babylon. The official in charge says of Jehoiachin, “Write (register) this man, ‘Stripped’ (perhaps dishonored, disgraced) or ‘Childless.’” A register of those taken captive would logically include the head of the family followed by a listing of dependents. It might also include comments such as disgraced, banished (as LXX implies), or stripped (of power). Such is to remain the condition of Jehoiachin. The fact that children are apparently included in v 28, and sons are listed in 1 Chr 3:17–18, should not diminish the thrust of the oracle. The sense of “childless” or “stripped” is that Jehoiachin will have no descendant ruling upon the throne of David. The word tslach occurs twice in this verse. Often the word is translated with the sense of “prosper.” However, here a better sense seems to be that of “succeed.” No man will succeed during Jehoiachin’s days; indeed none will succeed. The implication might be that of prosperity: that no man would prosper during his days. But the full intent of that phrase is shown in the two parallel lines, “none sitting on the throne of David, nor ruling again in Judah.” Jehoiachin will have no descendant to advance or succeed to the throne."

        © Copyright Original Source



        The above citation was copied from the following article: http://christianthinktank.com/fabprof4.html

        And regardless of whether the curse was for the immediate future (so that Jeconiah wouldn't get to experience any of his descendants sitting on the throne), or for an indefinite period of time, Haggai 2:22-23 proves either that the curse was indeed only applicable to Jeconiah's immediate descendants, or that God rescinded the curse for some reason (and rabbinical tradition seems to teach that the curse was rescinded because Jeconiah repented in prison*) because it states:

        Scripture Verse: Haggai 2:22-23 ESV

        22 and to overthrow the throne of kingdoms. I am about to destroy the strength of the kingdoms of the nations, and overthrow the chariots and their riders. And the horses and their riders shall go down, every one by the sword of his brother. 23 On that day, declares the Lord of hosts, I will take you, O Zerubbabel my servant, the son of Shealtiel, declares the Lord, and make you like a signet ring, for I have chosen you, declares the Lord of hosts.

        © Copyright Original Source



        Which when we compare it with Jeremiah 22:24-25 shows something interesting:

        Scripture Verse: Jeremiah 22:24-25 ESV


        24 “As I live, declares the Lord, though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, were the signet ring on my right hand, yet I would tear you off 25 and give you into the hand of those who seek your life, into the hand of those of whom you are afraid, even into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and into the hand of the Chaldeans.

        © Copyright Original Source



        In other words, Jeconiah was the signet ring that the Lord "tore off" from His hand and gave up to Nebuchadnezzar. But Zerubbabel, who was Jeconiah's grandson, was "reinstated" as God's signet ring, thus showing that the curse, for whatever reason, wasn't applicable any more, either because it was outside of the applicable time frame, or because it had been rescinded for some reason.







        *
        Source: Judaica Books of the Prophets, in loc

        "for no man of his seed shall prosper -In this, too, no man of his seed shall prosper, namely that no one will occupy the throne of David nor rule in Judah. Although we find that Zerubbabel, his great grandson, did rule over Judah upon the return of the exiles, the Rabbis (Pesikta /'Rav Kahana p. 163a) state that this : 'was because Jehoiachin repented in prison. They state further: Repentance is great, for it nullifies a person's sentence, as it is stated: inscribe this man childless.' But since he repented, his sentence was revoked and turned to the good, and he said to him, "I will take you, Zerubbabel, and I will make you a signet" (Haggai 2:23). They state further: Said Rabbi Johanan: Exile expiates all sins, as it is said: Inscribe this man childless," and after he was exiled, it IS written: '(I Chron. 3:17) And the sons of Jeconiah, Assir, Shealtiel his son--Redak"

        © Copyright Original Source



        Citation copied from the same article as the other citation above.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
          You can either

          1. Argue that the genealogies in Matthew and Luke are both Joseph's and therefore Jesus couldn't have been a physical descendant of David since Joseph wasn't Jesus' biological father,

          or

          2. Argue that the prophecy about the descendants of Jeconiah never sitting on the throne of David is falsified if Jesus sits upon the throne of David.


          You cannot argue both at the same time without contradicting yourself.

          -----

          But even if we ignore the way you blatantly contradict yourself, there are a few things we can note about the "prophecy". One is that it says that "a man who shall not prosper in his days", which seems to limit the "curse" to Jeconiah's own lifetime and the immediate future, and doesn't say anything about any descendants far off in the future after Jeconiah has died:

          Source: Craigie, P. C. (2002). Vol. 26: Word Biblical Commentary : Jeremiah 1-25.

          "The image in v 30 shifts to that of a scribe, whether a census taker (as Holladay suggests) or land register (as Carroll suggests) or a scribe tallying prisoners of war to be taken to Babylon. The official in charge says of Jehoiachin, “Write (register) this man, ‘Stripped’ (perhaps dishonored, disgraced) or ‘Childless.’” A register of those taken captive would logically include the head of the family followed by a listing of dependents. It might also include comments such as disgraced, banished (as LXX implies), or stripped (of power). Such is to remain the condition of Jehoiachin. The fact that children are apparently included in v 28, and sons are listed in 1 Chr 3:17–18, should not diminish the thrust of the oracle. The sense of “childless” or “stripped” is that Jehoiachin will have no descendant ruling upon the throne of David. The word tslach occurs twice in this verse. Often the word is translated with the sense of “prosper.” However, here a better sense seems to be that of “succeed.” No man will succeed during Jehoiachin’s days; indeed none will succeed. The implication might be that of prosperity: that no man would prosper during his days. But the full intent of that phrase is shown in the two parallel lines, “none sitting on the throne of David, nor ruling again in Judah.” Jehoiachin will have no descendant to advance or succeed to the throne."

          © Copyright Original Source



          The above citation was copied from the following article: http://christianthinktank.com/fabprof4.html

          And regardless of whether the curse was for the immediate future (so that Jeconiah wouldn't get to experience any of his descendants sitting on the throne), or for an indefinite period of time, Haggai 2:22-23 proves either that the curse was indeed only applicable to Jeconiah's immediate descendants, or that God rescinded the curse for some reason (and rabbinical tradition seems to teach that the curse was rescinded because Jeconiah repented in prison*) because it states:

          Scripture Verse: Haggai 2:22-23 ESV

          22 and to overthrow the throne of kingdoms. I am about to destroy the strength of the kingdoms of the nations, and overthrow the chariots and their riders. And the horses and their riders shall go down, every one by the sword of his brother. 23 On that day, declares the Lord of hosts, I will take you, O Zerubbabel my servant, the son of Shealtiel, declares the Lord, and make you like a signet ring, for I have chosen you, declares the Lord of hosts.

          © Copyright Original Source



          Which when we compare it with Jeremiah 22:24-25 shows something interesting:

          Scripture Verse: Jeremiah 22:24-25 ESV


          24 “As I live, declares the Lord, though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, were the signet ring on my right hand, yet I would tear you off 25 and give you into the hand of those who seek your life, into the hand of those of whom you are afraid, even into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and into the hand of the Chaldeans.

          © Copyright Original Source



          In other words, Jeconiah was the signet ring that the Lord "tore off" from His hand and gave up to Nebuchadnezzar. But Zerubbabel, who was Jeconiah's grandson, was "reinstated" as God's signet ring, thus showing that the curse, for whatever reason, wasn't applicable any more, either because it was outside of the applicable time frame, or because it had been rescinded for some reason.







          *
          Source: Judaica Books of the Prophets, in loc

          "for no man of his seed shall prosper -In this, too, no man of his seed shall prosper, namely that no one will occupy the throne of David nor rule in Judah. Although we find that Zerubbabel, his great grandson, did rule over Judah upon the return of the exiles, the Rabbis (Pesikta /'Rav Kahana p. 163a) state that this : 'was because Jehoiachin repented in prison. They state further: Repentance is great, for it nullifies a person's sentence, as it is stated: inscribe this man childless.' But since he repented, his sentence was revoked and turned to the good, and he said to him, "I will take you, Zerubbabel, and I will make you a signet" (Haggai 2:23). They state further: Said Rabbi Johanan: Exile expiates all sins, as it is said: Inscribe this man childless," and after he was exiled, it IS written: '(I Chron. 3:17) And the sons of Jeconiah, Assir, Shealtiel his son--Redak"

          © Copyright Original Source



          Citation copied from the same article as the other citation above.
          Between 1 and 2, ff course. 1. Since both genealogies in Matthew and Luke trace Jesus back to David namely through Joseph according to Luke 3:23 and Matthew 1:16. Since Joseph was not biological father of Jesus, Jesus cannot be traced back to David in Matthew and Luke in light of the fact that Jesus was born without a father.
          Last edited by Same Hakeem; 06-06-2019, 08:19 PM.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Same Hakeem View Post
            Between 1 and 2, ff course. 1. Since both genealogies in Matthew and Luke trace Jesus back to David namely through Joseph according to Luke 3:23 and Matthew 1:16. Since Joseph was not biological father of Jesus, Jesus cannot be traced back to David in Matthew and Luke in light of the fact that Jesus was born without a father.
            Are you really this dense? Jesus is Joseph's son by adoption and given Moses and Esther were adopted in the Old Testament it is not unlikely he was adopted legally by Joseph while having Mary as his mother. And I know you will throw up Romans 1:3 which has also been addressed.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Same Hakeem View Post
              Between 1 and 2, ff course. 1. Since both genealogies in Matthew and Luke trace Jesus back to David namely through Joseph according to Luke 3:23 and Matthew 1:16. Since Joseph was not biological father of Jesus, Jesus cannot be traced back to David in Matthew and Luke in light of the fact that Jesus was born without a father.
              Again, Jesus can be traced back to David via his mother, as which I showed in the other thread where I cited the passage from Numbers 27 about the daughters of Zelophehad.

              Comment


              • You all are wasting your breath. Answer one contradiciton and Same says nothing and moves on to the next. You'll be here potentially forever and he'll never accept it.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
                  You all are wasting your breath. Answer one contradiciton and Same says nothing and moves on to the next. You'll be here potentially forever and he'll never accept it.
                  It seems to me he has an agenda. After all he never answered the questions brought towards him.He wants a monologue with answers that fit his presuppositions. Is this a typical Muslim tactic?

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
                    You all are wasting your breath. Answer one contradiciton and Same says nothing and moves on to the next. You'll be here potentially forever and he'll never accept it.
                    bacon
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
                      You all are wasting your breath. Answer one contradiciton and Same says nothing and moves on to the next. You'll be here potentially forever and he'll never accept it.
                      Nah, I think this is fine actually. Even if Same himself doesn't actually learn anything from this it's still a fact that I myself have refreshed my memory on these issues, and it will be easier for me to remember the information, or at the very least where to find it, the next time I find myself in a situation where it's pertinent. And that's not to mention any potential lurkers who might stumble upon this thread and learn something from the discussion.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by ReformedApologist View Post
                        It seems to me he has an agenda. After all he never answered the questions brought towards him.He wants a monologue with answers that fit his presuppositions. Is this a typical Muslim tactic?
                        Yes

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
                          Nah, I think this is fine actually. Even if Same himself doesn't actually learn anything from this it's still a fact that I myself have refreshed my memory on these issues, and it will be easier for me to remember the information, or at the very least where to find it, the next time I find myself in a situation where it's pertinent. And that's not to mention any potential lurkers who might stumble upon this thread and learn something from the discussion.
                          I have no problem with that. I would just encourage you to make sure it's not a major priority and you're not giving him more time than he deserves. He obviously doesn't care about research and having accurate data.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Chrawnus View Post
                            Nah, I think this is fine actually. Even if Same himself doesn't actually learn anything from this it's still a fact that I myself have refreshed my memory on these issues, and it will be easier for me to remember the information, or at the very least where to find it, the next time I find myself in a situation where it's pertinent. And that's not to mention any potential lurkers who might stumble upon this thread and learn something from the discussion.
                            And you're a good man for putting it out there. Even if you do have blue hair.
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View Post
                              I have no problem with that. I would just encourage you to make sure it's not a major priority and you're not giving him more time than he deserves. He obviously doesn't care about research and having accurate data.
                              If I'm to be completely honest I'm mostly doing this as a way to motivate myself to do study and research for my own edification, rather than for Same's benefit, because he has clearly shown he's not in the least bit interested in learning anything.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                                And you're a good man for putting it out there. Even if you do have blue hair.
                                So, which one of the horses in your avatar picture are you then?

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-15-2024, 10:19 PM
                                14 responses
                                75 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-13-2024, 10:13 PM
                                6 responses
                                61 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-12-2024, 09:36 PM
                                1 response
                                23 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-11-2024, 10:19 PM
                                0 responses
                                22 views
                                2 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-08-2024, 11:59 AM
                                5 responses
                                50 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Apologiaphoenix  
                                Working...
                                X