Originally posted by ReformedApologist
View Post
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.
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
-
Originally posted by ReformedApologist View PostYou 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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Same Hakeem View PostAccording 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
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:
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:
Which when we compare it with Jeremiah 22:24-25 shows something interesting:
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.
*
Citation copied from the same article as the other citation above.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostYou 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:
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:
Which when we compare it with Jeremiah 22:24-25 shows something interesting:
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.
*
Citation copied from the same article as the other citation above.Last edited by Same Hakeem; 06-06-2019, 08:19 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Same Hakeem View PostBetween 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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Same Hakeem View PostBetween 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.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View PostYou 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 PostYou 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.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View PostYou 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 Chrawnus View PostNah, 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 Chrawnus View PostNah, 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.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Apologiaphoenix View PostI 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
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-15-2024, 10:19 PM
|
14 responses
75 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by rogue06
03-21-2024, 08:02 AM
|
||
Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-13-2024, 10:13 PM
|
6 responses
61 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 03-22-2024, 09:31 AM | ||
Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-12-2024, 09:36 PM
|
1 response
23 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
03-13-2024, 08:31 AM
|
||
Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-11-2024, 10:19 PM
|
0 responses
22 views
2 likes
|
Last Post 03-11-2024, 10:19 PM | ||
Started by Apologiaphoenix, 03-08-2024, 11:59 AM
|
5 responses
50 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 09:45 AM |
Comment