The Historical Accuracy of the Nativity Narratives

[ancient warrior]

Originally Posted by Heavenese

In the Genesis verse itself, it says the Seed of the woman, He would crush the serpent's head. So there is no point in saying the Seed of the woman meant a bunch of people, when God Himself clearly points it out that the Seed is one person that would crush the serpent's head.

Genesis ch. 3 verse 15:

"And I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your seed and her seed;
He shall bruise you on the head,
And you shall bruise him on the heel.”


Now when it comes to God's DNA and Jesus, didn't God make Adam in spite of being the Spirit? Didn't God take one of Adam's ribs, and from that rib formed Eve? You don't think God could take one of Mary's eggs cells, and form Jesus? Actually Jesus wasn't even created, because He is the Son of God. What the Holy Spirit did was take the Son, and infused Him with one of Mary's egg cells. So that is where that information came from, to make Him a Man.

RESPONSE:

No. You are using an erroneous translation perhaps produced to claim that Gen 3:15 is a prophecy of Jesus. Jews have never recognize this mistranslation.

Here are correct translations from the Hebrew text and a modern bible making translations from the oldest extant text in the original language:

From the Hebrew:
Gen 3-:15 -תְּשׁוּפֶנּוּ עָקֵב.טו וְאֵיבָה אָשִׁית, בֵּינְךָ וּבֵין הָאִשָּׁה, וּבֵין זַרְעֲךָ, וּבֵין זַרְעָהּ: הוּא יְשׁוּפְךָ רֹאשׁ, וְאַתָּה {ס} And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; they shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise their heel.'

From the New American Bible, Revised Edition, 2011
Gen 3:15 "I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers;They will strike at your head, while you strike at their heel."

(NAB footnote to 3-15 "They will strike…at their heel: the antecedent for “they” and “their” is the collective noun “offspring,” i.e., all the descendants of the woman).

God may have created Jesus but he didn't create DNA for himself.

[Heavenese]

Originally Posted by ancient warrior

RESPONSE:

No. You are using an erroneous translation perhaps produced to claim that Gen 3:15 is a prophecy of Jesus. Jews have never recognize this mistranslation.

Here are correct translations from the Hebrew text and a modern bible making translations from the oldest extant text in the original language:

From the Hebrew:
Gen 3-:15 -תְּשׁוּפֶנּוּ עָקֵב.טו וְאֵיבָה אָשִׁית, בֵּינְךָ וּבֵין הָאִשָּׁה, וּבֵין זַרְעֲךָ, וּבֵין זַרְעָהּ: הוּא יְשׁוּפְךָ רֹאשׁ, וְאַתָּה {ס} And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; they shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise their heel.'

From the New American Bible, Revised Edition, 2011
Gen 3:15 "I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers;They will strike at your head, while you strike at their heel."

(NAB footnote to 3-15 "They will strike…at their heel: the antecedent for “they” and “their” is the collective noun “offspring,” i.e., all the descendants of the woman).

God may have created Jesus but he didn't create DNA for himself.

I don't know what translation you are using, or whether you have added your own interpretation, but it is clear the translation is "He".

Genesis 3:15 Hebrew Texts and Analysis

This is what I was referring to when everywhere else, the Hebrew was translated as he. Again with the DNA, it's a matter of information. Jesus is the second Adam. I'm sure the formation of Jesus wasn't a problem. And He wasn't created.

[ancient warrior]

Originally Posted by Heavenese

I don't know what translation you are using, or whether you have added your own interpretation, but it is clear the translation is "He".

Genesis 3:15 Hebrew Texts and Analysis

This is what I was referring to when everywhere else, the Hebrew was translated as he. Again with the DNA, it's a matter of information. Jesus is the second Adam. I'm sure the formation of Jesus wasn't a problem. And He wasn't created.

RESPONSE:

I certainly didn't my "interpretation." Here is a detailed Hebrew explanation that might help you to understand the true meaning of Gen 3:15

http://www.thejewishhome.org/counter/Gen315.pdf
[
“The application in Genesis 3:15 of the term זַרְעָהּ , her seed, refers to Eve’s generic
descendants, i.e., humanity, since, according to the account of Creation in Genesis,
Adam and Eve are considered as the progenitors of all of us. To accept and believe
the claim that Genesis 3:15 is a “messianic prophecy”, that the "seed of Eve"
referred to therein can be distinctly and unambiguously identified as pointing to a
specific individual, Jesus, requires an incredible quantum leap of faith and ignoring
the facts.”

[ancient warrior]

Compare and Contrast Matthew’s and Luke’s Nativity Narratives.

Matthew has Jesus born during the life of Herod (died 4 BC). Luke has Jesus born during the census of Judea by Quirinius 6 AD.

Matthew has Holy Family living in Bethlehem, Judea. Luke has Holy Family living in Nazareth, Galilee

Matthew has angel appearing to Joseph. Luke has angel appearing to Mary.

Matthew describes: Star of Bethlehem, Magi, Slaughter of the Innocent, and Flight into Egypt. Luke doesn’t describe any of these things because Herod had been dead ten years.

Matthew has no journey to Bethlehem, no manger, no angels singing, no shepherds. Luke has story of journey to Bethlehem, stable, manger, angels singing, and shepherds.

After Jesus’ birth, Matthew has Joseph taking Holy Family into Egypt to await Herod’s death. Since King Herod had been dead for ten years, Luke has the Holy Family return to Nazareth after birth rites were completed (50 days after birth).

Matthew has Holy Family return from Egypt and settle (for the first time) in Nazareth. (Matthew claims this as prophecy fulfillment: “He shall be called a Nazarene. But there is no such prophecy or even any mention of Nazareth in the Old Testament).

Question: Which account is divinely inspired?