Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Matt.1:16 has Jacob as the father of Joseph - '...and Jacob the father of Joseph...'
and
Luke 3:23 has Heli as the father of Joseph - '...son of Joseph son of Heli...'
So who was Jospehs father? As this verse stands this is a contradiction.
There it is - one contradiction. Wait for it, wait for it - here comes the rationlizations of cognitive bias and dissonance.
It does appear to be a contradiction but from what I remember Luke provided the genealogy through the ancestry of Mary and Matthew the genealogy through descent from Solomon to Joseph (Joseph being Jesus's legal father in a secular sense as an adoptive father). Luke apparently was referring to Heli as the father of Mary and her husband, Joseph, could rightly be called son (son in law) whereas Matthew rightly calls Jacob the father of Joseph with Jacob being the natural father of Joseph. Luke also does this in Luke 3:27 where he describes the relationship between Shealtiel and Neri referring to Shealtiel as the son (instead of son in law) of Neri.
If there is more research done one would probably disccover how the people of Jesus day referred to sons in law (as in sons or sons in law). However even today one refers to in laws as mom and dad and they call a son- in- law "son" and I don't think that is uncommon or unusual.
10-23-2013, 12:47 AM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by hd4me
It does appear to be a contradiction but from what I remember Luke provided the genealogy through the ancestry of Mary and Matthew the genealogy through descent from Solomon to Joseph (Joseph being Jesus's legal father in a secular sense as an adoptive father). Luke apparently was referring to Heli as the father of Mary and her husband, Joseph, could rightly be called son (son in law) whereas Matthew rightly calls Jacob the father of Joseph with Jacob being the natural father of Joseph. Luke also does this in Luke 3:27 where he describes the relationship between Shealtiel and Neri referring to Shealtiel as the son (instead of son in law) of Neri.
If there is more research done one would probably disccover how the people of Jesus day referred to sons in law (as in sons or sons in law). However even today one refers to in laws as mom and dad and they call a son- in- law "son" and I don't think that is uncommon or unusual.
Mary is not even mentioned or hinted at anywhere in the text. Nor is there any hint of it being a relative of any kind. The natural father issue is beside the point.
Mary is not even mentioned or hinted at anywhere in the text. Nor is there any hint of it being a relative of any kind. The natural father issue is beside the point.
This aspect that theists espouse to 'splain away the contradiction is moot as in the context of Jewish tradition, the lineage is matriarch.
Further to that, they both trace all the way back though exodus, the flood to Adam. Few people take these as literal anymore as they have no empirical evidence that they ever occurred. If the Jesus fella traces back through mythological figures, it is safe to say, he did not exist as reported.
That said, to the fundie, this really makes no difference, they invent their own customised god just like countless folk have done in previous generations; the bible only serves to thinly support their beliefs as they see fit; which parts are relevant or not. You will find that they tend to cite Pauline texts rather than the gospels to support their premise of belief.
If their was some kind of universal truth, they would be all in agreement on all issues and the bible would support that 100%. However, we all know that is not the case. Opinions vary too much to assert that these gods of theirs are in fact the same personae, they are not. Each one has an opinion and likewise each one has their own version of god.
"The bible is like a End User License Agreement, most folk scroll down to click the "I accept" w/o actually reading it" ~ Bill Maher
it's funny. Every time I've ever asked someone for a Biblical contradiction, I get a link to a website that supposedly proves everything I believe wrong.
Can you, in your own words, give me a single contradiction? I'd like to have a discussion with an actual person--not the website you link to.
10-23-2013, 01:09 PM
2K5Gx2km
n/a posts
Explaining why a verse is a contradiction does not undo the fact that it is still a contradiction. As the verses stand they still contradict each other and no amount of musing about 'possibilities' gets rid of this fact. The verses say what thye say - period.
According to these two verses Joseph has two different fathers.
Explaining why a verse is a contradiction does not undo the fact that it is still a contradiction. As the verses stand they still contradict each other and no amount of musing about 'possibilities' gets rid of this fact. The verses say what thye say - period.
According to these two verses Joseph has two different fathers.
I agree...."why" doesn't mean anything. The question is if there is really a contradiction.
Joseph does not have 2 fathers. there are a few theories of why there are 2 names listed -- one seems to be a lineage of Mary, while the other is of Joseph's. Joseph was called the "son of" Mary's lineage. You need to keep in mind the people writing, and the style of writing. A geneology was not like what we might think of a geneology today. It lists key ancestors--but it may not be intended to be a perfect chronological listing of every male ancestor of Joseph.
Well, the bible is so full of contradicting things its not hard to imagine that we have 3990459774693 different denominations. For some reason Judaism doesn't have this problem, or Islam, or Confucianism. They have a few different sects, but they aren't all across the spectrum like Christianity.
Probably because Muslims are not allowed to think as freely. This reduces denominations. Or if they follow only one book, it reduces the number of interpretations. Whereas a the Bible is a set of different books written by different people of different faiths (or variations). So there is A LOT of room for differences in interpretations.
Especially since it's been my experience (personal and otherwise) that people tend to just ignore the verses which don't fit with their theory and just focus on the ones that fit within their constructed theory.
I agree...."why" doesn't mean anything. The question is if there is really a contradiction.
Joseph does not have 2 fathers. there are a few theories of why there are 2 names listed -- one seems to be a lineage of Mary, while the other is of Joseph's. Joseph was called the "son of" Mary's lineage. You need to keep in mind the people writing, and the style of writing. A geneology was not like what we might think of a geneology today. It lists key ancestors--but it may not be intended to be a perfect chronological listing of every male ancestor of Joseph.
I heard that explanation also, one of the books speaks of lineage from Mary's side and the other from Joseph's. But was it ok to do it from a woman's side I wonder, in those days, where they were used to mostly list men in their listings. Unless of course this book was written during the times when Mary was considered a Mother of God and revered.
Probably because Muslims are not allowed to think as freely. This reduces denominations. Or if they follow only one book, it reduces the number of interpretations. Whereas a the Bible is a set of different books written by different people of different faiths (or variations). So there is A LOT of room for differences in interpretations.
Especially since it's been my experience (personal and otherwise) that people tend to just ignore the verses which don't fit with their theory and just focus on the ones that fit within their constructed theory.
Actually, Islam is anything but a monolith. If you ask Woodrow, one of the mods, and a practicing muslim, he cannot say with certainty that anyone is or is not a Muslim. It's a very slippery subject who is and isn't a Muslim--and who is or isn't practicing the religion correctly.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
