Speaking of genealogy - DFWstangs Forums
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 14 (permalink) Old 01-24-2008, 04:26 PM Thread Starter
Time Served
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 779
Speaking of genealogy

I'm certainly not a good student of the bible. Nor do I want to look this stuff up for myself I just thought this would be an interesting thread. Maybe a good biblical brain teaser.

In reference to:
Luke 3:23
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/lk/3.html

Who was Zerubbabel's father?

1 Chronicles 3:19
And the sons of Pedaiah were, Zerubbabel, and Shimei.

Luke 3:27
Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel

From which of David's sons was Jesus descended?

Matthew 1:6-7
... and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias. And Solomon begat Roboam.

Luke 3:31
... which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David.

Who was the father of Salah?

Genesis 11:12
And Arphaxad lived five and thirty years, and begat Salah.

Luke 3:35-36
Salah, which was the son of Cainan.

Was Enoch the sixth or the seventh from Adam?

Jude 14
And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam....

Lk.3:37-38
Enoch, which was the son of Jared,
which was the son of Maleleel,
which was the son of Cainan,
Which was the son of Enos,
which was the son of Seth,
which was the son of Adam....

05 GT Torch Red C&L CAI, Diablo 93 tune, BMR LCR's & UCR, Pro 5.0, S UDP, Mac
<a href="http://giftube.com/"><img src="http://giftube.com/gifs/1016.gif" alt=""></a><br/><a style="padding:3px;background: transparent;color:#00ADEF;font-family:tahoma;font-size:10px;font-weight:bold;text-decoration:none;" href="http://giftube.com/" target="_blank">Gifs at Giftube.com </a>
jones4stangs is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 14 (permalink) Old 01-24-2008, 08:34 PM
Pilgrim
 
Phillystang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 3,086
Just looking at the very first one: Who was Zerubbabel's father?

We see that Zerubbabel has both a different father and different sons based on these two verses. Is it such a leap to conclude that more than one person may actually share the same name? If that is the scholarship of skepticsannotatedbible, I can't imagine what other 'errors' they have found with the Bible.

1 Chronicles 3:19
19 The sons of Pedaiah:
Zerubbabel and Shimei.
The sons of Zerubbabel:
Meshullam and Hananiah.
Shelomith was their sister.

Luke 3
27the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa,
the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel,
the son of Neri,
Phillystang is offline  
post #3 of 14 (permalink) Old 01-24-2008, 08:54 PM
Lifer
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Fate, TX
Posts: 1,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by jones4stangs
From which of David's sons was Jesus descended?

Matthew 1:6-7
... and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias. And Solomon begat Roboam.

Luke 3:31
... which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David.
http://www.christiananswers.net/dict...erofjesus.html

The lineage in Luke is from Mary and the lineage in Matthew is from Joseph.

Luke spoke to the gentiles so he traced the lineage all the way to Adam, the son of God.

Matthew spoke to the Jews, so he traced the lineage from Joseph to Abraham (whom the Jews referred to as the founding father of their religion)

Jesus was supernaturally conceived. It is so awesome that he chose Mary and Joseph because they are BOTH a decendant of David.
Mach1Nut is offline  
 
post #4 of 14 (permalink) Old 01-24-2008, 08:55 PM
Lifer
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Fate, TX
Posts: 1,014
Quote:
Originally Posted by website
GENEAOLOGY

Mary was a direct descendant of King David which gave Jesus the right to ascend the Jewish throne, both through Mary and through adoption by his foster father, Joseph. Mary’s genealogy is supplied in Luke 3:23-38. Dr. Henry Morris explains the genealogy in Luke:

“Joseph was clearly the son of Jacob (Matthew 1:16, so this verse [Luke 3:23 - says “son of Heli”] should be understood to mean “son-in-law of Heli.” Thus, the genealogy of Christ in Luke is actually the genealogy of Mary, while Matthew gives that of Joseph. Actually, the word “son” is not in the original, so it would be legitimate to supply either “son” or “son-in-law” in this context. Since Matthew and Luke clearly record much common material, it is certain that neither one could unknowingly incorporate such a flagrant apparent mistake as the wrong genealogy in his record. As it is, however, the two genealogies show that both parents were descendants of David—Joseph through Solomon (Matthew 1:7-15), thus inheriting the legal right to the throne of David, and Mary through Nathan (Luke 3:23-31), her line thus carrying the seed of David, since Solomon’s line had been refused the throne because of Jechoniah’s sin” [Dr. Henry M. Morris, The Defender’s Study Bible, note for Luke 3:23 (Iowa Falls, Iowa: World Publishing, Inc., 1995).].
Quoted from link above in-case anyone is scared to go to a Christian website.
Mach1Nut is offline  
post #5 of 14 (permalink) Old 01-25-2008, 10:34 AM Thread Starter
Time Served
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 779
Good responses.

Two down, two to go.

05 GT Torch Red C&L CAI, Diablo 93 tune, BMR LCR's & UCR, Pro 5.0, S UDP, Mac
<a href="http://giftube.com/"><img src="http://giftube.com/gifs/1016.gif" alt=""></a><br/><a style="padding:3px;background: transparent;color:#00ADEF;font-family:tahoma;font-size:10px;font-weight:bold;text-decoration:none;" href="http://giftube.com/" target="_blank">Gifs at Giftube.com </a>
jones4stangs is offline  
post #6 of 14 (permalink) Old 02-20-2008, 10:56 PM
Musician for the deaf
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Euless, TX
Posts: 9,656
If you really are interested in this you should study the synoptic problem.
Casper is offline  
post #7 of 14 (permalink) Old 02-21-2008, 12:19 AM
Time Served
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: irving
Posts: 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by jones4stangs
Good responses.

Two down, two to go.
as for the other 2..
1) the septuagint reads in genesis 10:24 that cainan begot salah. not arphaxad. the account of luke is consistent with the septuagint. (the oldest available translation of the O.T. between 3rd and 1st century bc) perhaps you should do a study on the reliability of the septuagint compared to other texts.

2)the epistel of jude giving an account of enoch being the seventh from adam was including adam within that count being that he was the first of God (the beginning of man) and the reason why wickedness was within the world in the first place. you can see the concistency in mathew as it gives the generations. when it says there are 14 generations from abraham to david, 14 from david to the captivity and 14 from the captivity to joseph... example. it wasnt that there are 14 generations between abraham and david. the count includes abraham and david. along with the other two geneologies of the 14 generations given. perhaps it was a way of speach i dont know. but whatever the reason, when compared with other similiar genology counts, i dont see a problem with jude.
svtaaron is offline  
post #8 of 14 (permalink) Old 02-21-2008, 12:34 AM
Musician for the deaf
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Euless, TX
Posts: 9,656
Luke drew heavily on Josephus.
Casper is offline  
post #9 of 14 (permalink) Old 02-21-2008, 05:40 PM
Time Served
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: irving
Posts: 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casper
Luke drew heavily on Josephus.
ive never heard of luke drawing heavily from josephus. i have heard that mathew and luke are so similar that some have come to the conclusion that they both barrowed from the "Q" document. not josephus.
svtaaron is offline  
post #10 of 14 (permalink) Old 02-21-2008, 06:50 PM
Musician for the deaf
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Euless, TX
Posts: 9,656
I'm combining Luke and Acts as two parts by the same author here for an example.

Acts 5:33 comes from Josephus' tale of Judas and of Theudas, Antiquities 20:5

The problem however, is that Theudas was beheaded by Cuspius Fadus. This happened in 44CE. And Antiquities is post 70CE. That is okay, because Luke is piecing together dim memories of the Quirinian Census of 7CE in Judea with a property census with the Oikian Census of 104CE in Egypt, a headcount which did require the city laborers to return to their homes in the countryside.

Another is Luke 2:46-48, the prodigy in the temple, lifted from Life of the Jews chapter 9.

He gathers some namedropping from 15:4 of Antiquities to come up with Lysanias, tetrarch of Abilene, in Syria, but unfortunately misinterprets Abilene as Adiabene, a jewish kingdom of the late first and early second century in Armenia. In his haste he shows his error by pinpointing the date as the 15th Year of Tiberius. He combined a monarch from 50 years earlier with a kingdom 50 years later than his 29CE setting

One unique part of Luke that really shows the Josephus influence is the story about the journey to Emmaus in chapter 24. This comes from Wars of the Jews chapter 7.

We know that Josephus made an error in saying the distance was threescore stadia from Jerusalem, and we see that Luke faithfully reproduced the error (as threescore furlongs). We know where this is from Vespasian, because it was known to the Romans as Colonia. Josephus and luke are the only two mentioning the place by the name Emmaus.

Of course, according to Luke the two disciples walked the 30 stadia (~8 miles) leaving after dark, uphill, and arrived before everyone had bedded down for the night. Not impossible, but not likely. The error remains because Luke knew nothing about the geography except from Josephus. In fact, there are textual variants that double the distance to 60 stadia, probably because the only known barracks at the time it was written was that of the 5th Legion in Nicopolis. Now consider the quick little journey they made, but it is now 16-17 miles. Not gonna work. But it certainly helped the local economy when 4th century pilgrims started rolling in.

Others

It wasn't just Josephus, his angel Stephen in Acts chapter 6 gets his lines from the book of Joshua, which would be an easily available source if he also had Josephus. It is amazing that the council did not need to take the matter up with Herod and Pilate for someone quoting scripture, but just take him outside and stone him to death.

And what about that fish story that he shares with John? Why does John come up with the odd number of 153 fish? Because it comes from The Life of Pythagoras., which tells the story, and coincides with a common ratio made famous by Archimedes, which is 153/265, a simple way to demonstrate the square root of 3.

These things are evidence of what Luke had as reference when writing his Gospel along with Acts. He also had some version of Mark, possibly Deutero-Mark or even Marcion's Apostolion, and either something postulated as Q, and maybe Matthew (it can be argued that Q is not needed as well).

These things are at the heart of the synoptic problem; who wroite what, when, in what order, and with what sources? It isn't a purely secular argument, although the implications can be embarrassing.

It isn't a bad thing if Luke borrowed some history. One side issue though is if he wrote late, and borrowed not from Josephus, but from Hegisippus, who is probably a Eusebian invention based on the Greek name for Josephus and not the Latin. But that is a whole different issue.

Last edited by Casper; 02-21-2008 at 06:58 PM.
Casper is offline  
post #11 of 14 (permalink) Old 02-21-2008, 07:12 PM
Time Served
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: irving
Posts: 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casper
I'm combining Luke and Acts as two parts by the same author here for an example.

Acts 5:33 comes from Josephus' tale of Judas and of Theudas, Antiquities 20:5

The problem however, is that Theudas was beheaded by Cuspius Fadus. This happened in 44CE. And Antiquities is post 70CE. That is okay, because Luke is piecing together dim memories of the Quirinian Census of 7CE in Judea with a property census with the Oikian Census of 104CE in Egypt, a headcount which did require the city laborers to return to their homes in the countryside.

Another is Luke 2:46-48, the prodigy in the temple, lifted from Life of the Jews chapter 9.

He gathers some namedropping from 15:4 of Antiquities to come up with Lysanias, tetrarch of Abilene, in Syria, but unfortunately misinterprets Abilene as Adiabene, a jewish kingdom of the late first and early second century in Armenia. In his haste he shows his error by pinpointing the date as the 15th Year of Tiberius. He combined a monarch from 50 years earlier with a kingdom 50 years later than his 29CE setting

One unique part of Luke that really shows the Josephus influence is the story about the journey to Emmaus in chapter 24. This comes from Wars of the Jews chapter 7.

We know that Josephus made an error in saying the distance was threescore stadia from Jerusalem, and we see that Luke faithfully reproduced the error (as threescore furlongs). We know where this is from Vespasian, because it was known to the Romans as Colonia. Josephus and luke are the only two mentioning the place by the name Emmaus.

Of course, according to Luke the two disciples walked the 30 stadia (~8 miles) leaving after dark, uphill, and arrived before everyone had bedded down for the night. Not impossible, but not likely. The error remains because Luke knew nothing about the geography except from Josephus. In fact, there are textual variants that double the distance to 60 stadia, probably because the only known barracks at the time it was written was that of the 5th Legion in Nicopolis. Now consider the quick little journey they made, but it is now 16-17 miles. Not gonna work. But it certainly helped the local economy when 4th century pilgrims started rolling in.

Others

It wasn't just Josephus, his angel Stephen in Acts chapter 6 gets his lines from the book of Joshua, which would be an easily available source if he also had Josephus. It is amazing that the council did not need to take the matter up with Herod and Pilate for someone quoting scripture, but just take him outside and stone him to death.

And what about that fish story that he shares with John? Why does John come up with the odd number of 153 fish? Because it comes from The Life of Pythagoras., which tells the story, and coincides with a common ratio made famous by Archimedes, which is 153/265, a simple way to demonstrate the square root of 3.

These things are evidence of what Luke had as reference when writing his Gospel along with Acts. He also had some version of Mark, possibly Deutero-Mark or even Marcion's Apostolion, and either something postulated as Q, and maybe Matthew (it can be argued that Q is not needed as well).

These things are at the heart of the synoptic problem; who wroite what, when, in what order, and with what sources? It isn't a purely secular argument, although the implications can be embarrassing.

It isn't a bad thing if Luke borrowed some history. One side issue though is if he wrote late, and borrowed not from Josephus, but from Hegisippus, who is probably a Eusebian invention based on the Greek name for Josephus and not the Latin. But that is a whole different issue.
again, this is the first time i have heard anything of the sort.. i wouldnt want to speak out of ignorance so i will do some looking and get back with you.
svtaaron is offline  
post #12 of 14 (permalink) Old 02-21-2008, 07:44 PM
Musician for the deaf
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Euless, TX
Posts: 9,656
Don't take my word for it, I can look back and see some errors on my part but I'll leave them in. One thing I should probably change is to admit that borrowing "heavily" might be an overstatement. But what the hell.

The synoptic problem and all its arguments become circular very easily. For instance, if we have agreements between Josephus and Luke, which one of those was the original source for the other? And who is to say they didn't share another source we don't know about? In fact, one idea is that Tacitus figures into the mix as well.
Casper is offline  
post #13 of 14 (permalink) Old 02-21-2008, 08:04 PM
Time Served
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: irving
Posts: 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casper
Don't take my word for it, I can look back and see some errors on my part but I'll leave them in. One thing I should probably change is to admit that borrowing "heavily" might be an overstatement. But what the hell.

The synoptic problem and all its arguments become circular very easily. For instance, if we have agreements between Josephus and Luke, which one of those was the original source for the other? And who is to say they didn't share another source we don't know about? In fact, one idea is that Tacitus figures into the mix as well.
well the barrowing of luke from josephus would be minimul, perhaps he used some of jospehus writings for a historic account because josephus was a historian... maybe luke had never been to the city, and wasnt quite sure how long of a journey it was and used the other writings or witnesses available to him at the time as a referrence... but that doesnt take away the accuracy of the historical account of Jesus and the gospel in which he writes of.
svtaaron is offline  
post #14 of 14 (permalink) Old 02-21-2008, 08:15 PM
Musician for the deaf
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Euless, TX
Posts: 9,656
I can dispute any accuracy you may see but I don't think this is a good thread for it.

But I went and found carrier's analysis of the similarities for you:

http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...djosephus.html

I've also read Mason's rebuttal, and while I find it lacking it isn't necessarily full of holes. I recommend them both.
Casper is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Bookmarks

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the DFWstangs Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome