To Planten or any other Muslim

[inJESUS]

All the Gospels that say she was a virgin, as well as the Quran. It is what it is, now we have to explain why it needed to be that way.

yes i know the belief is already there, but what would have changed if Jesus was born like every other human? the only human to be created without sexual union is Adam and Eve, but that’s because the Bible considers them as the first creation, before sexual cycle started. After them, all humans were created out of sexual union…there is no other reason for Adam and Eve’s non-sexual creation.

What would have changed if Jesus were born like Moses or Daniel or any other human?

 

[zerinus]

Nothing in the lineages of Matthew or Luke say anything about Mary.

Luke 1:32 does. This is what it says:

He [Jesus] shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

This implies that Mary was of the seed of David; and that is how it has been understood by Christians throughout history.

All that is said about her lineage is that she is cousin to a Levite.

That does not describe her lineage. The Greek word used simply means kinsman, or related. It does not mean that they came from the same blood line.

Remember there is also a tradition about Arimathea who came along after the first Joseph. It’s very likely if he adopted Jesus as his son that Arimathea was counted as the father of Jesus too, thus the two Joseph lineages.

Not sure what you are referring to here. The Bible only mentions the lineage of Joseph to be from David.

And then also, Jesus was not from either by a sexual union anyway.

That is the whole point! If Jesus had been the product of the sexual union of Joseph and Mary, He would still have been counted “of the seed of David,” therefore that prophecy would still have been fulfilled. Whether Mary was of the lineage of David or not is irrelevant here, because lineage is counted form the line of the father, not of the Mother. Therefore your argument that Jesus had to be born without a natural father in order to fulfill that prophecy breaks down, regardless of whose lineage Mary was.

zerinus

 

[FaithofAbraham]

yes i know the belief is already there, but what would have changed if Jesus was born like every other human? the only human to be created without sexual union is Adam and Eve, but that’s because the Bible considers them as the first creation, before sexual cycle started. After them, all humans were created out of sexual union…there is no other reason for Adam and Eve’s non-sexual creation.

What would have changed if Jesus were born like Moses or Daniel or any other human?

Because of David’s faith, God promised him an everlasting kingdom. God suggested Solomon receive that promise too but Solomon voided it with tolerance of other gods and so God split Solomon’s kingdom into Judah and Israel, then finally knocked it down for good with Babylon.

So David only has the promise of Messiah. But how does God keep His promise to David of an everlasting kingdom if many generations have passed since it was split and toppled?

Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

First born from the dead, or the first person who ever died that was born again. It doesn’t refer to his resurrection since Lazarus and other were already resurrected before that. So what did it mean? And how could it relate to keeping the promise to David of an everlasting and unbroken kingdom for his own son? Which son died for David’s sins instead of David, if not Solomon who no longer had the promise of Messiah?

 

[FaithofAbraham]

Luke 1:32 does. This is what it says:

He [Jesus] shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

This implies that Mary was of the seed of David; and that is how it has been understood by Christians throughout history.

It implies Jesus was of the seed of David. Mary could be of the seed of an Egyptian converted to Judaism for all we know.

That does not describe her lineage. The Greek word used simply means kinsman, or related. It does not mean that they came from the same blood line.

It’s more evidence that she was Levite than of Judah though, since it never specifically says where she is from.

Not sure what you are referring to here. The Bible only mentions the lineage of Joseph to be from David.

There are two lineages, it only makes sense that it is for the two Josephs who are said to have acted as his father, with Arimathea placing him in his own tomb.

Therefore your argument that Jesus had to be born without a natural father in order to fulfill that prophecy breaks down, regardless of whose lineage Mary was.

zerinus

Well he had to be because that’s what it says, if you believe the Bible. The question is why.

 

[zerinus]

Well he had to be because that’s what it says, if you believe the Bible. The question is why.

That is right. That is the question that inJESUS is asking. Do you have an answer for her—from an Islamic perspective at least? If you don’t, why don’t you just say so, and let her explain to you what her answer is?

zerinus

 

[FaithofAbraham]

That is right. That is the question that inJESUS is asking. Do you have an answer for her—from an Islamic perspective at least? If you don’t, why don’t you just say so, and let her explain to you what her answer is?

zerinus

I gave the answer. The Quran says Jesus was created from dust like Adam was. Only the dust was David’s own child who died for his sin with Bathsheba, older brother and greater than Solomon. Made from the seed of David according to the flesh. Then he went on to die for sins of the whole world, and received David’s kingdom straight from David to be an unbroken and everlasting one from the promise of God to David.

And a little child shall lead them.

 

[zerinus]

I gave the answer. The Quran says Jesus was created from dust like Adam was. Only the dust was David’s own child who died for his sin with Bathsheba, older brother and greater than Solomon. Made from the seed of David according to the flesh. Then he went on to die for sins of the whole world, and received David’s kingdom straight from David to be an unbroken and everlasting one from the promise of God to David.

And a little child shall lead them.

And how does that explain why Jesus had to be born without a natural Father?

Are we not all of the dust, after all? Did Jesus have to be born without a natural father in order to be of the dust?

zerinus

 

[FaithofAbraham]

And how does that explain why Jesus had to be born without a natural Father?

Are we not all of the dust, after all? Did Jesus have to be born without a natural father in order to be of the dust?

zerinus

It explains that you are asking the wrong question. The question is, who does the NT say his natural father was?

 

[inJESUS]

FaithofAbraham,

how is all this related to why Jesus was born with no biological father?

 

[inJESUS]

It explains that you are asking the wrong question. The question is, who does the NT say his natural father was?

are you saying His natural father is David??

 

[FaithofAbraham]

FaithofAbraham,

how is all this related to why Jesus was born with no biological father?

But he was, he is David’s son who died for David’s sin with Bathsheba as I said. The answer to the big mystery is all right there in the Bible. You just need the Quran to unlock it. That’s why Satan likes to keep Christians and Muslims at odds, so they remain blind to the truths each have received.

 

[zerinus]

It explains that you are asking the wrong question. The question is, who does the NT say his natural father was?

You don’t get to the right answer by changing the question. The question was the one that was asked. Do you have an answer for it or don’t you?

zerinus

 

[FaithofAbraham]

are you saying His natural father is David??

That’s exactly what I’m saying.

 

[zerinus]

That’s exactly what I’m saying.

In a sense that is correct. Jesus’ natural flesh was of the lineage of David, therefore in the Hebrew way of saying things, David was His “father”. But that does not answer the question of why He had to be born without a natural father though. Do you have an answer to that question or don’t you?

But now that you have mentioned the fact of His being the son of David, there is a scripture that puts a different slant on that that you may not be aware of. Here it is:

Matthew 22:

41 While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them,

42 Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The Son of David.

43 He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying,

44 The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool?

45 If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?

46 And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.

So, we still come back to the original question: why was it necessary for Jesus to be born without a natural father?

zerinus

 

[FaithofAbraham]

45 If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?

46 And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.

So, we still come back to the original question: why was it necessary for Jesus to be born with out a natural father?

zerinus

The original question is still the wrong question, since Jesus has a natural father in David. This must be in order for God to keep the promise of an everlasting and unbroken kingdom from David passed to his own son who came from his bowels.

This simply says that Jesus is Messiah and rules even over his father David.

 

[inJESUS]

The original question is still the wrong question, since Jesus has a natural father in David.

He could still have a natural father in David by being born like other humans, or can’t He?

when Jesus says : You are of your father the devil, does it mean they were not born of sexual union because the devil is no human?

 

[zerinus]

This simply says that Jesus is Messiah and rules even over David.

Actually, it doesn’t. It essentially states that Jesus is NOT David’s son, in the ultimate sense of the term. That is what the language implies.

Here is another scripture that comes to mind, that might be of interest to you:

Matthew 16:

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Cæsarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.

zerinus

P.S. We still haven’t answered the question of why He had to be born without a natural father. He didn’t need to do that in order to be the “son of David,” in the sense that the Hebrews understood it.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

He could still have a natural father in David by being born like other humans, or can’t He?

 

[FaithofAbraham]

Actually, it doesn’t. It essentially states that Jesus is NOT David’s son, in the ultimate sense of the term. That is what the language implies.

Here is another scripture that comes to mind, that might be of interest to you:

That logic would need to apply to not only being his immediate son, but his grandson in all future generations, if it applied at all. So it can’t because Jesus is made from David’s seed, and simply says Jesus rules even over David.

Matthew 16:

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.

Jews did not consider Son of God to mean from God’s seed, but rather to be of the most righteous.

8:14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

Romans 8:15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

 

[inJESUS]

Yes Jesus was made from the seed of David according to the flesh, implying from a sexual union,

but not with Mary since she was a virgin.

so with whom?

The context of the devil was that of people being spiritually either God’s or the devil’s.

if we assume that being from the seed of David is meant sexually, who said that being from the seed of David necessitates a virgin birth? i just cat follow you…if it is sexual, they why the virgin birth?