From: Paul Duncan To: Steven Monroe Cc: Bcc: Subject: Re: your mail Reply-To: In-Reply-To: X-Info: http://www.pablotron.org/ * Steven Monroe (xxxx@hotmail.com) wrote: > Paul, > > I read your website and wanted to let you know that Jesus had a > "mother" and a "father." These are two people, therefore, Jesus had > two lineages. As far as both lineages stating "Joseph," if you look > closer, you won't find a female's name in either lineages. If you > don't believe the Bible, I guarantee you, you will after it's too > late. Hi Steven, While I am not a historical expert, as far as I'm aware there is no precedent for Jewish lineages being traced through the maternal, or mother's, side. Even if there were, both the passage in Luke and the passage in Matthew are quite explicit about tracing the bloodline of Jesus through Joseph, not Mary. I'm not sure why you mention that both lineages omit female names. Barring the fact that this claim only reinforces my argument about paternal lineages, it is also partially incorrect. There are in fact several female names in the excerpt from Matthew (specifically: Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Beth-Sheba), but only in conjuction with their husbands. The author of Matthew is still tracing the paternal lineage of Jesus from Abraham to Joseph. I have seen several other methods used by Christian apologists to explain away the contradiction between these two passages, and all of them are speculative, omissive, or disingenuous. For example, biblical inerrants often claim that the author of Matthew simply skips generations in his lineage. This argument, of course, blatantly ignores Matthew 1:17, which I've taken the liberty of quoting below: "Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Christ." As you can see, the author is very specific about the number of generations between Abraham and Joseph. Suffice it to say that the other attempts I've seen at reconciling this discrepancy are equally fallacious and not worth elaborating on. I'm confused about your assertion that I will believe "the Bible" after it's too late. Which bible are you referring to? Would that be the 66 books of the Protestant bible, the 73 books of Catholic bible, or some other variation? The Syrian Orthodox Church had the same disdain for the book of Revelation that the Greek Orthodox Church and Martin Luther did. Does that mean Revelation is less important, not divinely- inspired, or that it doesn't count at all? For the sake of conversation, I'm going assume you're talking about the Protestant bible. Of course, that doesn't get us anywhere at all; there thousands of Protestant Christian denominations in the United States, many of which view the other those belonging to other denominations as not only mistaken, but condemned as well. Case in point: "You say you're supposed to be nice to the Episcopalians and the Presbyterians and the Methodists and this, that, and the other thing. Nonsense. I don't have to be nice to the spirit of the Antichrist. I can love the people who hold false opinions but I don't have to be nice to them." -- Pat Robertson, The 700 Club, January 14, 1991 Then of course there's the inter-denomination squabbling about issues such as homosexuality. The Southern Baptists recently split (again) with Baptists over the issue of homosexuality, while the Episcopal Church's Diocese of New Hamshire elected a gay man as its bishop. And let's not forget about issues like speaking in tongues (that's "spirit-filled" in the Christian vernacular), the concept of the trinity (an idea not explicitly found anywhere in the New Testament), and countless other issues dividing and sub-dividing the millions of Protestant Christians in this country who all miraculously claim to be reading the same divinely-inspired "Bible". At this point, it should be apparent which one of us has in fact "looked closer". I don't think you or anyone else at your level of intelligence is capable of making any guarantee to me about the accuracy, content, or message of the "Bible". I have very little patience for religious zealots, particularly stupid ones. Until you can do something more constructive than spout inane Christian rhetoric, I kindly invite you to fuck off. > Steven -- Paul Duncan OpenPGP Key ID: 0x82C29562 http://www.pablotron.org/ http://www.paulduncan.org/