MARK L. BAKKE'S
Night Owl Mk. II




Return to "Religion" essay


Back to Philosophy page




Please feel free to E-mail me with your own comments on this issue or on anything else included in my Philosophy of Life section. Debate is good!



Please report any problems with this page to the Webmaster!



Boulder Games
Bowling
Entrance Page
Exit/Links Page
Night Owl Mk. II
Special Features
Personal Pages
Philosophy of Life
Site Map
Wargaming
What's New on this Site?
REPLY #28 TO
"RELIGION"



Boldfaced statements are parts of the original essay (or a subsequent reply) to which the respondent has directed his comments.

Italicized/emphasized comments
prefaced by (R) are those of the respondent and are presented unedited.

My replies appear under the respondent's comments in blue text and are prefaced by my initials (MB).


(R) I found your page on creation vs. evolution by while looking for wargames info.
(MB) However you found it, I'm glad to hear from you! Since your reply more properly deals with the topic of religion, I've posted my answer under that topic. Now, let's see what we have to discuss....


(R) The question you responded to saying that there are hundreds of errors, or contradictions in the Bible I found interesting, since all the ones you list have been laid to rest many years ago.
(MB) If they had, indeed, been "laid to rest" there would be no further mention of them. However, continued scholarship has not only continually upheld the famous contradictions and errors I mentioned, but has uncovered many more, as well.


(R) Just to respond to your first one, the mutually exclusive genealogies of Jesus in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke? A SIMPLE reading of the text would show anyone that the account in Matthew is the genealogy of Joseph and the account in Luke is the line of Mary. No contradiction present!
(MB) Any reading of the text of Luke will not find Mary mentioned anywhere in the genealogy. Both Matthew's and Luke's genealogies explicitly end with Joseph. Luke's genealogy (Luke 3:23-28) clearly and unambiguously states that Joseph was the son of Heli while Matthew's (Matthew 1:1-16) says that "Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary". So, according to the Gospels, Joseph has two different fathers and Mary's lineage is not given.
    In any case, there is no reason to give Mary's lineage. Mary was a Levite and the Messiah was supposed to have been of the House of David. Jewish genealogies of the time were always traced through the paternal line and both of these genealogies purported to verify Jesus' claim to being the Messiah by showing him to be a direct descendant of the Davidic line in accordance with prophecy. If Luke's genealogy is claimed to be that of Mary, this verification is defeated and Jesus cannot be the true Messiah.
    In addition, the genealogies are also in conflict in reference to Zerubbabel. Matthew has him as a descendant of Solomon while Luke has him as a descendant of Nathan. Since Solomon and Nathan were both sons of David and full blood brothers, it is impossible for both to be paternal ancestors of Zerubbabel.
    And, there is yet one additional problem. Matthew includes Jechonias in his genealogy. However, in the Book of Jeremiah, it is recorded (JER 22:30) that God cursed Jechonias, "Thus saith the Lord, Write ye this man childless, a man [that] shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah".



(R) If you have other questions, or would like to discuss this one further, I'll be more than happy to reply.
(MB) I'd be very happy to debate any and all questions with you. Perhaps, we might each learn something. What better outcome from a discussion could there be?


(R) I do question your "open mindedness" since you list of "contradictions" is so old.
(MB) The list is indeed, "old", but is only so because they are the most obvious and most well-known problems. There are, as I stated before, hundreds of others with more being uncovered all the time. Occasionally, a problem is successfully resolved by further scholarship, but the ones I've mentioned so far are the ones that are most in need of competent answers.


(R) I used to believe very much the way you seem to be coming across, so I've asked many of your questions, with great furver, but found answers once I decided to start looking for them.
(MB) I, too, have looked for answers and have found them. That's why I have my beliefs, as well. Unfortunately, it would seem as though we have found differing answers. Hopefully, a continued discussion can sort some of them out.


(R) I hope to hear from you.
(MB) I'm here! Thanks for your reply.



Created with Allaire HomeSite 4.0 .......... Last Update: 04 Jun 98
E-mail: mlbakke1@earthlink.net


Earthlink Network Home Page


Go to next reply

Return to "Religion" essay

Back to Philosophy page