resurrection

[Berachiah Ben Yisrael]

Evidently the father of Mary and maternal grandfather of Jesus Christ. (Lu 3:23) Joseph’s being called the “son of Heli” is understood to mean that he was the son-in-law of Heli. While not listing her, Luke evidently traces the natural descent of Jesus’ mother Mary from David.—Lu 3:31

Not sure if you said you believed that Yahshua was a directly descended from David or not but if he was of the root, and offshoot of David then this geneology is worthless. For what purpose is there for showing the linage of either living parent when he had the seed of David directly? The seed that the malach placed in her by means other than sexual intercourse. This would still make scripture stand when it states that it was of or from the Ruach Ha Chodesh meaning that the malach had it and from it she got it but not by the way we do it as humans do it. So she still did not know a man and still was prego.

 

[starlite]

Not sure if you said you believed that Yahshua was a directly descended from David or not but if he was of the root, and offshoot of David then this geneology is worthless. For what purpose is there for showing the linage of either living parent when he had the seed of David directly? The seed that the malach placed in her by means other than sexual intercourse. This would still make scripture stand when it states that it was of or from the Ruach Ha Chodesh meaning that the malach had it and from it she got it but not by the way we do it as humans do it. So she still did not know a man and still was prego.

Oh my.......pondering :faint:

 

[Berachiah Ben Yisrael]

Oh my.......pondering :faint:

Cute. lol

 

[starlite]

Not sure if you said you believed that Yahshua was a directly descended from David or not but if he was of the root, and offshoot of David then this geneology is worthless. For what purpose is there for showing the linage of either living parent when he had the seed of David directly?

Not sure if this is what you were referring to:

Here are four primary lists of Christ’s line of descent, three of them beginning with Adam, and they appear in the Bible as follows: (1) Genesis and Ruth; (2) 1 Chronicles, chapters 1-3; (3) Matthew, chapter 1; and (4) Luke, chapter 3 (Luke actually runs back from Jesus to Adam). With one exception, they agree exactly from Adam to Solomon, the son of David. Then, parallel to Solomon, Luke lists Nathan, another son of David. To this point Luke traces the genealogy of Jesus from Heli, the father of Mary, the wife of Joseph, thereby proving Jesus’ natural right to the Messiahship as a son of David, for Jesus had no earthly father, being the foster son of Joseph, but the actual Son of God by a miracle.—Luke 1:34, 35.

There is a remarkable fact that should end any doubt about Jesus’ being both the natural heir of David, and the one having the legal right to David’s throne, since he was the firstborn son (actually foster-son) of a man descended from King Solomon. It is this: None of Jesus’ enemies among the Jews ever challenged his descent from David, either on the side of his mother or of his foster-father. Now we know that the Pharisees and Sadducees were as eager as a pack of wolves, seeking any possible way to discredit Jesus. But they could not deny the official birth registers, well known to the people and available for anyone to check. Neither did the pagan enemies attack Jesus’ genealogy until after the Jewish records were destroyed when the Romans invaded and destroyed Jerusalem. Then, of course, no one could check their lying claims with the public records.

Jesus, being the long-looked-for Messiah, fulfilled and closed the Bible genealogy. He gained the throne of David, to sit on it without successors. (Luke 1:31-33) He was used by God to establish a new priesthood, he now being in heaven as a “high priest according to the manner of Melchizedek forever,” not of the Levitical priesthood of the Jews. (Heb. 6:20; 7:11-14, 23, 24) The Biblical record of Jesus’ genealogy remains in the Bible as part of the foundation of our faith and as a testimony to the sureness of the word and promises of God, don't you agree?

 

[Berachiah Ben Yisrael]

Not sure if this is what you were referring to:

Your right. its not. I was just looking for a simple answer from you without all the pretties hanging all over it.

 

[S-word]

Quote....starlite..........This is how I understand the word "virgin"
Although the Hebrew word bethu·lah′ means “virgin,” another term (‛al·mah&#8242 appears at Isaiah 7:14: “Look! The maiden [ha·‛al·mah′] herself will actually become pregnant, and she is giving birth to a son, and she will certainly call his name Immanuel.” The word ‛al·mah′ means “maiden” and can apply to a nonvirgin or a virgin. It is applied to “the maiden” Rebekah before marriage when she was also called “a virgin” (bethu·lah&#8242. (Ge 24:16, 43) Under divine inspiration, Matthew employed the Greek word par·the′nos (virgin) when showing that Isaiah 7:14 found final fulfillment in connection with the virgin birth of Jesus, the Messiah. Both Matthew and Luke state clearly that Jesus’ mother Mary was then a virgin who became pregnant through the operation of God’s holy spirit.—Mt 1:18-25; Lu 1:26-35.


Hebrews 5: 7, In his life on earth Jesus made his prayers and requests with loud cries and tears to God who could save him from death etc, this is not a God who had been with the Father from all eternity who is believed by the deceivers, to be God the immortal one, who can, nor could ever die: Psalms 82, the Lord said to his chosen people the Israelites, “You are Gods” I said, “All of you are sons of the Most High,” And even though Jesus was ‘A’ son of God, not ‘The Son of God,’ nor ‘God’s Son,’ but ‘A’ son of God, he learnt through suffering to be obedient to his indwelling Father.

It was then and only then, that the Lord could manifest himself in his obedient earthly image, who would neither do nor say anything, other than that which he was commanded, and it was then that Jesus became the source to the Father and the salvation that our saviour offers, who raised Jesus from death as the first fruits, the first of many brothers, and is able to raise we also; and the Lord then made him high priest in the line of succession to Melchizedek, for Jesus did not take upon himself the honour of high priest, Instead, it was after he had become perfect in his total obedience to our indwelling Father, that the Lord made him high priest with these words that were heard from heaven as he rose from the baptismal waters, “You are my beloved in whom I am pleased, Today I have begotten you,” see the more ancient authorities of Luke 3: 22.

Acts 3: 13, The God of our ancestors has given divine glory to his servant Jesus, Acts 17: 31, For the Lord has fixed a day in which he will rule the whole world with Justice by means of a MAN he has CHOSEN. He has give proof of this to everyone by raising that MAN from death. How many references to The lord saying of his heir, ‘This is the one I have chosen,’ can you find, and there are quite a few which I will point out if you are unable, but I am yet to find anywhere in scripture, where the Lord says of his chosen heir, “This is the one whom I have sired.”

Wherever Isaiah refers to a virgin or virgins in the Old Testament, he uses the specific Hebrew term for virgin which is ‘Bethulah,’ or in the case of ‘Virgins, ‘Bethulum.’ Yes I know that it is said that the word ‘Almah,’ is used in the verse where Abraham’s servant sees the young woman coming to the well, who was ‘Rachel the Virgin,’ but the servant did not know at that time who she was nor her sexual status. After that first meeting, the Hebrew ‘Bethulah’ is used in any reference to Rachel before Isaac took her into his tent and consummated their union. I see that you have chosen to use the word ‘Maiden,’ which is perceived by the minds of many people to mean ‘virgin,’ nice try, but the more modern bibles rightfully translate the Hebrew ‘Almah,’ as ‘young woman, or as in Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Bible, (Concealment: unmarried female).

As said previously, Isaiah used the Hebrew word ‘Almah,’ in reference to the conception of the child Jesus in the womb of Mary, which word means (Concealment: unmarried female) and can in no way be translated to mean a ‘virgin,’ erroneously interpreted as 'virgin,' Yes! correctly translated as 'Virgin,' No!
In transcribing the words of the prophet Isaiah, that an “unmarried female would conceive and bear a child,” into Greek, which unlike the Hebrew language, does not have a specific term for ‘virgin,’ Matthew was forced to use the Greek word ‘Parthenos,’ which carries a basic meaning of ‘girl,’ and denotes ‘virgin’ only by implication. ‘Parthenos,’ was often used in reference to non-virgins who had never been married. Homer uses it, and Homer was the standard textbook for learning Greek all throughout antiquity, so any writter of Greek, including Matthew, who transcribed Isaiah’s words, (An unmarried woman would conceive etc) would have been well aware of this words versatile and indefinite meaning.

In order to support the false teaching of the disciples of the Anti-Christ who refused to acknowledge that Jesus came as a human being and have spread their deceptive lie all over the world, (andIt aint real hard to find, at least by those who are prepared to be true to their inner self). The word ‘virgin’ was introduced into God’s Holy Scriptures (Beware of the added yeast of the Pharisees) for the first time, when the bible was translated to Latin by the deceivers and the deceived. These are those people who believe and would have you believe, that the Son of Man existed before the body of Mankind in which the spirit of the heir to the throne of Godhead, gained all the wisdom, knowledge and insight needed by He who is to rule the whole world with justice, which wisdom, knowledge and insight was gained through the pain and sufferings, caused by the sins and mistakes that we, mankind, the body in which The Son and heir to the throne of Godhead developed.

By the second century, ‘Docetism,’ the false teaching that had been spread by those deceivers who refused to acknowledge that Jesus had come as a human being, and Docetism is the concept that Jesus had existed as a spirit, rather than a human being, had theoretically been stamped out. But there still persisted the belief that the Man Jesus had been too much of a god, or rather ‘The God,’ to have had the normal needs of mere human beings, such as eating, drinking and excretion etc, and in the second century A.D. Clement, the Bishop of Alexandria wrote this,
“It would be ridiculous to imagine that the redeemer, in order to exist, had the usual needs of man. He only took food and ate it in order that we should not teach about him in a Docetic fashion.” Satan must have had some trouble trying to tempt this Jesus who was the creation of the deceivers spoken of by John two centuries earlier, into turning stones into bread, for which He, the other Jesus taught by the Anti-Christ, who unlike we mere human beings, had no need for food or such.

Then in 325 A.D, Constantine, sick to the stomach by the constant abuse and insults that were being hurled at each other, by the diverse and different forms of so called Christianity that were evolving, He called the first-ever ‘World Council’ of churches, where the religion of today was firmly established by those deceivers who refused to acknowledge that Jesus came as a human being, the builders of the universal church, who had rejected the words of righteous Enoch which are the foundation of all scripture, and which now has turned out to be the most important of all.

If no human being, born of human male and female parents has ever been resurrected, then your faith in the resurrection is in vain, for you will not find one male person on this earth who has been born without the aid of male human sperm and who was with God from all eternity and who is God. So let’s eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we human beings enter into total oblivion from which there is no return.

 

[S-word]

Yes, I do believe that Jesus Christ was a human here on earth, and that since his resurrection he is ruling as a Heavenly King and will soon reappear to rule over a cleansed earth. And yes, there are those righteous ones who experience the first resurrection to join Jesus Christ in his heavenly kingdom.

I do believe that Jesus Christ was a human here on earth, No you don't. A child who is born of a mortal woman and sired by a being who is so far advanced that he created the entire Cosmos and the subserviant being mankind, then he is not a human being. If this thing you speak of, is the only thing that God has ever resurrected to eternal life, then let's eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we mere human will die,

 

[S-word]

I can not find any connection between these two individuals:

(E′li) [Ascended; Gone Up].

In the case of Israel’s high priest Eli, his sons, Hophni and Phinehas, served as officiating priests but “were guilty of injustice towards men, and of impiety towards God, and abstained from no sort of wickedness,” says historian Josephus. These “good-for-nothing men” did not acknowledge the true God, engaged in sacrilegious conduct, and were guilty of gross immorality. (1 Samuel 1:3; 2:12-17, 22-25) As their father and Israel’s high priest, Eli had the duty to discipline them, but he merely reproved them mildly. Eli ‘kept honoring his sons more than God.’ (1 Samuel 2:29) Retribution came upon the house of Eli. Both sons died the same day as their father, and their priestly line was eventually cut off completely. Thus the judgment of God on Eli’s house was fulfilled, and his descendants were ousted from the high-priestly office for all time.—1Sa 3:13, 14; 4:11, 17, 18.

(He′li) [from Heb., meaning “High (Exalted)”].

Evidently the father of Mary and maternal grandfather of Jesus Christ. (Lu 3:23) Joseph’s being called the “son of Heli” is understood to mean that he was the son-in-law of Heli. While not listing her, Luke evidently traces the natural descent of Jesus’ mother Mary from David.—Lu 3:31

The derivation of the Greek 'Heli' from the Hebrew 'Eli' is given in Strong's footnotes to the Bible. It transpires that both 'Heli' and 'Eli' means 'asension.' As I said previously starlite, you need to do more research.

 

[starlite]

Your right. its not. I was just looking for a simple answer from you without all the pretties hanging all over it.

It was necessary to establish Jesus' legal right to the throne and to have a written record for researchers like us

 

[starlite]

The derivation of the Greek 'Heli' from the Hebrew 'Eli' is given in Strong's footnotes to the Bible. It transpires that both 'Heli' and 'Eli' means 'asension.' As I said previously starlite, you need to do more research.

but that doesn't mean they are the same person as you implied

 

[starlite]

S-word....

I choose to disagree with post 286

 

[S-word]

S-word....

I choose to disagree with post 286

You were given a free will and you may choose to agree or disagree with whatever you wish, this does not mean that you have made the right choice, but tell me, if you still believe that Jesus was born without male semen having been introduced into the uterus of Mary, then why did you express your approval with your “Amen,” to this, a quote from Berachiah Ben Yisrael? I believe that Yahshua was a flesh and blood man like the rest of us that from birth was no more special than the rest of us with the exception that he was chosen to be the one prophesized to, after purification and possession of that malach that came down as a dove, fulfill said prophecies of the Mashiach.

 

[Sententia]

how about we start by you explaining why it wasn't necessary.

Why not explain how its possible? How did it happen? Was it magic?

Seriously... how many people in the world you live in now are ressurected? Is this a one time event that occured 2000 years ago and has absolutely no proof or documentation or any science of any kind involved and we are just supposed to believe in this?

Most peeps were born and raised into their religion but they cant see anything else. Others like my mom hopped around. Finally she found the faith she could accept. Does she have proof? No? Do you? Absolutely not. No one does.

Its just what feels right to you. Its what you think you know. Its what you claim to know. Its powerful. Consuming. Makes you feel good.

Im not against religion. Espcially if it makes you happy. But telling me some dude rose 3 days after death like so many other 'gods' did before him is factual? Seriously?

Now to demand someone explain to you why this unprovable fantasy story was neccesary unless someone else can prove otherwise? Why? What is the pont of this?

Prove to me why it isnt neccesary for a leprechaun to put his gold at the end of every rainbow. Prove to me why genies always have to grant three wishes. If you cant prove why they cant then they were obviously neccesary and true. Right? Genies and gods and devils all exist and eternity of happiness and peace await us on death....

I may be offensive tonight but I am not trying to be. Just trying to express some of the emotion I feel when I read this. Why do people believe in this? I know why I believed and I know why I stopped but those that still... Why? Is it the promise of reward? Is it indoctrination? I mean I can ask the same question of the people who sacrificed themselves to attack america. Why?

 

[S-word]

but that doesn't mean they are the same person as you implied

I didn't. I said that "Heli,' is the Greek adaptation of the Hebrew, 'Eli' the high priest, see the Greek translation of 1 Samuel 1: 3, and it is Heli the high priest. please do not insult my intelligence by saying that you thought that I was implying that Heli who lived in the days of Jesus was the same man 'Eli the high priest,' who lived in the days when Samuel was born.

 

[Ciarin]

The reason why the Jesus myth included a resurrection of his physical body before ascending in to heaven is this. The myth is borrowed from previous myths from other faiths and cults. For example Osiris, a god who was killed and his body ressurected.

 

[emiliano]

Well if we are to find why was the resurrection necessary, we will be searching to find the reasons for an all knowing, all powerful God to do so, the story is not finished yet, all we know is that if God did not confirmed Jesus divinity with powerful signs and wonders humanity would have succumbed to unbelieve long time ago. The Apostles went on with the ministry, preaching Jesus resurrected, and it grew to the billions in numbers, there was a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a doctor of the Law honored among all the people that said: “Men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what you intend to do regarding these men” if this counsel or this work is of men, it will come to nothing. “But if it is of God, you cannot overthrow it, lest perhaps you be found even to fight against God” what is important is to be clear on what Jesus was and we find in gospel of John that Jesus is the tabernacle where the almighty made contact with His precious creature, humanity. “And the Word became flesh, and tabernacled among us. And we beheld His glory”

 

[starlite]

You were given a free will and you may choose to agree or disagree with whatever you wish, this does not mean that you have made the right choice, but tell me, if you still believe that Jesus was born without male semen having been introduced into the uterus of Mary, then why did you express your approval with your “Amen,” to this, a quote from Berachiah Ben Yisrael? I believe that Yahshua was a flesh and blood man like the rest of us that from birth was no more special than the rest of us with the exception that he was chosen to be the one prophesized to, after purification and possession of that malach that came down as a dove, fulfill said prophecies of the Mashiach.

Because he (Jesus) became flesh and blood when he was born....That's why he had to be resurrected as a spirit....remember you had posted that flesh and blood cannot enter the heavenly realm.

 

[Berachiah Ben Yisrael]

It was necessary to establish Jesus' legal right to the throne and to have a written record for researchers like us

In other words it was for disbelieving heathens?

I don't think we needs it. We know the truth without the paper trail.

 

[Berachiah Ben Yisrael]

Because he (Jesus) became flesh and blood when he was born....That's why he had to be resurrected as a spirit....remember you had posted that flesh and blood cannot enter the heavenly realm.

As all men become flesh and blood from a seed and a egg. Yahshua was just like any man. He was no different. He was not special or over any man in any sense other that he was the one chosen to perform the prophecy of the Mashiach. He committed no miraculous acts until after his purification and even then it wasn’t the flesh and blood man but rather the Malach that came down as a dove that possessed him which did these works. There are some that say that it is possible that Yahshua may have even committed some act of sin prior to his purification. All say that he was a man and it is further stated “for all men have sinned” so many believe that he must have or scripture breaks. But after purification he was all righteous and never sinned. He was perfect in the sight of Yah.

 

[Katzpur]

Because he (Jesus) became flesh and blood when he was born....That's why he had to be resurrected as a spirit....remember you had posted that flesh and blood cannot enter the heavenly realm.

But He wasn't just a spirit. He specifically said He wasn't. Besides, His spirit could not be resurrected, because it had never died. To resurrect is to bring back to life. How can something that can't die in the first place be brought back to life?