more false teaching

[Wiskey Reb]

From what I'm reading, there seems to be some doubt as to whether or not Jesus is the rightful heir to the throne of David. Hope that I'm wrong, though. I may just be reading into something that's not there. My apologies if I am.

I am certainly not making any such case. Only emphasizing what is actually written. This topic is about Jesus' Jewishness, not his messiahship. I anticipated this coming up. The fact is, I've been replying to the comment above that Biblical Judaism is strictly patriarchal, which, if true, would eliminate a virgin born Jesus from being messiah for multiple reasons, only one of which I'm making a case for here. But in making certain of biblical accuracy in the thread, I have to point out that Mary's immediate family are not mentioned except possibly in Luke 3. And even then, the text does not state that it is her geneology. But really, that is all on the edge of being off topic for whether, as certain arguments assert, that pre-first century Judaism was strictly patriarchal, and that on the basis of Jesus birth, he is not a Jew because paternity, not maternity establishes Jewishness.

[KingsX]

You've been around, haven't you, brother? Appreciate your weighty perspective. If I may butt in here, may I ask you to define anti-semitic? Thanks

I will also put my two cents into this subject.

The word, Semite, is not a Bible term.

It originates from the word, Shem, one of the sons of Noah from whom are descended not just Israelites...
but also Ishmaelites, Edomites, Moabites, etc [Israel's enemies who had long since perverted their original
Shem bloodline.] Take Esau [Edom] for example. The Bible tells us that after Esau forsook his inheritance
he married forbidden women [race-mixed].. while his brother Jacob [Israel] was careful to marry within the
Shem blood line.

[KingsX]

From what I'm reading, there seems to be some doubt as to whether or not Jesus is the rightful heir to the throne of David. Hope that I'm wrong, though. I may just be reading into something that's not there. My apologies if I am.

I am certainly not making any such case. Only emphasizing what is actually written. This topic is about Jesus' Jewishness, not his messiahship. I anticipated this coming up. The fact is, I've been replying to the comment above that Biblical Judaism is strictly patriarchal, which, if true, would eliminate a virgin born Jesus from being messiah for multiple reasons, only one of which I'm making a case for here. But in making certain of biblical accuracy in the thread, I have to point out that Mary's immediate family are not mentioned except possibly in Luke 3. And even then, the text does not state that it is her geneology. But really, that is all on the edge of being off topic for whether, as certain arguments assert, that pre-first century Judaism was strictly patriarchal, and that on the basis of Jesus birth, he is not a Jew because paternity, not maternity establishes Jewishness.

Jesus Christ is the God of Israel incarnate into the chosen race of Israel via the Virgin Mary
This is a fact of genetics, period. It has nothing whatsoever to do with current Jew matriarchy
which is contrary to Biblical patriarchy.

In Jesus' day, the Jews' "traditions of the elders" [man-made extrabiblical rules] were likewise
condemned by Jesus.

[Nicho1]

Both sides of Jesus's genealogy are given. Matthew 1 gives the line of Jesus through Joseph. Luke 3 gives the line of Jesus through Mary. The text does say it is her genealogy since Joseph came through the line of David through Solomon and Mary came through the line of David through Nathan. Jesus's bloodline was through Nathan which bypassed the curse of Jeconiah. Jeconiah is in Joseph's line but since Joseph is not Jesus's father, the blood curse is not passed on.

As far as an actual Scripture that indicates Heli (Mary's father) had no sons, Luke 3 is the place to look. On the same hand, is there a Scripture that says Heli DID have sons? No, there is none.

Jesus IS the Messiah, the Jewish-born, virgin-born Messiah Who will come again and rule on the throne of His Father, David. God promised that and God never breaks His promises. There are many other "proofs" of His Messiahship within Scripture. Struggling over His genealogy may cause some to stumble and the scribes and Pharisees seemed to have difficulty recognizing His Messiahship, too. Perhaps we should all ask ourselves the same question that Jesus asked His disciiples, "Who do you say that I am."

[Sherree]

I know exactly who Jesus is. He is the son of David, a Jew, rightful heir to David's throne, and Savior of all mankind who put their faith and trust in him, the Messiah, born of a virgin. The Word of God makes this plain throughout Scripture.

Nicho1, you explained it very well.

I'll bow out now that I have the answer to what I wanted to know. Carry on.

[dmatic]

It all starts with me and my own faith, trying to find answers for the questions from my Bible, life and world that I couldn't answer intrinsically.... Discussion and debate sharpens a person if they allow it. But it can also be ruinous.

Thanks, Wiskey. By the way, if you can read and comprehend the Wiki article in a half hour, I am in awe! Interesting. I've asked you before to define the term "Jew" and was still unsure specifically, what is meant, whether "racial"/ethnicity or religious.

Anyway, it appears there is still a little, if not much, confusion about the definition of anti-Semitism, but the article did seem to try to clear it up, differentiating meaning by using the term anti-Judaism to define anti-Jewishness as a religion (not racial), and using the term antisemite to define racial hatred.

I think either kingsX or nicho1 told us it refers to Shem's bloodline? As opposed, presumably, to Ham's or Japeths? which of course, "begs the question", weren't they all three brothers with the same father?...Noah I'm simply trying to figure a way out of the "hatred".

From the Wiki article:
"In 1882, the early Zionist pioneer Judah Leib Pinsker wrote that antisemitism was a psychological response rooted in fear and was an inherited predisposition. He named the condition Judeophobia.^[51]

Judeophobia is a variety of demonopathy with the distinction that it is not peculiar to particular races but is common to the whole of mankind.'...'Judeophobia is a psychic aberration. As a psychic aberration it is hereditary, and as a disease transmitted for two thousand years it is incurable.'... 'In this way have Judaism and Anti-Semitism passed for centuries through history as inseparable companions.'......'Having analyzed Judeophobia as an hereditary form of demonopathy, peculiar to the human race, and having represented Anti-Semitism as proceeding from an inherited aberration of the human mind, we must draw the important conclusion that we must give' up contending against these hostile impulses as we must against every other inherited predisposition. (translation from German)<sup>"
Anyway, inherited predisposition? that we must give up contending with? of course, I completely disagree.

S0, I can't seem to make this work now that I've quoted from there, so will leave and try again, later, Lord willing.</sup>

[dmatic]

OK, since we all have the same father in Noah, genetically, our "differences" must come from our "mothers"?

It appears to me that we are all "related" of course, to each other. "Baseless hatred", Wiskey, as you have often said, is baseless, in my opinion.

We are commanded, by our Messiah, our elder brother, to love our enemies and not hate them. When, in the name of Christ, are we going to get that?

[CaryC]

Food for thought:

1)There is no way to prove that something doesn't exist, if it doesn't exist. Meaning you can't prove a negative. I can't prove I don't have any brothers, I just don't have any brothers.

2) Who is a Jew?

Answer By:

As you may know from watching the news, the issue of who is a Jew is a hotly debated one nowadays. There is no simple answer.Traditionally, the definition is a double one. Your status as a Jew depended on the status of your mother: if she was Jewish you were Jewish and so on. But your tribal affiliation (Priest, Levi, Benjaminite, Judean,...) was determined by the father. Why matters evolved this way is entirely unclear. These laws as such are spelled out fully only in the time of the Mishnah (around 230 CE). It is not necessarily the case that these laws were in operation in just this way back in Biblical times, let alone the time of Abraham. The question is moot in any case since both Abraham and Sarah were "Jewish."In 1983, the Reform Jewish Movement decided that it would accept as Jewish anybody who has one Jewish parent (i.e. mother or father) and who was raised Jewishly. This policy of "patrilineality," as it is called, is one of the points of disagreement between traditional and Reform Judaism since some people can now be considered Jewish by one movement but not the other. If the person in question is a woman, then the disputed status would presumably be carried forward into the next generation, etc.As to your case, because your mother is Jewish, you would be considered Jewish according to halacha (Jewish law), and so by all Jews (unless you openly declared otherwise).

Rabbi Peter J. Haas

https://reformjudaism.org/ask-rabbi-topic/who-jew

ursday July 8th, 2010 About 2 Minutes to Read

Home / Ask a Bible Teacher / Did Mary Have Any Brothers?

Q

In one of your articles you state that Mary had no brothers. I don’t believe I have read this in the Bible and I wondered where you got the information.

A

You can only find this in the Bible through deductive reasoning. I believe this discovery was attributed to Dr. C. I. Scofield, editor of the Scofield Study Bible. It was in support of his position that because of a blood curse on the Davidic royal line (Jer. 22:30), the Lord’s claim to the Throne of David could only have come through Mary, a descendant of David’s, and then only if she had no brothers.
According to Numbers 36:8 this would give her the right of inheritance as long as she married within the tribe of Judah. (Joseph was of both the tribe of Judah and the cursed royal line.) Conceiving the Lord without the participation of her betrothed husband sidestepped the blood curse because her son would have none of Joseph’s blood. When Mary and Joseph were wed, Jesus became Joseph’s son and heir, the only man in the last 2600 years to have a legal right to the Throne of David.
Further evidence that Mary had no brothers is that after the crucifixion she became the responsibility of the apostle John, not a brother as would have been Jewish custom had she had any. Knowing she had nowhere to go, the Lord saw to this from the cross (John 19:26-27). Also, the Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible indicates that it was Jewish custom for a son-in-law to be adopted when the father of the bride had no son, as was the case with Mary’s father. Some say this is why Joseph is called a son of Heli (Mary’s father) in Luke’s genealogy of the Lord (Luke 3:23).

https://gracethrufaith.com/ask-a-bib...-any-brothers/

Believe what you will.

[KingsX]

I think either kingsX or nicho1 told us it refers to Shem's bloodline? As opposed, presumably, to Ham's or Japeths? which of course, "begs the question", weren't they all three brothers with the same father?...Noah I'm simply trying to figure a way out of the "hatred".

Yes, they were all brothers with the same parents... as were Esau and Jacob who were fraternal twin brothers.
But it was God's providence that one of Noah's sons, Shem... and one of Isaac's sons, Jacob [Israel] would be
patriarchs of God's chosen people. While the descendants of Noah's other sons and Jacob's brother, Esau [Edom]
were destined to become totally different types of people, even enemies of God's chosen people, Israel.

I previously posted here about Esau/Edom who not only despised and sold his inheritance for lunch, he married
forbidden foreign women miscegenating his bloodline which forever separated Esau/Edom from God.

As Paul said in Romans 9:11: " Yet before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad, in order that
God’s plan of election might stand "... and Romans 9:13 " So it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated. "

Have you ever wondered why Paul would bring up God's Old Testament election of Jacob [Israel] over Esau [Edom] ??
Because Edomites [who had converted to being "Jews" over a century before] were in control of the palace and the temple
in Jerusalem at the time of Christ. This also explains Revelation 3:7-9... fake "Jews" = Edomites.

See my previous post

http://www.thetreeofliberty.com/vb/s...48#post2725548


.

[Wiskey Reb]

[QUOTE]

Thanks, Wiskey. By the way, if you can read and comprehend the Wiki article in a half hour, I am in awe! Interesting. I've asked you before to define the term "Jew" and was still unsure specifically, what is meant, whether "racial"/ethnicity or religious.

Actually, I've responded pretty comprehensively to that on a couple of occassions. But as I recall, it was you who refrained from offering a definition.

Anyway, it appears there is still a little, if not much, confusion about the definition of anti-Semitism, but the article did seem to try to clear it up, differentiating meaning by using the term anti-Judaism to define anti-Jewishness as a religion (not racial), and using the term antisemite to define racial hatred.

It's a semntic game. Jew hatred is Jew hatred regardless of what label one places on it.

I think either kingsX or nicho1 told us it refers to Shem's bloodline? As opposed, presumably, to Ham's or Japeths? which of course, "begs the question", weren't they all three brothers with the same father?...Noah I'm simply trying to figure a way out of the "hatred".

This is the crux of it. Either patrilineage was given because of moral character or genetic purity. Not both. Genetic purity is not the biblical value. And intermarriage was condemned when it brought in moral impurity. But it was overlooked when those marrying in or converting in were accepting G-d's ways.

From the Wiki article:
"In 1882, the early Zionist pioneer Judah Leib Pinsker wrote that antisemitism was a psychological response rooted in fear and was an inherited predisposition. He named the condition Judeophobia.^[51]

Judeophobia is a variety of demonopathy with the distinction that it is not peculiar to particular races but is common to the whole of mankind.'...'Judeophobia is a psychic aberration. As a psychic aberration it is hereditary, and as a disease transmitted for two thousand years it is incurable.'... 'In this way have Judaism and Anti-Semitism passed for centuries through history as inseparable companions.'......'Having analyzed Judeophobia as an hereditary form of demonopathy, peculiar to the human race, and having represented Anti-Semitism as proceeding from an inherited aberration of the human mind, we must draw the important conclusion that we must give' up contending against these hostile impulses as we must against every other inherited predisposition. (translation from German)<sup>"
Anyway, inherited predisposition? that we must give up contending with? of course, I completely disagree.

S0, I can't seem to make this work now that I've quoted from there, so will leave and try again, later, Lord willing.</sup>

I don't get what you're saying. are you saying that you reject the broad definition of antisemitism because one Jewish doctor and zionist leader, in the whole evolution of the idea, thought Jewish hatred was a genetically transmitted psychological disorder? That, when people on this board are making a case that genetic purity is the marker for spiritual purity? In the Christian tradition, Ruth the moabite and Rahab the canaanite were in Jesus direct lineage. Yet, there was no stated principle of intermarrying only within semitic bloodlines. In fact, after the Babylonian exile, some of the foreign spouses taken in captivity who were sent away were semitic. And, certainly, Laban was an idoloter, yet Jacob married two of his daughters. Did purity of bloodline and moral purity coincide there, in the very root of the people of Israel? No. Dmatic, all these arguments are put forward in an attempt to determine that genetic purity is the marker for Gd's chosen people. And a big pot of bs is being cooked up to make a case that within Christian culture exists a genetically pure group of believers who are demarcated in the keeping pure doctrine....the true line of Israel. This is just a repackaging of old German and Russian Christian judenrein / antisemitism. Except that early antisemitism literally fit the word etymology. One leg of that racism believed all semitic peoples to be inferior to Aryans. The other emphasized Jews. But the Christian aryans believed themselves to be the true original G-dly race....the true semitic subset chosen by G-d. Basically, that idea is what you are seeing reconstituted and presented in faux-pious form as of late by kingsx.

Tnis is what Pinsker was facing, when he wrote his opinion. The word antisemitism, at that time was broadly used and accepted by germans and Russians. They prided themselves in their antisemitism and called it such freely and openly. In fact, Pinsker was a product of the german/jewish enlightenment, until the Russian pogroms occurred. The family of the woman Kings x called a martyr for Christ....well, just have a look at how they treated the Jews....you'll see why kings x thinks they were saints. So, Pinsker saw wide spread germanic and european multi-generational jewish hatred pass down as a generatonal rite. To him, it was a genetic impulse. His solution was to stop trying to fight it with reason and instead, establish an autonymous Jewish state where Jews could be protected from such culturalized mistreatment. So, sorry if you see him as irrational. I'm glad you never had to walk a mile in his shoes.

It would be interesting to know if kings x will openly condemn the Russian pogroms and german persecutions of the late 1800' and early 1900's against Jews, their being herded into shtetls, ghettos, their lands confiscated, their being denied to work in certain professions, rape, burnings etc. Enquiring minds want to know.