Which God To Believe In

[NotBlinded]

...What is Freeday - IS GOD TRULY ALL THESE THINGS - OR NOT?

 

And whatever answer you give to this question - please tell me - and everyone else on this board - how someone can "live in a place apart" from the beginning and the end?

O_M,

 

I know I sent you directions to club x-o-nonfinity. You go down past the very last galaxy on the right and swing around to your left. Go 10 billion miles and look down.

 

No wonder you didn't show up last Saturday night!

 

 

 

 

I'm in a weird mood again.

 

 

OK ... THAT was just too much ... thanks, NotBlinded

 

ILWYT

[Thurisaz]

I repeatedly see christians act like there are only two options. either you believe in THEIR god, or you are a dogmatic materialist. That's just retarded.

 

Ain't that the truth...

 

It's like when i see creationists debating evolution...like they think somehow if they can disprove evolution it supports their beliefs in biblegod. NO IT DOESN'T. Even if you somehow WON or were "right" about there being some type of creative power behind the universe, you cannot just jump to "see? it MUST be biblegod" That's completely illogical.

 

I hear you sister. More power to you!

[freeday]

so from a pragmatic

So.. Freeday ... your choices boil down to the following:

 

1. There is a "place apart" from the Alpha and Omega - and this means God is NOT

1. Infinite, eternal Love
   
2. Omnipotent (All Powerful - Power over Everything)
   
3. Omniscient (All Knowing - Knowing Everything)
   
4. Oh and I'm saving my favorite until last - omnipresent - PRESENT EVERYWHERE
   

or

 

1. There is NO "place apart" from the Alpha and Omega - and this means God IS

1. Infinite, eternal Love
   
2. Omnipotent (All Powerful - Power over Everything)
   
3. Omniscient (All Knowing - Knowing Everything)
   
4. Oh and I'm saving my favorite until last - omnipresent - PRESENT EVERYWHERE
   

 

What is Freeday - IS GOD TRULY ALL THESE THINGS - OR NOT?

 

 

 

 

And whatever answer you give to this question - please tell me - and everyone else on this board - how someone can "live in a place apart" from the beginning and the end?

 

we say God is omnipresent, and all the other stuff, so you say that you can never be apart from God because he is omnipresent. so you are putting God in a small box and limiting him on what he can do. what if God doesn't want to be present in a certains person life, can he not choose whether he wants to or not.

 

 

if you look in verse 8 "Lord God made all kinds of trees grow out of the" ground" he didn't create the oportunity for evil, he created the prossess for the tree to grow, but not the tree itself, thus, he created good, evil was its indirect making. the concept of evil is powerless, it would need to be acted upon to be made. satan was the person who induced eve into going to the tree, thus he created evil. if she had never gone to the tree, theoretically there would be no evil.

 

ex. a gun is not evil, but when someone actively uses it to kill someone, then it is evil. only when it is acted upon does it become personified.

IMO, God didn't create the process for the tree to grow, God is the process. You can't put God outside of anything because that leaves something that is beyond and outside of God which starts the process of questioning about who created god.

 

Satan is referred to as the Prince of Lies. They believed the lies that Satan was speaking. This tells me the moral is... the only, and original, evil/sin is believing in lies. All others are secondary to this belief. It's not what the church would have you believe...do what you're told or be punished by God (that's a lie...don't believe it!). This moral was personified through myth and metaphor in order to get that moral across. When someone believes in a lie, they are fully convinced it is the truth. They have turned away from what is true. Adam and Eve turned away from what was true...God/their god-nature. They wanted to become like gods when they already were (only knowing good). We are tempted all the time to believe in lies and I'm sure there are things that I believe are lies too, but I just don't recognize it. I know my life could be a lot more pleasant if I wasn't afraid of what people thought of me. I know this is true, but I keep holding on to the belief that what they think of me must be true (not so much anymore ). If I believe them and the lies (original sin), then I have turned away from what is my true nature (divine/god/good) and listened to the lies and myself and others close to me pay miserably for it (repercussions from the original sin). Turning away doesn't mean being without it. It just means ignoring it or not knowing that what you believe is a lie (this is where forgiveness comes in). It's still there...I can never be without it...I can only be blinded to it. I can close my eyes, but that doesn't mean that I'm blind.

 

It's like the prodigal son...good was waiting for him when he returned. It never went away...it was always there when he decided to open his eyes. The other son never experienced this thus he was jealous and felt unfairly treated. He believed he should have been rewarded more so than his brother. In this process, he believed the lie that his brother was inferior to him for having wandered. If the story went on, he too would have been celebrated for returning to the truth.

 

Satan didn't create evil. God didn't create evil. Mankind does evil when they believe in lies. Like you said, it must be acted upon. There are many well-meaning, God-fearing people of the world that will kill mercilessly because they believe the lie that their beliefs are superior to others. They set themselves above other people. That is why, IMO, Jesus said, "Forgive them for they know not what they do." They believed they were superior to him...they believed in lies, but didn't realize it.

 

All one needs to do is to be inclusive in their beliefs. This would be a huge progression for mankind and all other kinds.

 

very well written.

[Asimov]

we say God is omnipresent, and all the other stuff, so you say that you can never be apart from God because he is omnipresent. so you are putting God in a small box and limiting him on what he can do. what if God doesn't want to be present in a certains person life, can he not choose whether he wants to or not.

 

No, that is precisely the reason why making a being unlimited brings in so many problems.

 

Omnipresent - What if he doesn't want to be? Then he's not omnipresent.

If he can't not be omnipresent, then he's not omnipotent.

Can God change what he knows he will do ahead of time? Then he's not Omniscient.

If he can't change what he knows he will do ahead of time, then he's not omnipotent.

 

Does evil exist? If it does, then how can God be omnipresent?

Does that mean that God is evil?

[Ouroboros]

we say God is omnipresent, and all the other stuff, so you say that you can never be apart from God because he is omnipresent. so you are putting God in a small box and limiting him on what he can do. what if God doesn't want to be present in a certains person life, can he not choose whether he wants to or not.

I'm sorry, but that is kind of funny!

 

Omnipresent means: "God is present everywhere." (inside or outside the box. If everywhere is the box, the there is nothing outside the box. There's is nothing outside everthing and everywhere. If it did, then that also would be automatically become part of everything and everywhere.)

 

So if God makes himself outside the box (himself) then the box is still himself, and he is still inside the box. Then he tries to be outside the box, but he is the box, so he will still not be outside the box.

 

He can't. Unless you redefine "omnipresent" to mean, "He is in most places, but not every place".

 

And this also leads to another question I have, sorry for derailing a little bit.

 

But if God is everywhere, wouldn't he already be in our soul, spirit, body etc? And if that's the case, what was the difference between a Human Jesus and a Son of God Jesus? Did Jesus have a little bit more of God present in a world where God is already present 100% everywhere? Did Jesus have 110% God presence instead of only 100% God presence like the rest of us mortals? And how does it connect to Adam getting the "breath" of God, if the "breath" isn't God anymore, was it ever a part of God in the beginning?

 

 

 

Does evil exist? If it does, then how can God be omnipresent?

Does that mean that God is evil?

And then God wouldn't be all benevolent.

[NotBlinded]

But if God is everywhere, wouldn't he already be in our soul, spirit, body etc? And if that's the case, what was the difference between a Human Jesus and a Son of God Jesus? Did Jesus have a little bit more of God present in a world where God is already present 100% everywhere? Did Jesus have 110% God presence instead of only 100% God presence like the rest of us mortals? And how does it connect to Adam getting the "breath" of God, if the "breath" isn't God anymore, was it ever a part of God in the beginning?

 

There is no difference, IMO. He was just slapped by more epiphanies than most of us are!

 

The only place I can see that God/natural laws may not be present is in the Bermuda Triangle. It would take rain to fall upward for God to be missing...

[Lycorth]

Does evil exist? If it does, then how can God be omnipresent?

Does that mean that God is evil?

 

Zackly - if Gawd exists everywhere, and evil exists in at least one place, then evil and Gawd share a space simultaneously. Wouldn't the "awesome holiness" of Gawd cancel the evil out?

 

How can evil even exist if the awesomely holy Xian Gawd is everywhere? If it does exist, then either Gawd is not omnipresent, or isn't able to cancel out the evil by his mere awesomely holy presence, indicating that Gawd is not omnipotent.

[freeday]

we say God is omnipresent, and all the other stuff, so you say that you can never be apart from God because he is omnipresent. so you are putting God in a small box and limiting him on what he can do. what if God doesn't want to be present in a certains person life, can he not choose whether he wants to or not.

I'm sorry, but that is kind of funny!

 

Omnipresent means: "God is present everywhere." (inside or outside the box. If everywhere is the box, the there is nothing outside the box. There's is nothing outside everthing and everywhere. If it did, then that also would be automatically become part of everything and everywhere.)

 

So if God makes himself outside the box (himself) then the box is still himself, and he is still inside the box. Then he tries to be outside the box, but he is the box, so he will still not be outside the box.

 

He can't. Unless you redefine "omnipresent" to mean, "He is in most places, but not every place".

 

And this also leads to another question I have, sorry for derailing a little bit.

 

But if God is everywhere, wouldn't he already be in our soul, spirit, body etc? And if that's the case, what was the difference between a Human Jesus and a Son of God Jesus? Did Jesus have a little bit more of God present in a world where God is already present 100% everywhere? Did Jesus have 110% God presence instead of only 100% God presence like the rest of us mortals? And how does it connect to Adam getting the "breath" of God, if the "breath" isn't God anymore, was it ever a part of God in the beginning?

 

 

 

Does evil exist? If it does, then how can God be omnipresent?

Does that mean that God is evil?

And then God wouldn't be all benevolent.

 

i concede for right now, you have taken this way further than my understanding of it. i will delve into the bible and see what i can find.

 

this is what i like about this board, it really makes you think.

[Open_Minded]

i concede for right now, you have taken this way further than my understanding of it. i will delve into the bible and see what i can find.

 

this is what i like about this board, it really makes you think.

 

That's what I like about this place too, Freeday. It sure beats the hell (pun intended) out of CF.com.

 

But, anyway, as long as you're thinking ... consider the following:

 

we say God is omnipresent, and all the other stuff, so you say that you can never be apart from God because he is omnipresent. so you are putting God in a small box and limiting him on what he can do. what if God doesn't want to be present in a certains person life, can he not choose whether he wants to or not.

 

If God didn't "want to be present in a certain persons life" then how would that impact the idea of an "infinitely mericful and infinitely loving" God?

 

If God is infinitely merciful and infinitely loving - then - it's ALL infinite - it isn't about choice it's about what simply IS. If it's infinitely loving then it is love within all, through all and beyond all.......

 

In an anthropomorphistic understanding of God "choosing" anything - "choosing" to be outside a person's life is NOT loving in anyone's eyes. So IF we assume God is an anthropomorphistic being in the far reaches of the universe who can "CHOOSE" to love, or "CHOOSE" not to love - then we loose the omnipresent God, the God of infinite love.

[Ouroboros]

i concede for right now, you have taken this way further than my understanding of it. i will delve into the bible and see what i can find.

 

this is what i like about this board, it really makes you think.

You're a cool guy in my book Freeday. At least you're not afraid to dig into these things and realize that there's more to it than you knew before. And know one thing... We haven't even started yet.

[chefranden]

so from a pragmatic standpoint, maybe in this world you can n't live apart from God, i think that is a fair statement. but the bible states that "ask and you shall recieve" uses the words such as "free gift." so maybe God is always pressing at us, but doesn't dwell inside us untill we ask. then there is the point of death. which i feel we will join him in heaven, "which i don't think is literally above us," and the people who didn't accept his free gift, will live in a place apart from him, wherever that might be. so in te afterlife, we can be apart from him.

 

But I asked and didn't recieve. Most folks here could say the same. How do you explain that?

 

Heaven used to be literally above us. What happened?

[freeday]

i concede for right now, you have taken this way further than my understanding of it. i will delve into the bible and see what i can find.

 

this is what i like about this board, it really makes you think.

You're a cool guy in my book Freeday. At least you're not afraid to dig into these things and realize that there's more to it than you knew before. And know one thing... We haven't even started yet.

 

i am having a hard time here, i have searched the KJV,NKJV, and the NIV and nowhere in it is the word omnipresent, always present, or never apart.

 

i don't understand where you are getting omnipresent, from alpha and omega. and it would probably help me better, to understand why you want me to say he is never apart from us.

[SkepticOfBible]

Omnipresent means: "God is present everywhere." (inside or outside the box. If everywhere is the box, the there is nothing outside the box. There's is nothing outside everthing and everywhere. If it did, then that also would be automatically become part of everything and everywhere.)

 

So if God makes himself outside the box (himself) then the box is still himself, and he is still inside the box. Then he tries to be outside the box, but he is the box, so he will still not be outside the box.

 

He can't. Unless you redefine "omnipresent" to mean, "He is in most places, but not every place".

This is great rebuttal to the claim that "Hell is nothing more than a absence of God", as Gaulinon claims to be.

 

I'll keep this in mind, the next time I'll meet a fundie like that.

[Ouroboros]

i am having a hard time here, i have searched the KJV,NKJV, and the NIV and nowhere in it is the word omnipresent, always present, or never apart.

 

i don't understand where you are getting omnipresent, from alpha and omega. and it would probably help me better, to understand why you want me to say he is never apart from us.

Correct, the word Omnipresent is not really in the Bible, but from tradition and religious philosophers the past 2000 years it has been established that the God described in the bible is supposed to be Opmnipresent. For instance a Psalm (I don't remember which one right now) that say that "where ever I go you're there. I go to the deepest sea and you're there, I go to the highest mountain and yet you're there"... etc So the concept is in the Bible, and the Christian thinkers made up this word to describe this attribute of God. And also this verse: Col 1:17 he [Jesus] is before all things, and in him all things consist. And what's interesting, from what I understand, is that this Omnipresent Deity idea was not in the Jewish religion at the time of Jesus, this is an invention by the Christians.

[Open_Minded]

Correct, the word Omnipresent is not really in the Bible, but from tradition and religious philosophers the past 2000 years it has been established that the God described in the bible is supposed to be Opmnipresent. For instance a Psalm (I don't remember which one right now) that say that "where ever I go you're there. I go to the deepest sea and you're there, I go to the highest mountain and yet you're there"... etc So the concept is in the Bible, and the Christian thinkers made up this word to describe this attribute of God. And also this verse: Col 1:17 he [Jesus] is before all things, and in him all things consist. And what's interesting, from what I understand, is that this Omnipresent Deity idea was not in the Jewish religion at the time of Jesus, this is an invention by the Christians.

 

HanSolo - Here's the surrounding verses from Colossians 1:15-17 - NRSV

 

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; for in him all things in heaven and on earth were created, things visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or powers—all things have been created through him and for him. He himself is before all things, and in him all things hold together

 

Also, Freeday - do not forget that Jesus is referred to as the Alpha and the Omega. There can be NOTHING outside the beginning and the end - NOTHING.

 

Back to our earlier discussion, Freeday .... how can anyone (or anything) be in a place apart from - separated from or away from .... him in whom "all things in heaven and on earth were created, things visible and invisible"? How can anyone (or anything) visible - or invisible be in a place "apart from" ... Him in whom all things are held together?

 

HanSolo - - - you wrote the following....

And what's interesting, from what I understand, is that this Omnipresent Deity idea was not in the Jewish religion at the time of Jesus, this is an invention by the Christians

 

I'm not as much up on the borrowing by early Christians from other religions as many on this board. This is a new piece of information for me.

 

There weren't omnipresent dieties in other religions surrounding the early Christian church?

[Ouroboros]

HanSolo - Here's the surrounding verses from Colossians 1:15-17 - NRSV

 

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; for in him all things in heaven and on earth were created, things visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or powers—all things have been created through him and for him. He himself is before all things, and in him all things hold together

True. The "hold together" (Sunistao) is more of "what everything consist of" or "tied to together by". Just like weak force, strong force, magnetic, gravity. Pretty much it says Jesus is the Unified Field Theory, or maybe Dark Matter.

 

 

There weren't omnipresent dieties in other religions surrounding the early Christian church?

I think I misspoke there. No, they probably had other religions with the same concept. And that in the concession of Jewish Christianity into the Gentile Christianity the idea became more established, like a "new invention" within the theology. Make sense?

 

(Good OM, you're keeping me on my toes. )

[freeday]

Correct, the word Omnipresent is not really in the Bible, but from tradition and religious philosophers the past 2000 years it has been established that the God described in the bible is supposed to be Opmnipresent. For instance a Psalm (I don't remember which one right now) that say that "where ever I go you're there. I go to the deepest sea and you're there, I go to the highest mountain and yet you're there"... etc So the concept is in the Bible, and the Christian thinkers made up this word to describe this attribute of God. And also this verse: Col 1:17 he [Jesus] is before all things, and in him all things consist. And what's interesting, from what I understand, is that this Omnipresent Deity idea was not in the Jewish religion at the time of Jesus, this is an invention by the Christians.

 

HanSolo - Here's the surrounding verses from Colossians 1:15-17 - NRSV

 

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; for in him all things in heaven and on earth were created, things visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or powers—all things have been created through him and for him. He himself is before all things, and in him all things hold together

 

Also, Freeday - do not forget that Jesus is referred to as the Alpha and the Omega. There can be NOTHING outside the beginning and the end - NOTHING.

 

Back to our earlier discussion, Freeday .... how can anyone (or anything) be in a place apart from - separated from or away from .... him in whom "all things in heaven and on earth were created, things visible and invisible"? How can anyone (or anything) visible - or invisible be in a place "apart from" ... Him in whom all things are held together?

 

HanSolo - - - you wrote the following....

And what's interesting, from what I understand, is that this Omnipresent Deity idea was not in the Jewish religion at the time of Jesus, this is an invention by the Christians

 

I'm not as much up on the borrowing by early Christians from other religions as many on this board. This is a new piece of information for me.

 

There weren't omnipresent dieties in other religions surrounding the early Christian church?

 

haven't had a chance to skim through psalms, but i probably wouldn't find it unless pointed to it. that is a rather large book.

 

i read up on the above verse, and read 3 different christian resource books, and did not find any implication that He is omnipresent. God is described as being all knowing (can't remember the fancy term right now), i don't remember any verse that said he is always present. i can't begin to describe the power of God, but i can only rationalize that he can know all things without being always present. if time is no matter to him, he could look at your entire life as a whole the day before you died. thus he would know your entire life, never having been present. do i even believe what i just wrote, not really, i beleive the Spirit is always actively working for the Lord.

 

i finally get the whole debate. if God is omnipresent, Jesus was lying when he said hell is a place apart from God. am i on the right track?

[Ouroboros]

I looked up the Catholic Encyclopedia, and they lay out a quite advanced argument for the omnipresence. And they have several Bible quotes to support it. Basically the idea is that God is present everywhere, but he is not everything. Just to separate it from Pantheism.

 

The idea that God would not be in Hell is not in the Bible at all. There's no statement either way. Jesus didn't say that it was separate. But he actually had the story where Hell is within view of Heaven, and people in both places can communicate with each other. And also, people that are in Hell can feel love and compassion and feel they care for their families while they're there.

 

I also looked into what other religions could have had the theology of omnipresence in Jesus' days. And the only one so far is the Vedic ones. Christianity either invented this idea by themselves, or maybe it was present in the theology of the Essenes at the time.

[Open_Minded]

i finally get the whole debate. if God is omnipresent, Jesus was lying when he said hell is a place apart from God. am i on the right track?

 

I wouldn't say Jesus was "lying". There are other possibilities..... most likely the verses you speak of - where Jesus said hell is a place apart from God (I'm not sure which verses they are) may be words attributed to Jesus, rather than words Jesus actually spoke.

 

Since the gospels were not written until years after the death of Jesus, and since they were written by specific authors, to specific audiences, to teach specific lessons ... it is VERY difficult to determine which words Jesus ACTUALLY spoke vs. which words Jesus had ATTRIBUTED to him by a later tradition.

 

People back then were no different than people are today, Freeday. You and I and everyone else on this board. We all come here with our own perspectives. We paint our pictures of reality. And many times we are in complete disagreement with each other - and yet - in the end - we're all living in the same world.

 

That's how it was for the early Christians as well. They may have believed some of the same core things about Jesus and the world. But they had many differences as well. Their writings reflect this dynamic.

[Ouroboros]

It would be interesting to see that verse. Did someone quote it earlier in this thread? I didn't know there was one.

[freeday]

Hans: i can't find it either?

 

i finally get the whole debate. if God is omnipresent, Jesus was lying when he said hell is a place apart from God. am i on the right track?

 

I wouldn't say Jesus was "lying". There are other possibilities..... most likely the verses you speak of - where Jesus said hell is a place apart from God (I'm not sure which verses they are) may be words attributed to Jesus, rather than words Jesus actually spoke.

 

Since the gospels were not written until years after the death of Jesus, and since they were written by specific authors, to specific audiences, to teach specific lessons ... it is VERY difficult to determine which words Jesus ACTUALLY spoke vs. which words Jesus had ATTRIBUTED to him by a later tradition.

 

People back then were no different than people are today, Freeday. You and I and everyone else on this board. We all come here with our own perspectives. We paint our pictures of reality. And many times we are in complete disagreement with each other - and yet - in the end - we're all living in the same world.

 

That's how it was for the early Christians as well. They may have believed some of the same core things about Jesus and the world. But they had many differences as well. Their writings reflect this dynamic.

 

i think there is some leway for indescrepancies, it was written by different authors with different perspectives of the situation. but the overall theme is correct in all.

 

someone stated the other day that Jesus wasn't the true heir to the throne of david, since joseph is not the actuall father.

 

mathew gives the geneology from a jews perspective and lends credit to joseph being the descended of david, where-as the geneology presented by luke written for non-jews lends credit for mary being the descendent of david. as long as you have faith. does it matter who the actuall descendent of david was?

[Asimov]

i think there is some leway for indescrepancies, it was written by different authors with different perspectives of the situation. but the overall theme is correct in all.

 

someone stated the other day that Jesus wasn't the true heir to the throne of david, since joseph is not the actuall father.

 

mathew gives the geneology from a jews perspective and lends credit to joseph being the descended of david, where-as the geneology presented by luke written for non-jews lends credit for mary being the descendent of david. as long as you have faith. does it matter who the actuall descendent of david was?

 

"As long as you have ad hoc, does it really matter what is true?"

[Guest Mr. XC]

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?searc...amp;version=31;

 

2 Thessalonians 1:9 (New International Version)

9They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power;

 

What!? A place away from the God who is everywhere!?

 

The new testament is such an upside down theology, in my humble opinion. I think Paul and John of Patmos (the writer of Revelations) had some very mind altering drugs, and the rest of the new testament were not the true words of Jesus, because it is not likely that one person would have said such obviously contradictory things. It takes a team of confused people to jumble up the meaning so much. I think much of his followers were confused and simplified the message to the point where it made sense to them, but in the process of simplifying what they misunderstood, they created something that was quite the opposite from the truth.

[Guest Mr. XC]

"As long as you have ad hoc, does it really matter what is true?"

True. To build on what I said in my previous post; with such inaccurate wittings, you are not going to find anything useful in them as a whole. Even if there were some correct spots here and there, you would not know where to find them without an authoritative reference to go by; which Christianity does not have. Christianity will probably never have such a reference because there is a part in the bible that says to throw out anything that is not in 100% agreement with the bible. So even if God Himself inspired someone to write a book that corrects Christianity, it will never be accepted by Christians.

[Ouroboros]

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?searc...amp;version=31;

 

2 Thessalonians 1:9 (New International Version)

9 They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the majesty of his power;

 

Thanks. I couldn't remember that I had seen a verse that stated that.

 

I think it shows how the two different views of God clashes in the letters and Gospel.

 

This verse is based on the older Jewish view that God is a being that have a "body" of some kind and have to actually go to a place to be there. Exactly like the Greek gods or many other religions. This verse is definitely not an omnipresent God.

 

 

i think there is some leway for indescrepancies, it was written by different authors with different perspectives of the situation. but the overall theme is correct in all.

The question is "what is the theme"?

 

You're right, different authors, different perspectives, but what is it that they really are trying to explain?

 

someone stated the other day that Jesus wasn't the true heir to the throne of david, since joseph is not the actuall father.

 

mathew gives the geneology from a jews perspective and lends credit to joseph being the descended of david, where-as the geneology presented by luke written for non-jews lends credit for mary being the descendent of david. as long as you have faith. does it matter who the actuall descendent of david was?

Well. The geneologies points to another clash of ideas in the early church. One group saying that Jesus must come from David, and the other that he came from God. And when the two versions met, the merge became the confusion of virgin birth and a geneology (or two).

 

It really doesn't matter if Mary is the heir of the David throne. Imagine claiming the Davidic kingdom from being related to David only on the mothers side? I've heard apologists say that the royal blodline is kept on the femal side, which doesn't match anything in the OT. No king in the OT is related through the maternal bloodline, but everyone is through the paternal. So by the standards in the Old Testament, Jesus was not a Davidic king by blood.