Interesting Biblical Contradiction I Had Never Heard Of Before

[Snafutopia]

Please post your findings here when you're done.

 

Will do. Maybe it's not as earth-shattering as I'm imagining, but ... wow, there really seems to be no way to get around it. At least, for the fundamentalist evangelical Christian denominations I'm familiar with, who claim that every word -- even every punctuation mark -- in the KJV is the infalliable, unalterable, etc., "word of God".

 

I'm checking and re-checking but so far see no wiggle room -- if the passages in question are "the infallible unalterable word of God" then Jesus can't be the messiah. If Jesus is the messiah then the Bible can't be "the infallible unalterable word of God."

 

Any ex-fundies reading this thread -- do you see any fundie-shaped holes in the argument as presented in the OP / link?

[Snafutopia]

Well, the Christian deity being racist isn't exactly news, but I hope this makes people think.

 

And it directly contradicts Christianity's core belief that anyone who converts can get into heaven.

 

Surely there are Americans who are descendants of these people and who are also practicing Christians...has any research ever been done on this?

 

Interesting question!

[Snafutopia]

Update ... not much to report! lol Offline life got crazybusy and so far the only church people I've emailed the question to have not responded.

 

The only person I actually talked to about it is my husband. Surprisingly, he thought it was "interesting"! You'd have to know him to realize what great leap forward that represents Somewhere along the way we also were discussing some other aspect of faith (it's been a couple of weeks, so i don't recall precisely what it was), and he said something along the lines of "People should try to disprove their religion." And I said, "That's so great to know you feel that way! 'Cause I've got some books for you to read" lol

 

Who knows whether he'll ever read them but at least he's been more open to discussing the topic of actually researching with the intent of "trying to disprove" his religion.

 

That gives me a lot of hope that eventually he'll turn into a rationalist in this area of his life -- it's the only area where he's not a rationalist! He's a brilliant guy and I love him dearly.

 

Like I said things have been crazybusy and neither of us has followed up on the discussion. Hopefully things will settle down a bit next week.

 

Anybody else who's been intrigued by the Moabite / lineage thing, please keep in touch, as I'm serious about this as a "mission"

[♦ Fuego ♦]

Another example of his racism is in Matthew 15 (also Mark 7:26-28)

21Leaving that place, Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon. 22A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to him, crying out, "Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession."

 

23Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to him and urged him, "Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us."

 

24He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel."

 

25The woman came and knelt before him. "Lord, help me!" she said.

 

26He replied, "It is not right to take the children's bread and toss it to their dogs."

 

 

Jesus loves the little children, all the children of the world, as long as they are not from mongrel lineage. Filthy half-breeds and mudbloods!

[Badger]

Another example of his racism is in Matthew 15 (also Mark 7:26-28)

Why not quoting the whole passage (verses 21-28)? Anyway, here Jesus actually breaks the gender barrier by talking to a woman and a racial barrier by hearling a Gentile. Isn't this interesting?

[Neon Genesis]

Why not quoting the whole passage (verses 21-28)? Anyway, here Jesus actually breaks the gender barrier by talking to a woman and a racial barrier by hearling a Gentile. Isn't this interesting?

But only after the woman had to degrade herself by saying she was a bitch first, which from what I've read was a grave insult back then, so wow, that's a real racial barrier (sarcasm).

[Snafutopia]

Ok I think I have a pretty good draft now. Message me if you want a copy (critique is appreciated!) It's too long, I think but will work on that. Am going to send this out (incognito of course!) to some fundies and see what happens. They'll probably ignore it, but then again maybe a few of them will actually think about it.

[Snafutopia]

Sorry it's taken me so long to get back to this topic.

 

The response to this topic among the several fundamentalist evangelical Christians to whom I've sent it or whom I've asked about has been kinda weird. And yes, I was very careful to word the question/topic in the most non-hostile, scholarly way I could manage.

 

The pastor refrains from any response whatsoever. My husband initially made interested sounds but no further comment. A former Baptist-turned-Progressive politely dismissed it but at least acknowledged the question. Everyone else has steadfastly ignored it.

 

I have to say, I'm surprised. I thought at least a few of them would be curious enough to look up the relevant scriptures and make some sort of remark, either questioning or dismissive. But there's been, basically, a wall of silence.

[Guest Davka]

Some thoughts from an ex-apologist:

 

The passage that should be looked at is not in Nehemiah, but rather the passage from the "Books of Moses" that is quoted in Nehemiah: Deuteronomy 23:2-4

 

No one of illegitimate birth shall enter the assembly of the LORD; none of his descendants, even to the tenth generation, shall enter the assembly of the LORD.

 

No Ammonite or Moabite shall enter the assembly of the LORD; none of their descendants, even to the tenth generation, shall ever enter the assembly of the LORD, because they did not meet you with food and water on the way when you came out of Egypt, and because they hired against you Balaam the son of Beor from Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse you.

 

Judaism is divided on this passage. There is one group which takes this as an admonition to keep the Jewish race pure, with no intermarriage between Jews and Gentiles until ten generations has passed since the first generation of proselytes (converts). This group is in the extreme minority. The much more common interpretation is that "even to the tenth generation" is the same as saying "forever," since this was a common type of usage in Biblical times (kind of like Jesus saying to forgive "seventy times seven" times). According to this mainstream Orthodox position, this means that no Jew may ever marry a Gentile under any circumstances.

 

The twist is that, once a Gentile converts to Judaism, s/he is no longer a Gentile. The Biblical precedent cited by the Rabbis is that of Ruth the Moabitess, who moved to Israel saying "your people shall be my people, and your God shall be my God." This is seen as a statement of conversion to Judaism, and therefore Ruth became Jewish rather than Gentile. This is why she was not only allowed to marry Boaz, but the marriage was sanctified by the Elders of Israel:

 

Then the elders and all those at the gate said, "We are witnesses. May the LORD make the woman who is coming into your home like Rachel and Leah, who together built up the house of Israel. May you have standing in Ephrathah and be famous in Bethlehem.

Ruth 4:11

 

This is taken by Rabbinic scholars as acceptance of Ruth's new status: The prayer that YHWH make her like one of the matriarchs of Israel seems to indicate that she is accepted by the elders as a Jewess.

 

Yes, I realize that this is a loophole. But if you want to know what both Christian and Jewish scholars will tell you about why Messiah, Son of David can come from a Moabitess woman, this is the answer they will give. Most Christians (including most pastors) wont have a frigging clue (thus the crickets), but among those who actually bother to study this stuff, the law in Deuteronomy is not considered to apply to converts.

 

More ammunition for this position can be found in passages which elaborate on why YHWH supposedly did not want "foreigners" to marry into Israel. Basically, it was because they would bring their "god" (i.e. idols) along with them, thus diluting the Jewish faith. Remember, YHWH has a serious green-eyed monster complex. He doesn't want the Jews getting any on the side. But Ruth, because she apparently gave up all her idols and wholeheartedly converted to Judaism, is given a pass.

[Light_of_Reason]

The defense Davka provides is one that I have heard on another site where I posed this question. Another rather interesting defense claims that Ruth is not of Moabite descent, but rather Israelite descent. It claims she was referred to as a Moabite due to geography and place name continuity. The example is that even though California is no longer a Mexican territory, non-Hispanics in California are called Californians.

 

Anyway, you can see this other argument here:

http://www.israelect.com/reference/ArnoldK...20Israelite.pdf

[Malcolm Hutton]

This deals with the prohibition of the Ammonites and Moabites from entering into the kingdom of God as described in Nehemiah and Deuteronomy of Ammon and Moab hireing Balaam to curse the Israelities. The contradiction lies with Christ himself being of Moabite decent if, as the Bible states, his blood line comes from David.

 

Very interesting read. http://www.bibleorigins.net/MoabiteBloodMessiah.html

 

King David was Dyayhwt III, commonly known as The Egyptian Napoleon. His grandson was Dyayhwt IV and his son was YmnHtp III aka SalimAmen III (Htp=Peace or Rest = Salim). His eldest son was the missing Prince TwtMs who it now seems was resurrected as YmnTwtAnkh (Twt or David V).

 

1 Kings 11:11/12 -"....I will take the kingdom away from you and give it to one of your officials. However for the sake of your father David I will not do this in your lifetime, but during the reign of your son."

This is exactly what happened to Amenhotep III. His Son King YmnTwtAnk was the last of the family line.

The kingdom then went to the Priest or Official Ay, the prophet Ahijah of the Bible.

 

The only other possibility is that the other son of SalimAmen/Solomon III, was SalimAmen IV who changed his name to Akhenaten, may have had a child after he disappeared. Akhenaten/Moses is shown in memorials with Nefertiti with Six daughters. Most of them died, though we do not really know what happened to Meritaten/MeriYmn/Miriam.

 

The Copper Scroll has Akhenaten's name in Greek letters and since this was found amongst the Dead sea Scrolls, perhaps he did get to Qumran and have children. This is the only possibility that the line continued.

 

Since a Historic Jesus never existed, it is pointless pursuing the 18th Dynasty bloodline, anyway.

[dagnarus]

Some thoughts from an ex-apologist:

 

The passage that should be looked at is not in Nehemiah, but rather the passage from the "Books of Moses" that is quoted in Nehemiah: Deuteronomy 23:2-4

 

No one of illegitimate birth shall enter the assembly of the LORD; none of his descendants, even to the tenth generation, shall enter the assembly of the LORD.

 

No Ammonite or Moabite shall enter the assembly of the LORD; none of their descendants, even to the tenth generation, shall ever enter the assembly of the LORD, because they did not meet you with food and water on the way when you came out of Egypt, and because they hired against you Balaam the son of Beor from Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse you.

 

Judaism is divided on this passage. There is one group which takes this as an admonition to keep the Jewish race pure, with no intermarriage between Jews and Gentiles until ten generations has passed since the first generation of proselytes (converts). This group is in the extreme minority. The much more common interpretation is that "even to the tenth generation" is the same as saying "forever," since this was a common type of usage in Biblical times (kind of like Jesus saying to forgive "seventy times seven" times). According to this mainstream Orthodox position, this means that no Jew may ever marry a Gentile under any circumstances.

 

The twist is that, once a Gentile converts to Judaism, s/he is no longer a Gentile. The Biblical precedent cited by the Rabbis is that of Ruth the Moabitess, who moved to Israel saying "your people shall be my people, and your God shall be my God." This is seen as a statement of conversion to Judaism, and therefore Ruth became Jewish rather than Gentile. This is why she was not only allowed to marry Boaz, but the marriage was sanctified by the Elders of Israel:

 

Then the elders and all those at the gate said, "We are witnesses. May the LORD make the woman who is coming into your home like Rachel and Leah, who together built up the house of Israel. May you have standing in Ephrathah and be famous in Bethlehem.

Ruth 4:11

 

This is taken by Rabbinic scholars as acceptance of Ruth's new status: The prayer that YHWH make her like one of the matriarchs of Israel seems to indicate that she is accepted by the elders as a Jewess.

 

Yes, I realize that this is a loophole. But if you want to know what both Christian and Jewish scholars will tell you about why Messiah, Son of David can come from a Moabitess woman, this is the answer they will give. Most Christians (including most pastors) wont have a frigging clue (thus the crickets), but among those who actually bother to study this stuff, the law in Deuteronomy is not considered to apply to converts.

 

More ammunition for this position can be found in passages which elaborate on why YHWH supposedly did not want "foreigners" to marry into Israel. Basically, it was because they would bring their "god" (i.e. idols) along with them, thus diluting the Jewish faith. Remember, YHWH has a serious green-eyed monster complex. He doesn't want the Jews getting any on the side. But Ruth, because she apparently gave up all her idols and wholeheartedly converted to Judaism, is given a pass.

 

From genesis Pharez and Zarah were illegitimate. Therefore if even unto the tenth generation means forever wouldn't that mean that both Jesus and David were disqualified from entering into the congregation seeing as how they both have Pharez as an ancestor.

[Guest Davka]

King David was Dyayhwt III, commonly known as The Egyptian Napoleon. His grandson was Dyayhwt IV and his son was YmnHtp III aka SalimAmen III (Htp=Peace or Rest = Salim). His eldest son was the missing Prince TwtMs who it now seems was resurrected as YmnTwtAnkh (Twt or David V).

I call bullshit. Hate to break it to you, but there's pretty strong historical - and some archaeological - evidence for the King David of the Bible, and his son Solomon. The Tel Dan stele mentions king David, as does the Mesha Stele from Moab. Secular archaeologists are in strong agreement over the historicity of Kind David, although most doubt the accuracy of the Biblical account.

 

Since a Historic Jesus never existed

Look! A baseless statement of faith!

 

It is as foolish to make such claims as it is to claim that Jesus was the Son of God. There is insufficient evidence for such a conclusion.

[OpheliaGinger]

There is insufficient evidence for that particular Jesus having ever existed.

 

Oh, and the guy I sent the information presented here too, as also yet to respond. I figured he read it, placed his fingers in his ears, and screamed, "Lalalala, I'm not reading this. This doesn't exist."

[Guest Davka]

There is insufficient evidence for that particular Jesus having ever existed.

True. It's a moot point, really. Silly to take a stand on quicksand.

 

Oh, and the guy I sent the information presented here too, as also yet to respond. I figured he read it, placed his fingers in his ears, and screamed, "Lalalala, I'm not reading this. This doesn't exist."

lol - I'm trying to think of a way to depict the Jesus fish with it's head in the sand.

[Kurari]

Except the story goes Jesus's mother was supposedly a virgin when she conceived, so Jesus isn't even in that lineage.

 

What do Jews say about adoption into lines?

 

 

 

 

....And yes, I'm fully aware of the logistics of this, but fundies don't argue logic.

[dagnarus]

Except the story goes Jesus's mother was supposedly a virgin when she conceived, so Jesus isn't even in that lineage.

 

What do Jews say about adoption into lines?

 

 

 

 

....And yes, I'm fully aware of the logistics of this, but fundies don't argue logic.

 

The fundamentalist think that the geneology in luke is mary's genealogy. So they probably argue that he get's into the line of David through her. That said theoretically if your dad was god you can say your part of whatever family line you damn well want.

[OpheliaGinger]

<!--quoteo--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Oh, and the guy I sent the information presented here too, as also yet to respond. I figured he read it, placed his fingers in his ears, and screamed, "Lalalala, I'm not reading this. This doesn't exist."<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

lol - I'm trying to think of a way to depict the Jesus fish with it's head in the sand.

 

There is an image in one of the galleries here that depicts Jesus with a sword sticking out of one ear and a long stemmed flower out the other.

[OpheliaGinger]

Trusting the genealogies of in the Christian Bible is like trusting the genealogies of the English monarchs--they all somehow are descendant from King Arthur.

[Brought None]

If I may point many of you to this interesting video about the genealogy of Jesus.

 

7 minutes 58 seconds

[Guest October s Autumn]

An actual scriptural reference from Nehemiah or where ever would be helpful to address your question.

 

From what you posted I can give you this: I don't the the concept of Kingdom of Heaven/God exists in the Hebrew Bible. Are they talking about the promised land, maybe?

 

Ruth, who is the grandmother of David, was a moabite who converted to Judaism. When she converted she would be considered 100% Jewish.

 

The Kingdom of God/Heaven is isn't about heaven in the clouds/angels sense. It is more of a here on earth thing. The Good News or Gospel that people often (mistakenly) think is about going to heaven because Jesus saved you from your sins (etc. etc.) is not at all about that. The good news that Jesus is quoted as saying in today's terms is about social justice. I realize that this is not the commonly held belief among Christians but it seems much more accurate to me.