Lee Strobel Coming to Visit

[ideologyhunter]

The Christians I've known who read widely in apologetics could handle just about any apparent gospel contradiction or conundrum. I knew a girl (we were both in our teens, so this is ages ago) who had no trouble with the Bible's death penalty for disrespectful sons who curse either parent (EX 21:17). Her reasoning: God knew he had to preserve the civilization that would bring forth Jesus, so he imposed harsh laws that would ensure that those people clung to righteousness. (I know, completely bonkers, but there are probably a lot of believers who would nod their heads and agree.)
So how about my personal Bible riddle: Could God load up a fart so vast that he himself could not suppress it? This one involves not only the analogy between God's substance and the human form, which is 'in his image', and God's will and might, but, potentially, solar wind storms and black holes. And possibly that whirlwind that God was in when he spoke to Job, who knows. Strobel should know.

 

[excreationist]

My suggestion:

"Do you think it is just or fair for people to go to hell forever?"

This isn't going to stump a pro.

• It isn't his place to judge.
• God's will is merciful, but his mercy is not limitless.
• Hell might simply be to be without god.

Blah blah blah.

A better question would be "Does he validate parking?"

Then maybe "assuming hell involves the unsaved suffering a lot forever, do they all completely deserve it and why?" He might not find the why difficult but it is there to try and avoid a dodge to the question.

 

[Elixir]

A better question would be "Does he validate parking?"

Then maybe "assuming hell involves the unsaved suffering a lot forever"

No, once they pay the parking fee they're allowed to leave the lot.

 

[James Brown]

If God can perform Immaculate Conception on Mary--letting her be born without a sinful nature so that she didn't pass it on to baby Jesus--then why can't God do that for everybody?

That's a Catholic doctrine, he's not Catholic.

Ah, then we can stick with Protestantism and ask, "Why didn't Jesus inherit Mary's sinful nature like the rest of humanity?"

 

[TomC]

"Why does God keep making people so ignorant and stupid that they make immoral choices? Why does God not make people more rational?"
Tom

 

[excreationist]

Ah, then we can stick with Protestantism and ask, "Why didn't Jesus inherit Mary's sinful nature like the rest of humanity?"

Mary was just carrying the baby - Jesus' DNA came from the Holy Spirit

 

[excreationist]

However, I'd be interested in is

The Gospels testify that Jesus performed miracles and resurrects from death. So why does the New Testament open with a political plea regarding the origins of Jesus as if the miracles/resurrection only matters if he is related to the right people? Presumably if someone today resurrected from death, no one would be asking 'But who is his great great great grandfather?'

I think the purpose of the genealogies is to "prove" that Jesus fulfilled prophecies about the Messiah:

The Genealogies of Jesus

Are the genealogies accurate?

guide4christmas.com

The Messiah would be a descendent of Abraham (Genesis 12:3, 22:18, Acts 3:25-26)
The Messiah would be a descendent of King David (2 Samuel 7:12-16, Psalm 89:3-4, Isaiah 9:7)
The Messiah would be a descendent of the governor Zerubbabel and his father Shealtiel (Haggai 2:23)

As you can see in the link the two genealogies agree about David, Zerubbabel, Shealtiel, and Joseph but disagree otherwise - I think this shows that each gospel started with the prophecies and just got all the names from different sources.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

However, I'd be interested in is

The Gospels testify that Jesus performed miracles and resurrects from death. So why does the New Testament open with a political plea regarding the origins of Jesus as if the miracles/resurrection only matters if he is related to the right people? Presumably if someone today resurrected from death, no one would be asking 'But who is his great great great grandfather?'

I think the purpose of the genealogies is to "prove" that Jesus fulfilled prophecies about the Messiah:

The Genealogies of Jesus

Are the genealogies accurate?

guide4christmas.com

Except, he resurrected! That is the miracle of all miracles... well that and getting Firefly back on the air.

If Jesus didn't fulfill a single prophecy, he still resurrected. The entire religion hangs on that one thing. Abraham, David... doesn't matter. The Resurrection matters! And really only the resurrection matters.

So for them to lead off and go into relationships and prophecies, one has to wonder... about the legitimacy of the other much more important claim.

As I noted, if a person Resurrected and came back to life today, no one is asking who their progeny was 8 generations ago. People might be interested, but it ain't going to be important.

 

[James Brown]

Ah, then we can stick with Protestantism and ask, "Why didn't Jesus inherit Mary's sinful nature like the rest of humanity?"

Mary was just carrying the baby - Jesus' DNA came from the Holy Spirit

Both parents contribute DNA to the fetus.

 

[ideologyhunter]

If the only human DNA you get is from your mom.....then...

 

[excreationist]

Ah, then we can stick with Protestantism and ask, "Why didn't Jesus inherit Mary's sinful nature like the rest of humanity?"

Mary was just carrying the baby - Jesus' DNA came from the Holy Spirit

Both parents contribute DNA to the fetus.

What about a woman who carried/hosted the fertilized egg from someone else? Would the pregnant woman contribute to the DNA of the fetus?

 

[James Brown]

Ah, then we can stick with Protestantism and ask, "Why didn't Jesus inherit Mary's sinful nature like the rest of humanity?"

Mary was just carrying the baby - Jesus' DNA came from the Holy Spirit

Both parents contribute DNA to the fetus.

What about a woman who carried/hosted the fertilized egg from someone else? Would the pregnant woman contribute to the DNA of the fetus?

Then Jesus wasn't a descendant of Mary or Joseph, and thus cannot be considered the Messiah.

 

[excreationist]

However, I'd be interested in is

The Gospels testify that Jesus performed miracles and resurrects from death. So why does the New Testament open with a political plea regarding the origins of Jesus as if the miracles/resurrection only matters if he is related to the right people? Presumably if someone today resurrected from death, no one would be asking 'But who is his great great great grandfather?'

I think the purpose of the genealogies is to "prove" that Jesus fulfilled prophecies about the Messiah:

The Genealogies of Jesus

Are the genealogies accurate?

guide4christmas.com

Except, he resurrected! That is the miracle of all miracles... well that and getting Firefly back on the air.

Martin Luther King Jr and Bishop Shelby Spong didn't believe in a physical resurrection.

If Jesus didn't fulfill a single prophecy, he still resurrected. The entire religion hangs on that one thing. Abraham, David... doesn't matter. The Resurrection matters! And really only the resurrection matters.

So for them to lead off and go into relationships and prophecies, one has to wonder... about the legitimacy of the other much more important claim.

As I noted, if a person Resurrected and came back to life today, no one is asking who their progeny was 8 generations ago. People might be interested, but it ain't going to be important.

In John 7:41-42 the crowd didn't think Jesus was the Messiah because they didn't think he was a descendant of David:

Others said, "This is the Christ." But some said, "What, does the Christ come out of Galilee? Hasn't the Scripture said that the Christ comes of the offspring of David, and from Bethlehem, the village where David was?"

There is a difference between Jesus being seen as God and Jesus being seen as the Jewish Messiah. And lots of Jews still don't think he's the Jewish Messiah.

 

[excreationist]

What about a woman who carried/hosted the fertilized egg from someone else? Would the pregnant woman contribute to the DNA of the fetus?

Then Jesus wasn't a descendant of Mary or Joseph, and thus cannot be considered the Messiah.

I did some research into what Christians actually believe:

Did Jesus have Mary's DNA or was Mary Jesus’ surrogate mother

Bible verses are given to help you know the answer to the question, "Did Jesus have Mary's DNA?" Learn if Mary was Jesus’ surrogate mother.

www.neverthirsty.org

"This would strongly suggest that Jesus did have Mary’s DNA"

 

[James Brown]

I've no doubt that Christians in general have come up with all sorts of various explanations for how Jesus was born without a sinful nature. Those answers are likely to be as varied and as helpful for explaining how Anakin Skywalker was conceived.

But this thread is about how Lee Strobel would answer such questions, not "Christians" or even some sub-set of them.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

However, I'd be interested in is

The Gospels testify that Jesus performed miracles and resurrects from death. So why does the New Testament open with a political plea regarding the origins of Jesus as if the miracles/resurrection only matters if he is related to the right people? Presumably if someone today resurrected from death, no one would be asking 'But who is his great great great grandfather?'

I think the purpose of the genealogies is to "prove" that Jesus fulfilled prophecies about the Messiah:

The Genealogies of Jesus

Are the genealogies accurate?

guide4christmas.com

Except, he resurrected! That is the miracle of all miracles... well that and getting Firefly back on the air.

Martin Luther King Jr and Bishop Shelby Spong didn't believe in a physical resurrection.

If Jesus didn't fulfill a single prophecy, he still resurrected. The entire religion hangs on that one thing. Abraham, David... doesn't matter. The Resurrection matters! And really only the resurrection matters.

So for them to lead off and go into relationships and prophecies, one has to wonder... about the legitimacy of the other much more important claim.

As I noted, if a person Resurrected and came back to life today, no one is asking who their progeny was 8 generations ago. People might be interested, but it ain't going to be important.

In John 7:41-42 the crowd didn't think Jesus was the Messiah because they didn't think he was a descendant of David:

Others said, "This is the Christ." But some said, "What, does the Christ come out of Galilee? Hasn't the Scripture said that the Christ comes of the offspring of David, and from Bethlehem, the village where David was?"

There is a difference between Jesus being seen as God and Jesus being seen as the Jewish Messiah. And lots of Jews still don't think he's the Jewish Messiah.

Uh huh... and we start getting to my point of why Matthew begins as it does.

 

[excreationist]

Uh huh... and we start getting to my point of why Matthew begins as it does.

The Gospels testify that Jesus performed miracles and resurrects from death. So why does the New Testament open with a political plea regarding the origins of Jesus as if the miracles/resurrection only matters if he is related to the right people? Presumably if someone today resurrected from death, no one would be asking 'But who is his great great great grandfather?'

"Presumably if someone today resurrected from death, no one would be asking 'But who is his great great great grandfather?'"

It depends if they were Jewish and were wondering if Jesus fit the criteria for being the Jewish Messiah. e.g. in John 7:41-42 some of the crowd didn't think Jesus was the Messiah because they didn't think his great great [.....] grandfather was King David....

Also having genealogies makes it seem like Jesus is a historical person as opposed to what Mythicists believe....

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Uh huh... and we start getting to my point of why Matthew begins as it does.

The Gospels testify that Jesus performed miracles and resurrects from death. So why does the New Testament open with a political plea regarding the origins of Jesus as if the miracles/resurrection only matters if he is related to the right people? Presumably if someone today resurrected from death, no one would be asking 'But who is his great great great grandfather?'

"Presumably if someone today resurrected from death, no one would be asking 'But who is his great great great grandfather?'"

It depends if they were Jewish and were wondering if Jesus fit the criteria for being the Jewish Messiah. e.g. in John 7:41-42 some of the crowd didn't think Jesus was the Messiah because they didn't think his great great [.....] grandfather was King David....

Well, yeah... he verifiably died and came back to life, but we don't know if he is related David. So no dice.

I don't think so.

Also having genealogies makes it seem like Jesus is a historical person as opposed to what Mythicists believe....

The genealogies are there because the mainstream Jewish folk view the Jesus people as a cult. Matthew 1 is a plea of "We're not a cult!!!"

Hence, why I invite it as a question, because it isn't an easy answer.

 

[excreationist]

Well, yeah... he verifiably died and came back to life, but we don't know if he is related David. So no dice.

Where does it prophecize that the Jewish Messiah would die and come back to life? Though there are 3 prophecies saying the Jewish Messiah would be a descendant of King David (2 Samuel 7:12-16, Psalm 89:3-4, Isaiah 9:7)

Also having genealogies makes it seem like Jesus is a historical person as opposed to what Mythicists believe....

The genealogies are there because the mainstream Jewish folk view the Jesus people as a cult. Matthew 1 is a plea of "We're not a cult!!!"

Can you provide any Bible verses or links that clearly agree with this? What about the genealogies in Luke 3? Is it also about "we're not a cult!!!" ?

Hence, why I invite it as a question, because it isn't an easy answer.

So your simple cult answer isn't easy?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Well, yeah... he verifiably died and came back to life, but we don't know if he is related David. So no dice.

Where does it prophecize that the Jewish Messiah would die and come back to life? Though there are 3 prophecies saying the Jewish Messiah would be a descendant of King David (2 Samuel 7:12-16, Psalm 89:3-4, Isaiah 9:7)

Also having genealogies makes it seem like Jesus is a historical person as opposed to what Mythicists believe....

The genealogies are there because the mainstream Jewish folk view the Jesus people as a cult. Matthew 1 is a plea of "We're not a cult!!!"

Can you provide any Bible verses or links that clearly agree with this?

You mean other than Matthew 1 leading the New Testament and a whole bunch of Jewish fan-fic after the gospels?

What about the genealogies in Luke 3? Is it also about "we're not a cult!!!" ?

The question is why does the New Testament begin with Matthew... why is Matthew 1 as it is. Books are designed, especially the Tanakh/Bible.

That they open up with genealogies is an apparent plea regarding the legitimacy of their claim that Jesus is that guy. This is a literary construction argument, not one where we find specific statements in the New Testament bemoaning that "they think we are a cult, let's patch some stuff up... maybe start the New Testament with a plea to authority fallacy?"

Hence, why I invite it as a question, because it isn't an easy answer.

So your simple cult answer isn't easy?

I'm saying that:

There might not be as pre-scripted response to the question. Again, the genealogy is a plea.... yet their dude committed miracles... so who cares about the genealogies. Matthew 1 is about trying to convince people that aren't buying their argument.

So indeed, ask 'Why start off the New Testament with a list of genealogies to link a person who resurrected, when the resurrection is what identifies Jesus as who he is?'

Let me tell about the man who raised a person from death.
Who was his great great grandfather?
What?
The man who rose the other guy from the dead, who was his great-great-great-great-great grandfather?
Why does it matter? He raised someone from the dead, why does it matter who his great five times over grandfather was?!
Getting a bit self-defensive here.
He died and came back.
Do we know anything about his aunt?