Is the Bible God's Word ? by Ahmed Deedat

Originally posted by Debmey at 2005-1-25 11:49 AM:
Muslism stuck, thats why need to copycat like kennkid.

cheers

Nothing to copy from you. All worthless.  I was correcting you.

zy

THE ACID TEST

How do we know that a book claimed to be from God is really the Book of God? One of the tests, out of the many such tests, is - that a message emanating from an Omniscient Being MUST be consistent with itself. It ought to be free from all discrepancies and contradictions. This is exactly what the LAST TESTAMENT, the Book of God says:



GOD OR THE DEVIL?
If God Almighty wants us to verify the authenticity of His Book (The Holy Qur-醤) with this acid test, why should we not apply the very same test to any other Book claiming to be from Him? We do not want to bamboozle anybody with words as the Christians have been doing. It would be readily agreed from the references, I have given from Christian scholars, that they have been proving to us that the Bible is NOT the Word of God, yet making us believe that they have actually convinced us to the contrary.

A classic example of this sickness was in evidence again only "yesterday." The Anglican synod was in session in Grahamstown. The Most Rev. Bill Burnett, the Archbishop was preaching to his flock. He created a confusion in his Anglican community. An erudite Englishman, addressing a group of learned English priests and bishops, in their own mother-tongue - English, which his learned colleagues drastically misunderstood: to such an extent that Mr. McMillan, perhaps also an Anglican, the Editor of an English daily - "The Natal Mercury," dated December 11, 1979, had this to say about the confusion the Archbishop had created among his own learned clergy:

"ARCHBISHOP BURNETT'S REMARKS AT THE SYNOD WERE HARDLY A MODEL OF CLARITY AND WERE WIDELY AND DRAMATICALLY MISINTERPRETED BY MANY OF THOSE PRESENT."

There is nothing wrong with English as a language, but can't you see that the Christian is trained in muddled thinking in all matters religious. The "bread" in his Holy Communion is not "bread" but "flesh?" The "wine" is "blood?" "Three is one?" and "Human is Divine?" But don't make a mistake, he is not that simple when dealing with the earthly kingdom, he is then most precise. You will have to be doubly careful when entering into a contract with him! He can have you sold out, without you realising it.

The examples that I shall furnish in substantiating the points I have raised about the contradictions in the so-called Book of God, would be found so easy even for a child to follow and understand. See page 36.

You will observe that the authors of the books of "Chronicles" and of "Samuel" are telling us the same story about David taking a census of the Jews. Where did David get his "inspiration" to do this novel deed? The author of 2 Samuel 24:1 says that it was the "LORD" God who MOVED (RSV: "incited") David, but the author of 1 Chronicles 21:1 says that it was "SATAN" who PROVOKED (RSV: "incited") David to do such a dastardly thing! How could the Almighty God have been the source of these contradictory "INSPIRATIONS?" Is it God or is it Satan! In which religion is the DEVIL synonymous with GOD! I am not talking about "Satanism," a recent fungus growth of Christianity, in which ex-Christians worship the Devil. Christianity has been most prolific of spawning isms, Atheism, Communism, Fascism, Totalitarianism, Nazism, Mormonism, Moonism, Christian Scientism and now Satanism. What else will Christianity give birth to?

[ Last edited by zy on 25-1-2005 at 09:58 PM ]

zy

The "Holy Bible" lends itself to all kinds of contradictory interpretations. This is the Christian boast! "SOME CLAIM AND RIGHTLY SO, THAT BIBLICAL PASSAGES HAVE BEEN CONTINUOUSLY MISUSED AND MISAPPROPRIATED TO JUSTIFY ALMOST EVERY EVIL KNOWN TO MAN" (From: "The Plain Truth" an American-based Christian Journal under the

While the author of Samuel 24 above, makes God the boss of the situation, the author of Chronicles, below:



apart from showing allegiance to God as is noted elsewhere, also gives the devil his due. This dichotomy on the part of the author of Chronicles reminds one of the story of the old woman who lit one candle to St. Michael and another to the devil. St. Michael was trampling underfoot, so that whether she went to Heaven or Hell, she would have a friend. This Chronicles fellow, made sure that he had a friend at court Above, as well as a friend at court Below. He wanted to have it both ways, or wanted to have his cake, and eat it too.

zy

WHO ARE THE REAL AUTHORS?
As further evidence will be adduced from "Samuel" and "Chronicles," I deem it advisable first to determine their authors instead of suspecting God of those books' incongruities. The Revisers of the RSV say:

   1. SAMUEL: Author "Unknown" (Just one word)
   2. CHRONICLES: Author "Unknown, probably collected and edited by Ezra."

We must admire the humility of these Bible scholars, but their "possiblys," "probablys" and "likelys" are always construed as ACTUALLY'S by their fleeced sheep. Why make poor Ezra or Isaiah the scapegoats for these anonymous writers?

THREE OR SEVEN?
Note the reproduction of page 38. Compare both the quotations. 2 Samuel 24:13 tells us - "So Gad came to David, AND TOLD HIM, and said unto him, ..." These words are repeated word for word in 1 Chronicles 21:11, except the redundant "AND TOLD HIM" is removed! But while trimming the useless phrase, the author also pruned the time factor from 'SEVEN" years to "THREE" years. What did God say to Gad - Three or Seven years plague - "on both your houses?"

EIGHT OR EIGHTEEN?
See page 39. Compare the two quotations. 2 Chronicles 36:9 tells us that JEHOIACHIN was "eight" years old when he began to reign, while 2 Kings 24:8 says that he was "eighteen" when he began to reign. The "unknown" author of KINGS must have reasoned that what possible "evil" could a child of eight do to deserve his abdication, so he generously added ten years to make JEHOIACHIN mature enough to become liable to God's wrath. However, he had to balance his tampering, so he cut short his reign by 10 days! Add TEN years to age and deduct TEN days from rule? Could God Almighty say two widely differing things on the same subject?

CAVALRY OR INFANTRY?
Compare the two quotations on page 40. How many chariot riders did David slay? Seven hundred or seven thousand? And further, did he slay 40 000 "HORSEMEN" or 40 000 "FOOTMEN?" The implication in the conflicting records between 2 Samuel 10:18 and 1 Chronicles 19:18 is not only that God could not discern the difference between hundreds and thousands, but that He could not even distinguish "CAVALRY" from "INFANTRY!" It is obvious that blasphemy masquerades in the Christian dictionary as "inspiration!"

DivinePonytail

zy, the answers you seek are at

http://www.muslimhope.com/bibleanswers.htm
and
http://www.carm.org/bible_difficulties.htm

greekgod

so good...

i have save this question to ask in thread i created..
Science Perspective: World's Creation according to Bible,
but, i think it worth too to ask it now...

Why world's creation mentioned in Sacerdotal texts different to those in Yahvist text?

If Bible comes from god, it should preserved the same information, but unfortunately, information has been missed somewhere... then, i think, interpolation has taken place, that makes the bible no longer god's words, but human ideas.

Debmey

it is not diffrent information but diffrent interpretation.

zy

WHAT DID THE LORD DECREE 3 YEARS  FAMINE OR 7 YEARS FAMINE?




If God is the author of every single word, comma and full-stop in the Bible, as the Christians claim, then is He the Author of the above arithmetical discrepancy as well?

zy

HOW OLD WAS JEHOIACHIN? 8 OR 18?

Between Eight and Eighteen years, there is a gap or difference of a full 10 years. Can we say (God forbid!) that the all-knowing Almighty could not count, and thus did not know the difference between 8 and 18? If we are to believe in the Bible as the Word of God, then the Dignity and Status of the Lord Almighty will hit an all-time low!

zy

700 or 7 000?
It is certainly naught for Bible-lovers' comfort that a whole nought (0) was either added to 700, or subtracted from 7 000, thus making the confused Biblical Mathematics even more confounded!*



GOD CONFUSED BETWEEN "CAVALRY" AND "INFANTRY"?

As for the "inspired writers" of the Bible not knowing the difference between "footmen" and "horsemen," is all the more serious because God himself here stands accused, as a source of that "inspiration" for not knowing the difference between cavalry and infantry. Or is it possible that the Syrians who fled before Israel were centaurs (i.e. a race of creatures with the body and legs of a horse and the torso, head and arms of a man). Is it possible that these "creatures" had suddenly stepped out of Classical Mythology to bemuse the all too gullible authors.

zy

God could not discern the difference between hundreds and thousands, but that He could not even distinguish "CAVALRY" from "INFANTRY!" It is obvious that blasphemy masquerades in the Christian dictionary as "inspiration!"

PRACTICAL HOME-WORK
Solomon in his glory began building a royal palace for himself which took him thirteen years. We learn this from the 1st Book of Kings, chapter 7. You remember Dr. Parker's boast (Page 30) about "whole pages being taken up by obscure names?" Well, for sheer puerility you cannot beat this chapter 7 and Ezekiel chapter 45. You owe it to yourself to read it just once in your lifetime. After that, you will really appreciate the Holy Quŕ醤! If you do not own a Bible, and if you are a Muslim, you will get a free copy from the address at the bottom of this page. You may then colour the various references from this booklet in your Bible. "Yellow" for all contradictions, use "Red" for pornographic passages, and "Green" for sensible, acceptable quotations as the ones I have mentioned at the beginning of this essay - that is words that you can effortlessly recognize as being those of God and His Holy Messengers. With just this preparation, you will be ready to confute and confuse any missionary or Bible scholar that comes your way! "IF WE PERSPIRE MORE IN TIMES OF PEACE, WE WILL BLEED LESS IN TIMES OF WAR." (Chiang Kai-Shek)

HOW HYGIENIC?
Turn, now, to page 42 and note that the author of 1 Kings 7:26 has counted 2 000 baths in Solomon's palace, but the author of 2 Chronicles 4:5 increases the kingly count by 50% to 3 000! What extravagance and error in the "Book of God?" Even if God Almighty had nothing else to do, would He occupy Himself "inspiring" such trivial contradictory nonsense to the Jews? Is the Bible God's Book? Is it the Word of God?

PILED CONTRADICTIONS
before I conclude this series of contradictions, let me give you just one more example. There are hundreds of others in the Bible. See page above. It is Solomon again. He really does things in a big way. The ex-Shah of Iran was a nursery kid by comparison! The author of 2 Chronicles 9:25 gives Solomon one thousand more stalls of horses than the number of baths he had given him. "And Solomon had FOUR thousand stalls for horses..."

zy

THE DIFFERENCE 2 000 AND 3 000 IS ONLY 50% EXAGGERATION!


Whether it is witting or unwitting, the "inspired" writer's singular inability to grasp the difference between 2 000 and 3 000 is unforgivable. It is an obvious contradiction. "AND NO MIRACLE WOULD PROVE THAT TWO AND TWO MAKES FIVE, OR THAT A CIRCLE HAS FOUR ANGELS; AND NO MIRACLES HOWEVER NUMEROUS COULD REMOVE A CONTRADICTION WHICH LIES ON THE SURFACE OF THE TEACHINGS AND RECORDS OF CHRISTIANITY." - (Albert Schweizer), from his book: "In Search of the Historical Jesus."

zy

The Difference between 4 thousand and 40 thousand



is only 36 000!



The Jews did not use The "0" (Zero) in the Old Testament


author of 1 Kings 4:26 had real kingly thoughts about his royal patron. He multiplied Solomon's stalls by 1 000% - from 4 000 to 40 000 stalls of horses! Before some glib evangelist draws the wool over your eyes that the difference is only a nought, a zero - "0"; that some scribe or copyist had inadvertently added a zero to 4 000 to make it 40 000, let me tell you that the Jews in the time of Solomon knew nothing about the zero - "0"! It was the Arabs who introduced the zero to the Middle East and to Europe centuries later. The Jews spelt out their figures in words in their literary works and did not write them in numerals. Our Question is - Who was the real author of this staggering discrepency of 36 000? Was it God or man? You will find these references and many more allied facts in a very comprehensive book - "THE BIBLE - Word of God or Word of Man?" by A. S. K. Joommal.

zy

MOST OBJECTIVE TESTIMONY

The Christian propagandist is very fond of quoting the following verse as proof that his Bible is the Word of God.

"All scripture IS given by inspiration of God and IS profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." (2 Timothy 3:16 - AV by Scofield)

Note the "IS's" in capitals. Rev. Scofield is telling us silently that they do not occur in the original Greek. "THE NEW ENGLISH BIBLE," translated by a committee representing the Church of England, the Church of Scotland, the Methodist Church, the Congregational Church, the Baptist Union, the Presbyterian Church of England, etc., etc., and the BRITISH AND FOREIGN BIBLE SOCIETY has produced the closest translation of the original Greek which deserves to be reproduced here:
"EVERY INSPIRED SCRIPTURE HAS ITS USE FOR TEACHING THE TRUTH AND REFUTING ERROR, OR FOR REFORMATION OF MANNERS AND DISCIPLINE IN RIGHT LIVING." (2 Timothy 3:16)

The Roman Catholics in their "Douay" Version, are also more faithful to the text than the Protestants in their Authorised Version (AV). They say: "ALL SCRIPTURE, INSPIRED OF GOD, IS PROFITABLE TO TEACH, TO REPROVE, TO CORRECT ..."

We will not quibble with words. Muslims and Christians are agreed that whatever emanates from God, whether through inspiration or by revelation, must serve one of four purposes:-

   1. It must either teach us DOCTRINE;
   2. REPROVE us for our error;
   3. Offer us CORRECTION;
   4. Guide us into RIGHTEOUSNESS.

I have been asking learned men of Christianity for the past forty years, whether they can supply a FIFTH "peg" to hang the Word of God on. They have failed signally. That does not mean that I have improved upon their performance. Let us examine the "Holy Bible" with these objective tests.

zy

NOT FAR TO SEEK
The very first book of the Bible - Genesis - provides us with many beautiful examples. Open chapter 38 and read. We are given here the history* of Judah, the father of the Jewish race, from whom we derive the names "Judea" and "Judaism." This patriarch of the Jews got married and God granted him three sons, Er, Onan and Shelah. When the first-born was big enough, Judah had him married to a lady called Tamar. "BUT ER, JUDAH'S FIRST-BORN WAS WICKED IN THE SIGHT OF THE LORD; AND THE LORD SLEW HIM."(Genesis 38:7). Under what heading, from the above four principles of Timothy will you place this sad news? The second - "REPROVE" is the answer. Er was wicked so God killed him. A lesson for all, God will destroy us for our wickedness. REPROOF!

Continuing with this Jewish history, according to their custom, if a brother died and left no offspring, it was the duty of the other brother to give "seed" to his sisters-in-law so that the deceased's name might be perpetuated. Judah, in honour of this custom, orders his second son Onan to do his duty. But Jealousy enters his heart. It will be his seed but the name will be his brother's! So at the critical moment "HE SPILLED IT ON THE GROUND...AND THE THING HE DID DISPLEASED THE LORD: WHEREFORE HE SLEW HIM ALSO." (Genesis 38:9-10). Again, where does this slaying fit into Timothy's tests? "REPROOF!" is the answer again. No prizes are offered for these easy answers. They are so basic. Do wrong and bear the consequence! Onan is forgotten in the "Book of God," but Christian sexologists have immortalized him by referring to "coitus interruptus," as Onanism in their "Books of Sex."

Now Judah tells his daughter-in-law, Tamar, to return to her father's house until his third son Shelah attains manhood, when she will be brought back so that he can do his duty.

A WOMAN'S REVENGE
Shelah grows up and is, perhaps, married to another woman. But Judah had not fulfilled his obligation to Tamar. Deep in his heart he is terrified. He has already lost two sons on account of this "witch," - "LEST PERADVENTURE HE (Shelah) DIE ALSO, AS HIS BRETHERN DID." (Genesis 38:11). So Judah conveniently forgets his promise. The aggrieved young lady resolves to take revenge on her father-in-law for depriving her of her "seed" right.

zy

Tamar learned that Judah is going to Timnath to sheer his sheep. She plans to get even with him on the way. She forestalls him, and goes and sits in an open place en route to Timnath. When Judah sees her, he thinks she is a harlot because she has covered her face. He comes up to her and proposes - "ALLOW ME TO COME IN UNTO THEE; AND SHE SAID WHAT WILT THOU GIVE ME, THAT THOU MAYEST COME IN UNTO ME?" He promises that he would send her a goat kid from his flock. What guarantee could she have that he would send it? What guarantee did she require, Judah queried. "His ring, his bracelet and his staff" is the ready answer. The old man hands these possessions to her, and "CAME IN UNTO HER, AND SHE CONCEIVED BY HIM." (Genesis 38:16-18).

THE MORAL LESSON
Before we seek the heading from Timothy 3:16, under which to categorize this filthy, dirty story from the "Book of God," I am tempted to ask, as you would be tempted to ask: what is the moral (?) lesson that our children will learn from Tamar's sweet revenge? Of course we do tell our children, fables, not really for their entertainment value, but that through them some moral may be imparted."The Fox and the Grapes," "The Wolf and the Lamb," "The Dog and his Shadow," etc. However simple or silly the story, a moral is aimed at.

'CHRISTIAN PARENTAL DILEMMAS'?
Dr. Vernon Jones, an American psychologist of repute, carried out experiments on groups of schoolchildren to whom certain stories had been told. The heroes of the stories were the same in the case of the different groups of children, but the heroes behaved contradictorily to each group. To one group "St. George," slaying the dragon emerged a very brave figure, but in another group, fleeing in terror and seeking shelter in his mother's lap. "THESE STORIES MADE CERTAIN SLIGHT BUT PERMANENT CHANGES IN CHARACTER, EVEN IN THE NARROW CLASSROOM SITUATION," concluded Dr. Jones.

How much more permanent damage the rapes and murders, incests and beastialities of the "Holy Bible" has done to the children of Christendom, can be measured from reports in our daily newspapers. If such is the source of Western morality, it is no little wonder, then, that Methodists and Roman Catholics have already solemnized, marriages between HOMOSEXUALS in their "Houses of God." And 8 000 "gays" (an euphemistic term for sodomites) parade their "wares" in London's Hyde Park in July 1979, to the acclaim of the news and TV media.You must get that "Holy Bible" and read the whole chapter 38 of Genesis. Mark in "red" the words and phrases deserving this adornment. We had reached verse 18 in our moral (?) lesson - "AND SHE CONCEIVED HIM."

[ Last edited by zy on 29-1-2005 at 07:40 AM ]

zy

CAN'T HIDE FOR EVER
Three months later, as things were bound to turn out, news reached Judah that his daughter-in-law, Tamar, had played the "harlot" and that she was with "CHILD BY WHOREDOM AND JUDAH SAID, BRING HER FORTH, AND LET HER BE BURNT." (Genesis 38:24). Judah had deliberately spurned her as a "witch" and now he sadistically wants to burn her. But this wiley Jewess was one up on the old man. She sent the "ring," the "bracelet," and the "staff," with a servant, beseeching her father-in-law to find the culprit responsible for her pregnancy. Judah was in a fix. He confessed that his daughter-in-law was more "RIGHTEOUS" than himself, and "HE KNEW HER AGAIN NO MORE." (verse 26). It is quite an experience to compare the choice of language in which the different Versions describe the same incident. The Jehovah's Witnesses in their "New World Translation" translate the last quotation as - "HE HAD NO FURTHER INTERCOURSE WITH HER AFTER THAT."* This is not the last we will hear about in the "Book of God" of this Tamar whom the Gospel writers have immortalized in their "Genealogy of their Lord."

INCEST HONOURED
I don not want to bore you with details but the end verses of Genesis 38 deal with a duel in Tamar's womb: about the twins struggling for ascendancy. The Jews were very meticulous about recording their "first borns." The first-born got the lion's share of their father's patrimony. Who are the lucky winners in this prenatal race? There are four in this unique contest. They are "PHAREZ and ZARAH of TAMAR by JUDAH." How? You will see presently. But first, let us have the moral. What is the moral in this episode? You remember Er and Onan: how God destroyed them for their several sins? And the lessons we have learnt in each case was "REPROOF." Under what category of Timothy will you place the incest of Judah, and his illegitimate progeny? All these characters are honoured in the "Book of God" for their *****y. They become the great grandfathers and great grandmothers of the "only begotten son of God.'(?)

See Matthew 1:3. In every version of the Bible, the Christians  have varied the spelling of these characters' names from those obtained in the Old Testament (Genesis chapter 38) with those contained in the New Testament (Matthew chapter 1) to put the reader off the scent. From PHAREZ in the "Old" to PARES in the "New," and ZARAH to ZARA and TAMAR to THAMAR. But what about the moral? God blesses Judah for his incestuous crime! So if you do "evil" (Er), God will slay you; if you spill "seed" (Onan), God will kill you, but a daughter-in-law (Lamat) who vengefully and guilefully collect her father-in-law's (Judah's) "seed" is rewarded. Under what category will the Christians place this "honour" in the "Book of God?" Where does it fit? Is it...Your?

   1. DOCTRINE?
   2. REPROOF?
   3. CORRECTION? or
   4. INSTRUCTION INTO RIGHTEOUSNESS?

Ask him who comes and knocks at your door - that professional preacher, that hot-gospeller, that Bible-thumper. Here, he deserves a prize if he can grant an explanation for the correct answer. There is none born who can justify this filth, this pornography under any of the above headings. But a heading has to be given. It can only be recorded under - "PORNOGRAPHY!"

[ Last edited by zy on 29-1-2005 at 07:41 AM ]

zy

BAN THE BOOK!
George Bernard Shaw said,"THE MOST DANGEROUS BOOK (the Bible) ON EARTH, KEEP IT UNDER LOCK AND KEY." Keep the Bible out of your children's reach. But who will follow his advice? He was not a "B.A.,1 a "reborn" Christian.

According to the high moral scruples of the Christian rulers of South Africa, who have banned the Book, "Lady Chatterley's Lover," because of a "tetragrammaton" - a four-letter word, they would most assuredly have placed a ban on the "Holy Bible" if it had been a Hindu religious Book, or a Muslim religious Book. But they are utterly helpless against their own "Holy Book," their "SALVATION" depends upon it!



DAUGHTERS SEDUCE THEIR FATHER
Read Genesis 19, verses 30 to the end and mark again in "red" the words and phrases deserving this honour. Do not hesitate and procrastinate. Your "coloured" Bible will become a priceless heirloom for your children. I agree with Shaw, to keep the Bible "under lock and key," but we need this weapon to meet the Christian challenge. The prophet of Islam said that "WAR IS STRATEGY," and strategy demands that we use the weapons of our enemy. It is not what we like and what we do not like. It is what we are forced to use against the "ONE BOOK" (Bible) professors, who are knocking at our doors with "the Bible says this" and "the Bible says that." They want us to exchange our Holy Quŕ醤 for their "Holy Bible." Show them the holes in the "holiness" which they have not yet seen. At times these zombies pretend to see the filth for the first time. They have been programmed with selected verses for their propagation.

To continue: the "history" has it that, night after night, the daughters of Lot seduce their drunken father with the noble (?) motive of preserving their father's "seed." "Seed" figures very prominently in this "Holy Book": forty seven times in the little booklet of Genesis alone! Out of this another incestuous relationship come the "Ammonites" and the "Moabites," for whom the God of Israel was supposed to have had a special compassion. Later on in the Bible we learn that the Jews are ordered by the same compassionate God to slaughter the Philistines mercilessly - men, women and children. Even trees and animals are not to be spared, but the Amonites and the Moabites are not to be "distressed" or "meddled" with because they are the seed of Lot! (Deuteronomy 2:19)

No decent reader can read the seduction of Lot to his mother, sister or daughter, not even to his fianc閑 if she is a chaste and moral woman. Yet you will come across perverted people who will gorge this filth. Tastes can be cultivated!

Read again and mark Ezekiel 23. You will know what colour to choose. The "whoredoms" of the two sisters, Aholah and Aholibah. The sexual details here puts to shame even the unexpurgated edition of many banned books. Ask your "born again" Christian visitors, under what category will they classify all this lewdness? Such filth certainly has no place in any "Book of God."

Al-Haj A.D. Ajijola in his book - "the Myth of the Cross," gives a masterly expos

sakinahmawaddah

Originally posted by Debmey at 26-1-2005 10:03 PM:
it is not diffrent information but diffrent interpretation.

If the interpretation is different, why still keep it safe. Wouldn't this will mislead people coz the understanding also will be different?

zy

THE GENEALOGY OF JESUS

Watch now how the Christian fathers have foisted the incestuous progenies of the Old Testament upon their Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, in the New Testament. For a man who had no genealogy, they have manufactured one for him. And what a genealogy! Six adulterers and offsprings of incest are imposed upon this holy man of God. Men and women deserving to be stoned to death according to God's own law, as revealed through Moses, and further to be ostracised and debarred from the House of God for generations.1

IGNOBLE ANCESTRY
Why should God give a "father" (Joseph) to His "son" (Jesus)? And why such an ignoble ancestry? "This is the whole beauty of it," says the pervert. "God loved the sinners so much that he disdaineth not to give such progenitors for His 'son.'"

ONLY TWO COMMISSIONED
Of the four Gospel writers, God "inspired" only two of them to record the genealogy of His "son." To make it easy for you to compare the "fathers and grandfathers" of Jesus Christ in both the "inspired" lists, I have culled the names only, minus the verbiage. See page 53. Between David and Jesus, God "inspired" Matthew to record only 26 ancestors for His "son." But Luke, also "inspired," gathered up 41 forefathers for Jesus. The only name common to these two lists between David and Jesus is JOSEPH and that, too, a "supposed" father according to Luke 3:23 (AV). This one name is glaring. You need no fine-tooth comb to catch him. It is Joseph the carpenter. You will also easily observe that the lists are grossly contradictory. Could both the lists have emanated from the same source, i.e. God?

FULFILLING PROPHECY?
Matthew and Luke are over-zealous in making DAVID the King, the prime ancestor of Jesus, because of that false notion



[ Last edited by zy on 1-2-2005 at 02:11 AM ]