Sukkafreestudies: The Jews, in their " canonical " more definitely i...

Sukkafreestudies: The Jews, in their " canonical " more definitely i...: The Jews, in their " canonical " more definitely in their apocryphal or admittedly forged scriptures, expected a " Messia...

The Jews, in their " canonical " more definitely in their apocryphal or admittedly forged scriptures, expected a " Messiah " or anointed King of the race and lineage of David, who should deliver them from the rule of their enemies. This king, says Isaiah, shall sit and reign " upon the throne of David, and upon his Kingdom, to establish it"[ Isa. ix,7 ]; and that this prophecy was in order of fulfillment , Gabriel the Angel announced to Mary the ever-virgin mother of eight sons and daughters:" Thou shalt bring forth a son and shalt call his name Jesus; and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: and he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever"[ Luke, i.32,33. ] There is not a word of "prophecy" anywhere that this King should be divine, a Son of the God of Israel; he was to be a human king of the house of Jacob and David. That this Messiah Jesus who was to come was merely a man, but instinct with the Spirit of God, is positively avowed by both Peter and Paul. Says Peter in his first sermon at Pentecost: Ye men of Israel, here these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you[etc]. The patriarch David, therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit upon his throne[ Acts,ii,22,29,30]. And Paul: " There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus[ 1 Tim.ii,5 ]; and again: " Jesus Christ of the seed of David"[2 Tim.ii,8]. Therefore, in the time when the two cited books were written, Jesus at that time was regarded simply as a man, a "son" or descendant of David. Matthews first chapter begins very humanly and explicitly: The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham"; and Matthew gives an unbroken line of human begetting until" and Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ"![ Matt.i,1-16]. And Matthew names and catalogues twenty-eight generations between David and Jesus, to-wit: David, Solomon, Jacob, Joseph, Jesus, a purely human ancestry. Also Luke still reflected the belief held at time he wrote that Jesus was of human ancestry; he gives his human genealogy all the way back to Adam, and through many mythical patriarchs who assuredly never existed. This human genealogy by Luke vastly differs from, however, from that of Matthew's; instead of twenty-eight generations from David through Solomon, Jacob, and Joseph, Luke's genealogy makes out in detail forty two generations, to-wit: David, Nathan, Heli, Joseph, Jesus. So one or the other of the two inspired genealogies if fictitious, false and forged. Both of the genealogies are false and forged lists of mostly fictitious names, in the original Gospels-forgeries, fabricated to prove Jesus a direct son or descendant of David, and thus to fulfill the terms of the pretended prophecies that the human Messiah should be of the race of David and lineage of David the King...The Greek text of the Gospels make this plain, that no supernatural progeneration and actual God-ship was intended. In most instances the Greek text reads simply " son of God "huious Theou,, " not the son " o huious ": the definate article is a clerical falsification...forgery in christianity.. J. Wheless..