John Hattan <john@thecodezone.com> wrote in message news:<me0rhv8728vo3eobufr1ea8lu76fv5cq5f@4ax.com>...
jientho@aol.com (Jeff Young) wrote:
John Hattan <john@thecodezone.com> wrote in message news:<b39qhvoqtfkpn615np5vab463qoqknphf1@4ax.com>...
jientho@aol.com (Jeff Young) wrote:
John Hattan <john@thecodezone.com> wrote in message news:<vurohvgm2lk2vcv374dokd7dau93q15br0@4ax.com>...
jientho@aol.com (Jeff Young) wrote:
John Hattan <john@thecodezone.com> wrote in message news:<67fmhvkrhr5ieo99t0obbiduou8p3mrvs0@4ax.com>...
jientho@aol.com (Jeff Young) wrote:
John Hattan <john@thecodezone.com> wrote in message news:<ev2bhv44g59h51lqun8hfc3g1ki3tbgo6d@4ax.com>...
jientho@aol.com (Jeff Young) wrote:
John Hattan <john@thecodezone.com> wrote in message news:<i8j8hvoru6v75au1qjim37hev9l139dklm@4ax.com>...
jientho@aol.com (Jeff Young) wrote:
John Hattan <john@thecodezone.com> wrote in message news:<jc08hvscd06hpbvtese6756srffh0k3439@4ax.com>...
check out T-chy's "evidence" regarding the
conflicting genealogies of Jesus. He just asserts that one genealogy is
maternal, then a week later insists that "the evidence has been
provided".
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=jrr38.82613%24_w.12778561%40typhoon.tampabay.rr.com
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=EHB58.154829%24_w.24088684%40typhoon.tampabay.rr.com
Feel free to sift
No need, because it's in his very next reply in the same thread:
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=7c15eee6.0201250958.dacb4a0%40posting.google.com
Are you referring to this?
Women, generally speaking, didn't occur in Jewish lineages. It
would be surprising if Joseph's mother were listed--and it also has
to do with your next question . . .
<begin quote>
Inheritance was determined by the father, and status as a
Jew (part of the religious family) by the mother.
Joseph's lineage was key to Jesus' claim as Israel's king. Having
that through both parents would definitely be a plus & make the
inclusion of the genealogies relevant to the reader at that time.
<end quote>
I referred to the whole post.
That quote doesn't
<sni
<snip>
It's funny
Well thank you. It's a pity you couldn't address the evidence though.
Beyond your Fallacy of Ridicule that is.
You snip
For reasons already explained -- you've been dismissed for cause.
Liar.
Incorrect. I have in fact already explained my reasons for your
dismissal. Your continued dishonesty on that point noted. For the
record.
And BTW, it's noted once again that you are using one-word sentences.
;-)
Jeff
.
