I think it’s the other way around. Since he’s decended from David he can’t be conceived the Holy Spirit.
oldscratch:
Six of one, half a dozen of the other. The two statements can’t both be true. So JC as described by Christian theology cannot be the Messaih as described by Jewish theology.
Chaim Mattis Keller
Well, maybe God divinely gave J.C. Joseph’s DNA? He can do that, He’s God and all. No sciptural support for this, though.
There’s no scriptural support, either.
Brian,
I have talked to people from Jews for Jesus and other such organizations. They tried to convince me of their claims and failed. Simple as that. I won’t convince someone else to believe or look into something that I myself found unconvincing.
Zev Steinhardt
I see what Gaudere is trying to say, but it still fits CMKeller’s point about being self-contradictory.
Anyone out there familiar with how Christians view fatherhood in the case of donated sperm? Can a person have two fathers? If yes, then Gaudere’s scenario is interesting. (But no more than merely interesting, since Jesus failed to accomplish those things which Judaism expected of a Messiah.) But if a person cannot have more than one father in Christian theology, then it’s either Joseph or God. You can’t have it both ways.
Sorry, Keeves and CM, but you’re looking for logic underlying belief, and you won’t find it… and, at the same time, you won’t convince any of the faithful to give up their belief merely because it ain’t logical.
In terms of Christianity, a religion that can claim there are three gods who are really One, and thus can swallow a camel, will not strain at the gnat of two fathers for one of those three gods.
In terms of Judaism, there are also inherently illogical assumptions (such as the omni-present God having a “presence” in the Tabernacle, to pick just one.) Again, the faithful find ways to reconcile these seeming contradictions.
Non-believers think they have scored a great point by pointing out illogic or inconsistency, not aware that those illogics and inconsistencies have all been known and answered by the faithful, hundreds (if not thousands) of years ago.
Ok, let’s say God does the whole Holy Spirit thing and impregnates Mary, but He uses Joseph’s genetic code to “make” Jesus. Now, I would consider God the father, even though J.C. would have Joseph’s DNA. Since he has the genetic code of the bloodline of David, he would be qualified for messiahship, even though Joseph is not technically his father. There are various reasons why God would do things this way; people would assume Joseph was the father, so you may as well use his DNA, to fulfill the prophesies, as a sop to Joseph to make up for being cuckolded by God, etc.
If, say, God snitched some of Joseph’s sperm and got Mary preggers without Joseph’s help, would Joseph still be the father? I would say yes. Does it make any difference if God made “ex nihlio” the DNA code, rather than doing it by way of sperm? I tend to think, in this case, God is the father (since he “made” J.C.), but it is appropriate to still claim Joseph’s bloodline. Also, there is the matter of adoption. If J.C. has the blood of the male line of David, exactly as if Joseph had concieved him with Mary in the traditional way, and has adopted him as his son, it seems as if J.C. would definitely be qualifies as being of the line of David, despite the roundabout way of getting there.
The question is “Is Jesus from the line of David” and that depends entirely on how they figure it. Are you of the line of David, if, and only if, the man who had sex with and inpregnated your mother is decended from David? Or is it enough that you have the right genetic code that is is exactly as if you were?
I hate to jump in here folks. Brian, can you quantify “many” in the above statement?
Messianic Jews and other Judeo-Christian organizations are relatively christian organizations that involve a limited teaching of the Old Testament combined with the New Testament of the Cristians.
Being a Jew, I can definitely say that neither I, nor any of my family believe in Christ and the second coming for reasons that have been posted by people such as Zev.
ME
AS A NON PRACTICING CATHOLIC HERE ARE MY ARGUMENTS FOR JESUS AS THE MESSIAH. JESUS CAME TO US IN PART (I BELIVE) TO PUT US ON THE RIGHT PATH OF RELIGION. 2.)HE CAME TO US TO PURPOSELY DIE TO CLENSE OUR SOULS OF SIN FOREVER. 3.) JESUS IS THE ONLY MESSIAH TO EVER DIE AND COME BACK. i DON’T RECALL IF BUDDA OR ALLAH EVER DID THIS. i AM IN NO WAY SAYING MY RELIGION IS RIGHT AND EVERYONE ELSE IS WRONG. I AM SIMPLY STATING WHAT I BELIVE. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT JEWS ARE THE MOST PERSICUTED PEOPLE ON EARTH AND ALWAYS HAVE BEEN BUT AS A CHRISTIAN MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IS WHY THEY ARE GOD’S CHILDREN SAVED FROM CERTAIN DEATH WHEN THE WATERS PARTED. I ALSO BELIVE ALL RELIGION IN SOME SHAPE OR FORM COMES TOGETHER IN SOME WAY.MOST RELIGONS PREACH BEING GOOD TO ONE ANOTHER ETC ETC ETC. ANY GOOD GOD DETESTS WAR AND SELF DESTUCTION. AND I DON’T THINK GOD WOULD WANT US TO BLOW UP A BUILDING FOR HIM-IE:TERRORISTS/ HE WANTS US TO LOVE LIVE NOT KILL IT AND ALSO IF HE TRUELY WANTED TO HE COULD DO IT HIMSELF. ALL I’M SAYING IS THAT FAITH IS THE BOTTOM LINE ON RELIGON BECAUSE IF YOU DON’T BELIVE IN SOMTHING THEN WHAT ARE YOU LIVING FOR.
BRIAN BOVOLD, thanks for the testimony. Although I don’t think it furthered the debate, itself, very much, it was nice to see a plea for consideration for all faiths.
HOWEVER,
please kill the caps lock. Typing in all caps is generally considered to be “shouting” on this sort of forum. Since you were not actually ranting or being nasty, your use of all capitalized letters may give some readers the wrong impression.
Tom~
**
Not having much to do with the OP, but I feel the need to set the record straight on the misconceptions you seem to be laboring under about a few things.
**
A few comments - If you knew anything about Buddhism, you would know that Buddha is not a God, but a man. Buddhism is in it’s essense a non-deistic philosophy about making yourself better through meditation (and other ritual), and in fact, many Christians are using the Buddhist techniques to get closer to Jesus without conflict.
Furthermore, Allah is not Jesus, but He IS the God of the Old Testament - Jesus’ father, if you will. The Koran, which is based on what the angel Gabriel imparted upon the prophet Muhammad, simply uses the name Allah instead of God, and this has a lot to do with the fact that any English version of the Koran is considered uninspired by Muslims - It has to be in the original Arabic.
Finally, David Copperfield made the Statue of Liberty disappear and then come back, in front of a lot more peopel than witnessed Jesus’ resurrection. Would this make Copperfield God and the Statue of Liberty the messiah?
Well, a lot of atheists and agnostics would no doubt feel they have much to live for in spite of this accusation.
And please, for the love of God, hit the caps-lock key and turn it off!!
Yer pal,
Satan
http://www.raleighmusic.com/board/Images/devil.gif
I HAVE BEEN SMOKE-FREE FOR:
Four days, 12 hours, 38 minutes and 32 seconds.
181 cigarettes not smoked, saving $22.63.
Life saved: 15 hours, 5 minutes.
I am sorry about the cap locks people. anyway, I will admit that I know alittle about most religons but alot about none of them. I know that the thing that motivataed me when I had nothing to lose was faith. a simple belief in somthing /anything. as far as being agnostic i will never understand the arrogance that man has that he thinks he is the greatest thing in the universe until proven otherwise. I am not trying to be rude I just don’t get that logic. you say you have alot to live for but if that’s true IE:goals and whatnot if you don’t belive in a higher power or purpose then what’s the point in trying to acheive anything if the sole reason for being here is simply to exsist.
Actually, you can’t say the argument for Jesus being the messiah is that he is the only messiah to ever die and return. You are assuming the premise. By that reasoning, I can make the argument that I am the Emperor of the United States because I am the only Emperor to proclaim himself so.
Zev Steinhardt
I apologize for the cap locks people. I will admit that i only know aliitle about most religons and alot about only afew. what i do know is that when I had nothing to lose I had faith and it pulled me though the rough patches. agnostics may call it self will or determination,trust in self/whatever. I don’t get the arrogent attitude that man is the greatest thing in the universe until proven otherwise. I don’t mean to offend I simply feel thats a tall order for anyone. and if you have other things to live for IE:goals and dreams for life what’s the point if you believe there is nothing after this. if all we have to do is show up and exsist and die then why are we capable of so many things. we certainly would not need to do anything besides find food and shelter and procreate.
Uh, Zev…you might want to look into the history of San Francisco.
Do a quick check for the name Joshua Norton the First. 
>>Being Chaotic Evil means never having to say your sorry…unless the other guy is bigger than you.<<
—The dragon observes
Whoops. Sorry about that. My text should have been outside the quote.
Here it is:
Yes, I knew about Joshua Norton. However, (despite the recognition of the people of SF), his proclamation did not make him Emporer.
Besides, this still doesn’t refute my point.
Zev Steinhardt
As always, Cecil (or, in this case, his minions) have the answer, in this Mailbag Article.
Indeed, Norton did proclaim himself Emperor of the United States.
Whether Zev recognizes Norton as a true Emperor, or just a false pretender is another story.
Perhaps we could hijack this thread into “Why does Zev reject Norton as the Emperor.”
Or maybe not. 
Hey, I’ll be more than happy to discuss why I reject Norton I as Emperor of the United States. First of all, he didn’t… [long religio-political rant inserted here].
Zev Steinhardt