By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - A Muslim writes about Jesus - Is This The Most Embarrassing Interview Fox News Has Ever Done?

Osc89 on 29 July 2013
ultima said:
Very nice graphic. I remember seeing this somewhere... Can't remember where though...


Yeah it's good. The presentation sometimes has more effect than the actual data, so it's good they went to the effort to create this. Hopefully it might help in getting through to some people.



PSN: Osc89

NNID: Oscar89

Around the Network
ultima on 29 July 2013
happydolphin said:
ultima said:
happydolphin said:

It can be exclusive in one account, and inclusive in the other. I haven't gone in depth in the matter but at this level of debate that much should be obvious.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interval_(mathematics)#Excluding_the_endpoints

Lol, I'm a math major. Excluding the endpoints of a nontrivial interval (meaning it's neither empty nor consisting of a single element) of a real line does not change the length of the interval.

Answer my question, how many generations are there from father to son? There's no inclusive/exclusive convention. There's a well-defined way to count this. If you stray from the well-defined convention, then you're doing it wrong. I'm not exactly sure which passages you're talking about, but if Matthew was indeed counting it, by your terminology, inclusively, then he was doing it wrong. It's as simple as that.

Also, please do go look at Matthew 1 and Luke 3. The discrepancy in the number of generations is so great, that you can't use inclusion/exclusion to walk around it (and don't take this as a validation that your previous use of inclusion/exclusion was okay).

Okay, that's great. Have you heard of discrete mathematics? I have, because I'm a Software Engineering major. This is what I know. You can include or include the bounds in an interval when you're talking about discrete entities like generations.

Do you know what the convention was in those days, in their culture. If you do, then I'd like to see your sources.

I will go look at it, but so far I see no problem (I skimmed over it).

Yes, I've done a lot of discrete mathematics. My explanation was with respect to the link you provided: intervals of real numbers. I'm sure you know that the real numbers are in no way discrete.

As for the discrete case, it still does not apply. When you calculate the number of meters inside a swimming pool along its length, you start at one end, and you start at zero. You do not start some voodoo magic by starting at one before you unrolled your measuring tape. Once again, answer me, how many generations are there from father to son?

Also, I did not ask explicitly, but I kind of insinuated that I wanted to know the passages over which you were arguing. It'd be nice if you could provide them.



           

ultima on 29 July 2013
happydolphin said:
ultima said:

Yeah, it's a very decorated depiction of a compilation of facts, namely the contradictions within the bible. Why did you call it pseudoscience? How is this related to science?

It's pseudoscience because it is using a glorified edge graph to show that the bible is flawed, which is retarded. Theology is much better suited for such things. I know, I've studied it as an elective.

No, what it's doing is compiling data that shows that the bible is flawed into a visually pleasing graph. The content of the graphic is the contradictions within the bible. The pretty picture is just another way of presenting the aforementioned data.



           

ultima on 29 July 2013
happydolphin said:
ultima said:
happydolphin said:

It can be exclusive in one account, and inclusive in the other. I haven't gone in depth in the matter but at this level of debate that much should be obvious.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interval_(mathematics)#Excluding_the_endpoints

Lol, I'm a math major. Excluding the endpoints of a nontrivial interval (meaning it's neither empty nor consisting of a single element) of a real line does not change the length of the interval.

Answer my question, how many generations are there from father to son? There's no inclusive/exclusive convention. There's a well-defined way to count this. If you stray from the well-defined convention, then you're doing it wrong. I'm not exactly sure which passages you're talking about, but if Matthew was indeed counting it, by your terminology, inclusively, then he was doing it wrong. It's as simple as that.

Also, please do go look at Matthew 1 and Luke 3. The discrepancy in the number of generations is so great, that you can't use inclusion/exclusion to walk around it (and don't take this as a validation that your previous use of inclusion/exclusion was okay).

Okay, that's great. Have you heard of discrete mathematics? I have, because I'm a Software Engineering major. This is what I know. You can include or exclude the bounds in an interval when you're talking about discrete entities like generations.

Do you know what the convention was in those days, in their culture? If you do, then I'd like to see your sources.

I will go look at it, but so far I see no problem (I skimmed over it).

Here, I'll make it easier for you:

According to Luke:

Joseph,

the son of Heli,

the son of Matthat,

the son of Levi,

the son of Melchi,

the son of Janna,

the son of Joseph,

the son of Mattathiah,

the son of Amos,

the son of Nahum,

the son of Esli,

the son of Naggai,

the son of Maath,

the son of Mattathiah,

the son of Semei,

the son of Joseph,

the son of Judah,

the son of Joannas,

the son of Rhesa,

the son of Zerubbabel,

the son of Shealtiel,

the son of Neri,

the son of Melchi,

the son of Addi,

the son of Cosam,

the son of Elmodam,

the son of Er,

the son of Jose,

the son of Eliezer,

the son of Jorim,

the son of Matthat,

the son of Levi,

the son of Simeon,

the son of Judah,

the son of Joseph,

the son of Jonan,

the son of Eliakim,

the son of Melea,

the son of Menan,

the son of Mattathah,

the son of Nathan,

the son of David,

the son of Jesse,

the son of Obed,

the son of Boaz,

the son of Salmon,

the son of Nahshon,

the son of Amminadab,

the son of Ram,

the son of Hezron,

the son of Perez,

the son of Judah,

the son of Jacob,

the son of Isaac,

the son of Abraham.

According to Matthew:

Abraham was the father of Isaac,

Isaac the father of Jacob,

Jacob the father of Judah,

Judah the father of Perez,

Perez the father of Hezron,

Hezron the father of Ram,

Ram the father of Amminadab,

Amminadab the father of Nahshon,

Nahshon the father of Salmon,

Salmon the father of Boaz,

Boaz the father of Obed,

Obed the father of Jesse,

and Jesse the father of King David.

David was the father of Solomon,

Solomon the father of Rehoboam,

Rehoboam the father of Abijah,

Abijah the father of Asa,

Asa the father of Jehoshaphat,

Jehoshaphat the father of Jehoram,

Jehoram the father of Uzziah,

Uzziah the father of Jotham,

Jotham the father of Ahaz,

Ahaz the father of Hezekiah,

Hezekiah the father of Manasseh,

Manasseh the father of Amon,

Amon the father of Josiah,

and Josiah the father of Jeconiah.

After the exile to Babylon:

Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel,

Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,

Zerubbabel the father of Abihud,

Abihud the father of Eliakim,

Eliakim the father of Azor,

Azor the father of Zadok,

Zadok the father of Akim,

Akim the father of Elihud,

Elihud the father of Eleazar,

Eleazar the father of Matthan,

Matthan the father of Jacob,

and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah.

If nothing else, the lengths of the two lists are significantly different.



           

happydolphin on 29 July 2013
ultima said:

Yes, I've done a lot of discrete mathematics. My explanation was with respect to the link you provided: intervals of real numbers. I'm sure you know that the real numbers are in no way discrete.

As for the discrete case, it still does not apply. When you calculate the number of meters inside a swimming pool along its length, you start at one end, and you start at zero. You do not start some voodoo magic by starting at one before you unrolled your measuring tape. Once again, answer me, how many generations are there from father to son?

Also, I did not ask explicitly, but I kind of insinuated that I wanted to know the passages over which you were arguing. It'd be nice if you could provide them.

Change the R to an N. And yes, you can count to generation from father to son if you're counting inclusively.



Around the Network
ultima on 29 July 2013
happydolphin said:
ultima said:

Yes, I've done a lot of discrete mathematics. My explanation was with respect to the link you provided: intervals of real numbers. I'm sure you know that the real numbers are in no way discrete.

As for the discrete case, it still does not apply. When you calculate the number of meters inside a swimming pool along its length, you start at one end, and you start at zero. You do not start some voodoo magic by starting at one before you unrolled your measuring tape. Once again, answer me, how many generations are there from father to son?

Also, I did not ask explicitly, but I kind of insinuated that I wanted to know the passages over which you were arguing. It'd be nice if you could provide them.

Change the R to an N. And yes, you can count to generation from father to son if you're counting inclusively.

So you're saying from father to son there are 2 generations?

Can I have the passage so I can read and process it myself?



           

happydolphin on 29 July 2013
ultima said:

Here, I'll make it easier for you:

According to Luke:

Joseph,

the son of Heli,<snip>

According to Matthew:

<snip>

and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah.

If nothing else, the lengths of the two lists are significantly different.

They are two different chronologies. Joseph is the son of Jacob, the son in law of Heli.

"John Gill, a great Bible scholar, stated in his commentary that “Joseph, the son of Heli” meant:

not that Joseph was the son of Eli; for he was the son of Jacob, according to (Matthew 1:16), but Jesus was the son of Eli; and which must be understood, and carried through the whole genealogy, as thus; Jesus the son of Matthat, Jesus the son of Levi, Jesus the son of Melchi . . . till you come to Jesus the son of Adam, and Jesus the Son of God; though it is true indeed that Joseph was the son of Eli, having married his daughter; Mary was the daughter of Eli: and so the Jews speak of one Mary, the daughter of Eli, . . . which accords with this genealogy of the evangelist, who traces it from Mary, under her husband Joseph; though she is not mentioned, because of a rule with the Jews, that “the family of the mother is not called a family.”1

Renowned Greek scholar A.T. Robertson points out that Luke employs the definite article toubefore each name, except Joseph’s.2 This seems to indicate that a better translation would be “Jesus being (as was supposed the son of Joseph) the son of Heli” with the understanding that Jesus was the grandson of Heli through Mary.

Although the descendants of Jeconiah were unable to physically sit on the throne of David (Jeremiah 22:24–30), Jesus was able to fulfill the prophecies that David’s throne would be established forever (Jeremiah 33:17) through his mother Mary (genetic descendant of David through Nathan—a non-cursed line)."

Source: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/chronology-conundrums



happydolphin on 29 July 2013
ultima said:

So you're saying from father to son there are 2 generations?

Can I have the passage so I can read and process it myself?

I don't have a passage, that's according to my understanding of boundaries. Like in programming, you can loop while i < n or loop while i <= n. The boundaries are crucial in my field, and so I see no issue it being inclusive in one instance and exclusive in another, but that's in my modern interpretation. Wait till we see your sources as to how THEY interpreted it. We'll both have a laugh.



ultima on 29 July 2013
happydolphin said:
ultima said:

Here, I'll make it easier for you:

According to Luke:

Joseph,

the son of Heli,

According to Matthew:

 

and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah.

If nothing else, the lengths of the two lists are significantly different.

They are two different chronologies. Joseph is the son of Jacob, the son in law of Heli.

"John Gill, a great Bible scholar, stated in his commentary that “Joseph, the son of Heli” meant:

not that Joseph was the son of Eli; for he was the son of Jacob, according to (Matthew 1:16), but Jesus was the son of Eli; and which must be understood, and carried through the whole genealogy, as thus; Jesus the son of Matthat, Jesus the son of Levi, Jesus the son of Melchi . . . till you come to Jesus the son of Adam, and Jesus the Son of God; though it is true indeed that Joseph was the son of Eli, having married his daughter; Mary was the daughter of Eli: and so the Jews speak of one Mary, the daughter of Eli, . . . which accords with this genealogy of the evangelist, who traces it from Mary, under her husband Joseph; though she is not mentioned, because of a rule with the Jews, that “the family of the mother is not called a family.”1

Renowned Greek scholar A.T. Robertson points out that Luke employs the definite article toubefore each name, except Joseph’s.2 This seems to indicate that a better translation would be “Jesus being (as was supposed the son of Joseph) the son of Heli” with the understanding that Jesus was the grandson of Heli through Mary.

Although the descendants of Jeconiah were unable to physically sit on the throne of David (Jeremiah 22:24–30), Jesus was able to fulfill the prophecies that David’s throne would be established forever (Jeremiah 33:17) through his mother Mary (genetic descendant of David through Nathan—a non-cursed line)."

Source: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/chronology-conundrums

Read the words. I went back and looked at different translations. They all unambiguously agree (through wording) that it's a chain of sons to fathers. There is absolutely no mention of Mary in Luke's passage. Having read the bible, I also noticed that the females are never chronicled. So why would Mary all of a sudden become important in a culture like that?



           

happydolphin on 29 July 2013
ultima said:
happydolphin said:
ultima said:

Here, I'll make it easier for you:

According to Luke:

Joseph,

the son of Heli,

According to Matthew:

 

and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah.

If nothing else, the lengths of the two lists are significantly different.

They are two different chronologies. Joseph is the son of Jacob, the son in law of Heli.

"John Gill, a great Bible scholar, stated in his commentary that “Joseph, the son of Heli” meant:

not that Joseph was the son of Eli; for he was the son of Jacob, according to (Matthew 1:16), but Jesus was the son of Eli; and which must be understood, and carried through the whole genealogy, as thus; Jesus the son of Matthat, Jesus the son of Levi, Jesus the son of Melchi . . . till you come to Jesus the son of Adam, and Jesus the Son of God; though it is true indeed that Joseph was the son of Eli, having married his daughter; Mary was the daughter of Eli: and so the Jews speak of one Mary, the daughter of Eli, . . . which accords with this genealogy of the evangelist, who traces it from Mary, under her husband Joseph; though she is not mentioned, because of a rule with the Jews, that “the family of the mother is not called a family.”1

Renowned Greek scholar A.T. Robertson points out that Luke employs the definite article toubefore each name, except Joseph’s.2 This seems to indicate that a better translation would be “Jesus being (as was supposed the son of Joseph) the son of Heli” with the understanding that Jesus was the grandson of Heli through Mary.

Although the descendants of Jeconiah were unable to physically sit on the throne of David (Jeremiah 22:24–30), Jesus was able to fulfill the prophecies that David’s throne would be established forever (Jeremiah 33:17) through his mother Mary (genetic descendant of David through Nathan—a non-cursed line)."

Source: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/chronology-conundrums

Read the words. I went back and looked at different translations. They all unambiguously agree (through wording) that it's a chain of sons to fathers. There is absolutely no mention of Mary in Luke's passage. Having read the bible, I also noticed that the females are never chronicled. So why would Mary all of a sudden become important in a culture like that?

Read bold. (Edit: sorry, I missed bolding the last item, important in answering your question)