There are doubts concerning Jesus' ancestry

Question: There are doubts concerning Jesus ancestry.

Response:

Before discussing the objections concerning Jesus' ancestry, we would mention the following:

1) A Jewish family was very proud of its family tree, for it was proof that the family members stemmed from God's chosen people and it substantiated their claims to the inheritance of the land. Levites, for example, could only perform their duties if they could prove their membership to the Levitic  tribe. The Jews kept accurate records of their ancestry; they refuse to acknowledge any person as a Jew whose name was not included in these lists Ezra 2:62). Thus, had there been any error in Jesus' ancestry, as recorded by Matthew or Luke during the first century, the Jews would have detected it and objected.

Christians have attributed much more to Christ than priesthood or land. They believed that He was the prophesied Messiah, the Savior of the world.

2) There is a fact that would perplex the modern reader, yet it is one with which the Jewish readers of old were quite familiar: one person could belong to two tribes-to one by birth and to the other by marriage; he could also have two fathers-his own and his wife's. Such cases are found in the Old Testament. After the return of the Jews from the Babylonian Captivity, the following priestly clans could not find no record to prove their ancestry: Habaiah, Hakkoz and Barzillai (Ezra 2:61-62). The ancestor of the priestly clans of Barzillai had married a woman from the clan of Barzillai of Gilead and had taken the name of his father-in-law's clan. But since they were unable to prove who ancestors were, they were not accepted as priests. The same was written by Nehemiah 7:63-64. In 1 Chronicles 2:21-22, we read that when Hezron was sixty years old, he married Machir's daughter, the sister of Gilead. They had a son named Jair who ruled 23 cities in the territory of Gilead. Because Machir was the chef of the tribe of Manasseh, Jair was called the son of Manasseh (1 Chronicles 7:14-16 and Numbers 32:40-41).

3) Matthew traced the ancestry of Christ to Joseph, son of Jacob and divided it into three groups comprising the patriarchs, kings and their descendants. David was considered to be one of the patriarchs as well as one of the kings. Matthew traced the ancestors of Jesus to Abraham, because he wrote with a Jewish readership in mind.

Luke linked Jesus' ancestry to the Virgin Mary and pointed out that Joseph was the son of Heli, Mary's father (Luke 3:23); therefore he gave Joseph the name of his father-in-law. He traced His ancestry to Adam and God, stating that Jesus was "thought to have been" the son of Joseph (Luke 3:23).

4) It was no problem for a Jewish historian to delete some names from a family tree; this did not detract from the reliability of the record. Matthew left out the names of three kings from Jesus' ancestry; Ahaziah, Joash, and Amariah who reigned between Jehoram and Uzziah.

5) The ancestry reveals that which Matthew and Luke wrote serves the objective of the Gospel, showing us that Jesus was "the Seed of the Woman" predicted in Genesis 3:15. The names of Tamar the Palestinian, Rahab the Amorite, Ruth the Moabite, and the Jewish Virgin Mary indicates that Jesus is the Son of Man who belongs to all mankind and desires all to be saved. He is the Savior for all. Some of His grandfathers were kings, while others were shepherds living in tents (Luke 3:23-28).


Message for the Muslims

I have many friends that are Muslims and they refuse to believe that Jesus is God. I hope the Muslims understand this Surah.

Surah 5:68: "Say: O People of the Book! ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law, The Gospel and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord."

Great link for more knowledge on YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EWRi5vsatQk

The Perfect Man, my Muslim Friend

I have an important message for my Muslim friends. If you are Muslim then please hear me out.

The doctrine of Incarnation was limited to Christianity only but we see that Islam supported that doctrine very clearly, confirming that the Spirit of God had become flesh, saying: "Then We sent to her Our Spirit that presented Himself to her as a man without fault (a perfect man)" (Mary 17).

The Qur'an stresses that the Spirit of God became in fashion as a "perfect man," teaching that act of becoming a man on the part of God's Spirit was something easy. Is God's Spirit different from God? 

When Muslim scholars failed to understand the person of the Holy Spirit, they insisted that the Spirit of God is the angel of God. But the Qur'an itself clearly proves the existence of clear distinction in the identities between angels and the Spirit of God, saying: "In it the angels and the Spirit descend." (Power 5). 

If the Spirit was an angel, the verse would not have clearly distinguished between them; in making that clear distinction, the Qur'an confirms what the Bible teaches, that the angels are God's creatures and not God's Spirit, who is of the very Self of God. 

We should not take lightly the Person of God's Spirit by making Him equal to created beings such as the angels of whom the Bible says that they are not the Spirit of God but servants; on the other hand, God's Spirit is the creating Spirit. Therefore, an angel is an angel, but the spirit of God is the Spirit of God, who is of the essence of God. 

If the Almighty God is able to do anything, what can prevent Him from becoming flesh to save the human race that He so loved? The Qur'an teaches that Christ is of the spirit of God, who in order to preserve His purity and holiness, used a miraculous virgin birth, befitting His becoming a perfect man and the Qur'an testifies exclusively of Christ's perfection.

How clearer could it be? Here the Qur'an is given us a positive and a well knitted answer, with no doubt in it, confirming the doctrine of the Becoming; ie., God became flesh in the person of Christ.

How could people deny such a divine truth, which is very clearly revealed to men?

John 1:14

The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

Link from an great YouTube video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0D8Uz4oQck

Some say that Matthew Chapter One and Two were not originally part of the book?

Objection: Norton said that Matthew 1 and 2 were not originally part of the book.

Response:

Those who find fault with the first two chapters of Matthew's Gospel account obviously do so because they doubt the virgin birth of Christ, for this subject is found therein. If you are an Muslim that uses this claim against the Bible then hear the next statement. The Koran also witnesses to Christ's conception through the Holy Spirit in the Virgin Mary, without human agency. Thus, any Muslim that denies the first two chapters of Matthew's Gospel account denies the Koran as well.

Consider the proofs which supports the authenticity of chapters one and two of Matthew's account"

1) Chapter three begins with the words, "In those days..." This indicates that it is dependent upon something described previously-namely, the contents of the preceding chapter. And since Matthew wrote his account of the Gospel with a Jewish readership in mind, it was of utmost importance for him to include a genealogy and this is what we find in chapter one.

2) The first two chapters are mentioned in all the old manuscripts such as the Codex Vaticanus, the Cambridge edition, the Codex manuscript at Trinity College, Dublin, as well as in the old Italian and Coptic manuscripts. These manuscripts were all written before the fifth century.

3) Ancient scholars and religious authorities mention chapters one and two. Clement (AD 194) mentions the genealogy of Christ listed in Matthew 1 and Luke 3. Also, Eusebius mentions a statement of Hegesippus who wrote that Emperor Domitian summoned two scholars to research the ancestry of David. Hegesippus makes reference to Matthew 2 where we read about Herod feeling threatened by the birth of Christ. Justin Martyr (AD 140) mentions all the incidents that are described in these two chapters. Iganatius (AD 107), in his letter to the Ephesians, writes that Christ was born miraculously of the Virgin Mary and that a star pronounced his birth.  Ignautius died six years after the death of the Apostle John, so his testimony occupies a prominent position among scholars. As for the writings of Irenaeus and the later Church fathers, there is no need to mention them, for all these men accepted the authenticity of Matthew 1 and 2. Regarding the attacks of the enemies of Christianity, Christian authorities mentioned their objections when refuting them; all of them refer to the birth of Christ as describe in chapters one and two of the Gospel according to Matthew.

Click on this link for YouTube video about the topic "Is Jesus God"?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bKhCxcBo_U

    

Power of God to create

I will share this information to all Muslims. I believe that all Muslims needs to understand my points in this blog.

The Qur'an spoke of the Power of Christ to create and it mentioned in The House of Imran 49 that He created a bird. Some Muslim scholars objected saying that the ability of Christ to create a bird was not self-generating, but Christ could create "by God's permission". This phrase is of great importance to them because they believe that Christ was a man to whom God granted the power to create a bird out of clay. In response to that misunderstanding, we answer that if you read the Gospel of Christ, you will find that Christ prayed before He made His miracles as though He was asking the permission of God. In His action, He was teaching His disciples and the world the importance of the chain of command and of respecting positions and obeying orders. In the meantime, in order to show the world that he was not a mere human. He always proclaimed at the time He made the miracles that He and the Father are one. If He were not one with God. God would have stripped Him of His powers from the very beginning, from the very moment He claimed that He was equal with God. Therefore, His powers were not granted to Him as to a human but as to Someone Who is equal in essence with God.

The Qur'an insists that Christ possessed the power of creation (House of Imran 49). The Qur'an teaches that the power of creation is restricted to God only (Jonah 34). History testifies that God has never delegated His creating power to any mere human. Here, the conclusion becomes clear and necessary; i.e., the Qur'an is testifying publicly for the divinity and the deity of Christ. The Qur'an recorded that Christ used the same "method of operation" which was used at the time the human race was created, employing the clay and breathing in it. Life came directly from his breath. Notice that life came to the bird when the Lord Jesus breathed in it, showing that He Himself was the source of life (El-Hijr 28 &29). Here the student can see that the Qur'an agrees, overtly and covertly with the Bible text thay Christ was the creator for "All things were made by Him."

Click on this great video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O2tYAgboOrI

Is there no continuous chain of authority for the Gospel according to Matthew?

In his epistle of AD 107, Ignatius quoted from this Gospel account seven times. He mentioned Christ's conception in the Virgin Mary and the appearance of the natal star that guided the wiseman to Bethlehem. This same Ignatius was a contemporary of the apostles, outliving the Apostle John by seven years.

Polycarp, a disciple of John the Apostle, quotes this Gospel account five times in his epistles. Also, many renowned Christian scholars of the first century testified that the Gospel of Christ according to Matthew indeed came from Matthew.

In the second century, Tatian wrote The Diatesseron or "The Harmony of the Four Gospels." This work was quoted by Hegesippus, a scholar who wrote profusely. He authored a Church history in which we find an account of Herod similar to what appears in Matthew's account of the Gospel. Justin Martyr (AD 140) often quotes from the Gospel according to Matthew and in his works he mentions verses from the prophecies of Isaiah, Micah and Jeremiah, just as Matthew does. Ireanues, Athenagoras, Theophilus of Antioch, Clement of Alexandria and others also quote from this Gospel account.

In the third century, the Gospel according to Matthew was mentioned by Tertullian, Julius, Origen and Amonius, author of The Harmony of the Two Gospels.

In the fourth century, Festus questioned the authorship of the Gospel according to Matthew, owing to chapter nine, verse nine: "Then as Jesus passed on from there, He saw a man named Matthew sitting at the tax office. And He said to him, 'Fool Me.' And he arose and followed Him." Festus believed that if Matthew had really written the Gospel account attributed to him, he would have written of himself in the first person, saying "I," and not in the third person, say "he." However, writing about oneself in the third person was a custom among ancient authors. Julius Caesar, Josephus, Moses and Xenophon all referred to themselves in this way in their writings.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNQ-Byu8klI

Muslims needs to believe in Jonah 94.

John 1:2, He was with God in the beginning.

When some contemporary Muslim interpreters heard that Christ is the Word of God, they objected saying: "Christ is a word among other words of God." They said, "here means a command: ie., Christ was born 'by God's command." This interpretation is a gross and intentional misleading and is clearly wrong in form and in essence, which is something that confirms the wisdom of the Qur'an verse that urges their prophet, saying: "If thou art in doubt... ask those who recited the Book before you (I.E., the Christians)." (Jonah 94). Oh, that the Muslims follow the Qur'an's advice, instead of attacking the Bible and the people of the Bible and they should learn from them the real meaning of the spiritual issues. When you read (The Women 171), you will find that Jesus is "His Word", and you will understand that the statement in House of Imran 45 did not come to contradict the principles of the verse in Women 171. Moreover, the statement in that verse did not focus on a process of "commanding the birth" but rather, it focused on the very identity of the person of Christ. The Qur'an must have expressed it in that fashion in order to stress the fact that Christ is God's Word. Christ is distinguished in the Qur'an above all the prophets, not only by His great and mighty works, which no other man could even come close to accomplishing, but also by the sublime distinctives that were given exclusively to Him. Some of those attributes were, "The Word of God" and "the Spirit of God" (Women 171, House of Imran 45). If Christ is The Word of God and His spirit, therefore, He is divine and eternal, for the Spirit of God and His Word are integral parts of God  and cannot be separated from Him. The Spirit of God and His Word are of His very Self; therefore, Christ is by necessity of the Godhead, from the beginning.

Great YouTube Video, Click here!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEmJfuTAvFo&t=907s

False charges against the Gospel of Christ, my Muslim friend

According to Matthew

Objection:
The Gospel of Christ According to Matthew was written in Hebrew; but it was lost,owing to corruption at the hands of Christian sectarians. The present copy is a translation and the name of the translator is unknown.

Response:
This gospel record was originally written in Greek, the predominant language during the time of Christ. Since it was God's intention to proclaim His will and purpose to mankind, it is unreasonable that the Bible would have been written in an uncommon language, lest its intended usefulness should be diminished.

Matthew was a tax collector before he was called to apostleship. Being employed in this profession, it was necessary for him to know Greek, the most common language of the day. All the apostles and disciples of Christ wrote their letters in Greek for their readers, regardless of whether they were of Jewish or Gentile background.

Many of the expressions found in this Gospel account are harmonious with those found in the other three Gospel records. The idea that Matthew wrote this Gospel account in Hebrew most likely stemmed from a statement in a letter which Papias, bishop of Hierapolis, wrote to Eusebius in AD 116: "Matthew wrote his gospel in the Hebrew tongue."

Papias did not mention that he personally saw Matthew's  account of the Gospel in Hebrew but rather that the Greek version circulated among the people before his time. Thus, the statement that the Gospel of Christ according to Matthew was written in Hebrew is mere conjecture, as opposed to the proof that shows it was written in Greek. Moreover, the passage in this Gospel account, quoted from the Old Testament, were taken from the Greek Septuagint edition. Had the Gospel According to Matthew been written in Hebrew, as alleged by the objector, the quoted passages from the Old Testament would also have been taken from the Hebrew.

Though Matthew's account of the Gospel was written in Greek, we could allow the possibility of its being written in Hebrew as well.  The sacred, inspired books do not lose their meaning and beauty when translated into other languages. The historian Josephus wrote his Wars of the Jews both in Hebrew and Greek to widen its appeal. In any case, this Gospel record was in circulation among Christians not too long after Christ's ascension into heaven.

In AD 178, Irenaeus stated that Matthew also published a Gospel account in Hebrew, for the convenience of the Jews; thus, there was a Greek copy, too.

In AD 230, Origen said: "Regardless the four Gospels which the whole Church under heaven clings to vigorously, I have learned from reliable authority that the first one was given by inspiration to Matthew who was a tax collector before he became a follower of Jesus Christ. He published it for the believers in Judea in Hebrew. Those words indicate that his account of the Gospel of Christ was available in Greek for the benefit of all Christians. Then it was made available to the Jews in Hebrew.

https://www.answering-islam.org/