The Bastard Kings of Israel

[StuartJ]

Jesus is said to have been descended from the David kings.

The Davids were no longer on the throne in Jesus' time.

In what looks to me to be political propaganda from a faction that took over from the Davids, Jesus' ancestry is shown, in early biblical writings, to be illegitimate.

[StuartJ]

[Replying to post 36 by bluethread]

I put it to you that you know perfectly well which "law" ...

I posted it earlier.

I put it to you that you know perfectly well the Tamar Turns a Trick slander could have been written by the men of Yahweh AFTER they had written the supposed "laws" of Yahweh.

I put it to you that you know perfectly well that the oldest scraps of Genesis text are from Herodian times and the tiny scraps do NOT contain the harlotry story.

I know none of that perfectly well. I repost references quite often and see nothing wrong with asking others to do so. I am aware of the Josiah/Ezra theory, among others. However, knowing of them and being convinced of their vsalidity are two different things. I am also aware that almost all artifacts are partial. However, if you are going to question whether the events ever took place, you are undermining your own argument. If it never happened, the it can not serve as justification for calling the Kings of Israel bastards.

Let me make it simple for you ...

Given that no one demonstrates that so much as a verse of the "Word of God" came from "God" ...

I offer the hypothesis that much is human political propaganda.

The Tamar Turns a Trick scandal never happened ...

... because the priests of the newish Yahweh god were inventing propaganda, set way back in historical times, that demonstrated, through holy "scripture", that the David kings they had ousted were illegitimate holders of the throne in the first place.

And the simple folk would buy it as "God's own truth" ...

Because simple folks swallow things from those in authority ...

Without a demand for independently verifiable evidence.

It's THAT simple.

[brianbbs67]

[Replying to post 41 by StuartJ]

Well , if you have this evidence, please present it.

[StuartJ]

[Replying to post 42 by brianbbs67]

It's an hypothesis ...

Based on what I have given and repeated already.

Please read it ...

And debate the bases for the hypothesis.

[brianbbs67]

[Replying to post 42 by brianbbs67]

It's an hypothesis ...

Based on what I have given and repeated already.

Please read it ...

And debate the bases for the hypothesis.

Here's the problem. You have a hypothesis, so do I. Could it all be politically motivated? Yes. But, there is little proof relying upon scripture alone. It seems homogenous. In other words, you are here in theology and doctrine, which are accepted as doctrine for this group. The other side of me says God(truth) always outs itself. Yours is a good question, but a specific thread should hold it.

[brianbbs67]

My bad. This is that.

[StuartJ]

[Replying to post 44 by brianbbs67]

I'm debating the theology ...

Based on nothing more than the writings.

I can't see any Theo in it at all.

I doubt the writers intended it as "scripture".

I suggest any doctrine or dogma or theology based on this nasty piece of human writing is just plain wrong.

However, I have posted all my other debate topics and random ramblings in the Apologetics (love that term) forum.

I'll sign out of this one here.

[brianbbs67]

[Replying to post 44 by brianbbs67]

I'm debating the theology ...

Based on nothing more than the writings.

I can't see any Theo in it at all.

I doubt the writers intended it as "scripture".

I suggest any doctrine or dogma or theology based on this nasty piece of human writing is just plain wrong.

However, I have posted all my other debate topics and random ramblings in the Apologetics (love that term) forum.

I'll sign out of this one here.

wait a minute or 3

[Tcg]

[Replying to post 44 by brianbbs67]

I'm debating the theology ...

Based on nothing more than the writings.

I can't see any Theo in it at all.

I doubt the writers intended it as "scripture".

I suggest any doctrine or dogma or theology based on this nasty piece of human writing is just plain wrong.

However, I have posted all my other debate topics and random ramblings in the Apologetics (love that term) forum.

I'll sign out of this one here.

wait a minute or 3

I've been waiting around 24 hours.

What were you expecting to happen in a minute or 3?

Would you suggest I keep waiting?

[brianbbs67]

[Replying to post 44 by brianbbs67]

I'm debating the theology ...

Based on nothing more than the writings.

I can't see any Theo in it at all.

I doubt the writers intended it as "scripture".

I suggest any doctrine or dogma or theology based on this nasty piece of human writing is just plain wrong.

However, I have posted all my other debate topics and random ramblings in the Apologetics (love that term) forum.

I'll sign out of this one here.

wait a minute or 3

I've been waiting around 24 hours.

What were you expecting to happen in a minute or 3?

Would you suggest I keep waiting?

Wait if you wish. I was talking to StuartJ. And asking him to wait a moment before leaving the whole debate here. That's all.

[Tcg]

Wait if you wish. I was talking to StuartJ. And asking him to wait a moment before leaving the whole debate here. That's all.

Yes, I see.

And what specifically was StuartJ to wait for?

My post was the first activity on this thread for almost 24 hours.