Requisite Danger

We are reading through Africanus’ genealogy of Christ as recorded by Eusebius in 324 A.D. Let us pick up where we left off yesterday: Thus neither of the gospels is in error, for one reckons by nature, the other by law. For the line of descent from Solomon and that from Nathan were so [...]

In 324 AD, the Bishop Eusebius completed his ten volume series on the History of the Church. This was the first time anyone had written down the full history of the Christian Church – of course, Luke and others had written down parts of it, but this series was to be an account of [...]

Continuing in the thread of Luke’s genealogy being Mary’s, some people follow John Haley [Alleged Discrepancies of the Bible, Whitaker House Books, 1992, 9. 325]:

"It is indirectly confirmed by Jewish tradition [that Luke's genealogy is of Mary's line]. Lightfoot {Horae Hebraicae on Luke iii. 28} cites from the Talmudic writers concerning the pains [...]

This whole discussion about Christ’s genealogy is getting really, really sticky. The scholars, whom we are supposed to trust, are telling us wild and crazy things.

Yet, if they are not correct, then it means the Bible is in ERROR!!!  

Oh no – our entire belief structure is false! We have all [...]

Gospels where originally written in Greek so let us look at a few modern translations to see if Geisler and Howe are correct. Was Luke really listing Mary’s ancestors instead of Joseph’s line?

When Jesus entered public life he was about thirty years old, the son (in public perception) of Joseph, who was son [...]

Yesterday, we heard two New Testament scholars say that Matthew and Luke are talking about two different lines of ancestors: Joseph and Mary’s lines.

Let’s look at the Bible once more:

And Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. –Matthew 1:16

Now [...]