Brexit Hit To Uk Trade Less Than...
News5 mins ago
No best answer has yet been selected by bringitback. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.The Bible is a little contradictory. In the New Testament Joseph was his adopted father, in Matthew 1.18 it says "When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost." In the Old Testament he was prophesised as being born of the loins of the prophet David. "Concerning his son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh."
Now the bit about Jesus Christ....
The Bible uses a convention unknown to modern people where the city of origin is used very much as a type of family, or last, name. In the case of Jesus he is addressed as "Jesus of Nazareth" which gramatically acts like a formal name for Jesus.
Something like "Jesus Joseph's son" or "Jesus of Nazareth" or a combined form would have been entered into the census records at the time of his birth. Not "Jesus Christ." The word, "Christ" popularly thought to be his last name has nothing whatsoever to do with his name.
Christ simply means 'The Anointed'. This is the same as the Hebrew equivalent word "Messiah" which also means "the anointed."
My goodness.
The contradiction I refer to is one in which the OT ijn several places says he is the son of Joseph descended from the prophet David (see Acts 2 - yes yes I know he was a king blah blah) and the New Testament which has written that Jesus was the son of god/holy ghost etc. The contradiction (okay lets call it confusion) is referring back to the original question. I think the Child Support Agency should get involved really.