No. That is the Mormon view of Mary's pregnancy - that the Father came down and had sex with her, resulting in the pregnancy. The Scripture says that the Holy Spirit "overshadowed" her.
I am not pressing the issue now. Point being...end result she was impregnated by someone other than Joseph.
Begot...is defined in the scriptures....conceived is defined in the scriptures....son is defined in the scriptures. No miraculous words used in the scriptures....no transporter to zap Him in. But I do not really care.
There is a lunatic theory that Jesus was conceived by someone prior to Joseph and he was Jesus' step father. Total twaddle, and makes a liar out of the angel who told her that the conception was a miracle done by the Holy
Spirit. Unless one accepts the virgin birth of Christ through a miracle of God then one has no foundation for salvation because it is an essential for believing the gospel. So if you don't believe what the angel said to Mary, then you can't believe that Jesus is God/man and therefore are still in your sins. It's not me who says that, it is clear in the Scriptures as one of the foundations of the gospel of Christ.
The bloodline was through Joseph,
You funny...Joseph was not His father....no prophecy about step-son, but if you do not care about prophecy, that is your
issue.
We know that Joseph was not His father, but everyone else believed that he was, except maybe Elizabeth. So as far as the couple were concerned, Joseph was of the line of David and therefore had to travel to Bethlehem for the census and therefore the prophecy about the Messiah being born in Bethlehem was fulfilled.
I just wonder how much of the Bible you have actually studied other than your favourite passages? I have my doubts from your responses.
The thing about prophecy is that there is no actual time limit to it.
You said a mouthful there, all of the Apostles in the NT thought they were living in the last days....their bad. That is an important point of understanding. How many other things did they get wrong? But the OT has rules regarding prophecies and what happened did not play out anything like the sequence told in prophecies.
The last days started with the day of Pentecost, and will continue until the end of the church age, which only God the Father knows when. The fact is that every successive generation of believers thought they are living in the last days which will end in their lifetime But there has to be certain events that were prophesied that have to happen, and before 1948, no one had any idea that the prophecy about the Jews returning to Israel was going to be fulfilled, and yet in 1948, Israel became a nation again for the first time since its destruction in AD70.
But I guess, doing a comprehensive study of Biblical prophecies and reading subsequent history to see how they were fulfilled is beyond many religious people who haven't got the inclination to study the Bible any deeper than those parts that agree with their personal doctrine.
Most mainstream Protestants, Pentecostals, and Charismatics view the church as those who have received Christ as Saviour and who are born again, and not the man-made denominational structures.
Please show me a denomination that does not have a man's name as who founded it. The name of some of them are the name of the man that started it. You can tap dance on that all you want and historically we can look up the man's name that started the denomination...with Bible in hand...with no historical connection to the early Church. The are organizations that start up 1500 plus years after Christ.
You missed my point. The organisations are not the church. The true church is invisible, and the man-made structures are just the scaffolding to contain the true church. It doesn't matter whose name is on the front gate of the church, when there are no believers present, it is just an empty building - an empty, lifeless shell.
I have been associated with Anglican, Baptist, Pentecostal, Charismatic and Presbyterian churches, along with small groups meeting in hired halls and first story rooms above shops. In all these environments I have found Christian believers who share exactly the same essential gospel beliefs. It is the same when I worked for a paint company, and they packaged their paint in tins with different brand names on them, but exactly the same paint in them. So it is not the brand of church that one goes to, it is whether they hold to the essentials of the gospel of Christ.
The church bishop got together in the 4th Century and worked out what were the essentials of the gospel - because of the invasion of heresies - Arianism, Gnosticism, and others. They came up with the Nicene Creed which they believed contained the essentials of the gospel of Christ. Anyone who did not hold to the Nicene Creed was recognised as a heretic and not accepted as a genuinely converted believer. It is the same today. This is why JWs, LDS, and SDAs are not considered part of the mainstream of true Christian faith, but are pseudo-christian cults.
[qote]The word Christian does not appear in the Old Testament.
The word "Christian" was actually a derogatory word given to believers who appeared to be "little Christs".
This is an irrelevant statement. The point is that the whole scenario were pagans take the reins of the Church is that last thing prophesied in the OT.[/QUOTE]
Well, you said it about the word Christian, and I responded to it by telling you the origin of the word. But now, observance of the Nicene Creed is the evidence of a true converted believer in Christ, people outside of it may be never so religious and wear the "christian" badge, but they are not saved.