The 33/66 Pattern
I've read the thread so far, and have picked up several points on which to comment.
So, the meaning of 33 and 66 has nothing to do with being born again, it has everything to do with who is "God's Ruler".
There is something in Hebrew which permits opposites to be expressed by certain words. Richard can, I'm sure, find examples for us. Because of this, I suggest you're putting too much emphasis on the one side of possible interpretations, while in Hebrew thought, the writer/reader would have been using context to determine the bias of emphasis/meaning, frequently.
Thus, God's Ruler is absolutely fine, but is not necessarily in contradiction to other possible meanings. For instance, unless we are born again, we are not under God's Rulership. God's Ruler implies there is something/someone to be ruled over. See what I mean?
In the next post I'll paste a link to the finer details of how a baby's blood group is determined. I looked it up after finding the comment on your website, because I've been hearing the myth you propounded:
online, so many times, I've lost count. And, it has never been the truth; more, it precedes 'modern medicine' by a good several decades.
Modern medicine knows that the baby’s blood is determined by the father.
This is also a myth, because while the Y chromosome may be passed from generation to generation, the X which goes with it in a normal male, always came from the child's mother. In other words, if a Y sperm fertilises an X ovum, the X sperm from the father did not fertilise the ovum. Maybe you knew this? I mention it because even if the Y is the same in brothers of the same father, the X in each brother may be different. So, when you say 'the same seed', that's not possible.
Concur about the same seed being passed down: from son to grandson to great-grandson
Which is why the status of the parent-child becomes (more) important (than the biological descent). (And yes, we're back to adoption. )
To Richard, greetings;
This is an excellent question, and I thank you for it.
I am only applying the standard tests for truth. Luke says that there were 21 generations from Adam to Abraham. If this were the pattern you were looking for, would you accept Luke over the MT? Please think carefully about this.
One thing I wonder about (you'll remember) is whether Eve fits into the count at all, as a generation all on her own? I realise that later she became one flesh with Adam and together they bore fruit, but, what kind of difference would it make if all the numbers were 1 greater?
It struck that by the same measure you put to dux, it is valid to ask if you (personally) were to accept the Bible's definition of God, whether you would still think the text contradicts 'that idea'? You have your own idea of what God is like, and while the Bible presents Him differently, you feel free to reject the words attributed to him.
it is taken as the "Word of God" even though it contains much that directly contradicts that idea.
Isn't this logic just as dodgy as dux's?
16 That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man; 17 That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love, 18 May be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; 19 And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.