Genealogy

[JOHN_IGNATIUS]

I'm going to go ahead with another question.

Why did Matthew attempt to prove that Jesus was the son of Abraham and the son of David by tracing his ancestry down to Joseph when, Joseph was supposedly not his father? And why in his effort to portray the genealogies in fourteen-generation increments, did he misrepresent the truth in vs 8 where he said Joram is the father of Uzziah when he was not his father. He was his great, great, grandfather (2 kings14:1 and 2 cron26:1).

What do you think?

[JOHN_IGNATIUS]

On another board someone spoke of "telescoping genealogies", where father could mean grandfather, etc. He said:

“Telescoping genealogies goes clear back to Genesis. It some way it is similar in principle to a practice called "condensing narratives."”


I said:
I can agree with “condensing narratives” as a way to explain shorter versions of events, especially in a word of mouth scenario where excess or unrelated information would tend to be dropped over a period of time. However, I’m not much of a fan of the “telescoping” explanations. Telescoping sounds like STRETCHING to me. That is, stretching the truth genealogies. That would be like the 12 year old claiming to be 8, saying that just because he is 12, he hasn’t ceased to be 8 as well. I would wonder about the legality of telescoping interest rates on a bank loan.

The writer of Matthew said “fourteen generations”. But, there was more than fourteen. It seems to me that Matthew had to manipulate Jesus’ genealogy to have something of major significance happen every fourteen generations. BTW, the last one contains only thirteen names even though Matthew climes that it contains fourteen. (Babylon to Jesus, Jech-o-ni-as to Jesus, thirteen not fourteen).

The writer of Matthew started his narrative by saying that Jesus was the son of David. David’s name is spelled with three letters (no vowels) and is equivalent to D,V,D. The numerical value of “D” is “4” and “V” is “6”. Therefore the numerical value of David’s name is fourteen. My, my. What a coincidence.

It seems the writer of Matthew stretched, or telescoped in whatever direction necessary to make the genealogies spell “fourteen”, the son of David. My question is, is that not the tail wagging the dog?

What do you think?

[Hnovilla]

His Name Is Jesus!

Joseph was the 'legal' father of Jesus, and his ancestry traces to one of the sons of David, and to Adam.
Mary was the birth-mother of Jesus, and her ancestry trtaces back to Sloman, the son of David; from there to Adam.
There is a beautiful Jewish custom, and I daresay in the Hispanic community as well, of calling our grandchildren 'sons'. Surely, our descendants also came from our loins.

Beloved, you are too well-versed in the scriptures, and I still believe you have other intentions.

Brother Villa

[ddc101]

we are all called the sons of God and children of Abraham.

I have to wonder if this is an attempt to discredit the word of God.
Regardless we still received the real Holy Ghost and spoke in
other tongues as the Spirit gave the utterance.So its too late
to try and discredit the truth of the word...its true...its real etc.

Bro.J.I.,
Are you by any chance interested in textual criticism? I have studied it from time to time.

[JOHN_IGNATIUS]

Amen!

You just hit the nail on the head. The Baptism proves everything. The Spirit (JESUS) teaches and JESUS (the Spirit) is the "Word" of God.


And, yes. I have become interested in textual criticism since I started this New Testament class I'm in now.

[JOHN_IGNATIUS]

Hello,
I found the answer to my question. I'll post it.

David's line in matthew is the royal line through
Soloman. His line in Luke.3:23-38; is through Nathan,
another son (2sam.5:14;), and Heli, the father of Mary.
Both lines were necessary in fulfilling prophecy. God
had cursed Jechoniah (Coniah or Jehoiachin) of the royal
line and sworn that no seed of his should ever sit on
the throne of David and reign in Jerusalem
(jer.22:24-30;) God had also sworn to David that his
line through Solman would forever sit on the throne
(2.sam:7;). The only way this could be fulfilled was for
Jesus the son of David through Nathan and Mary, to
become the legal heir to the throne of David through
Joseph of the kingly line (luke.1:32-33; isa.9:6-7;
rev.5:5; 22:16;). Jesus, being the foster son of Joseph
and the firstborn in the family, became the legal heir
to Davids throne through Joseph. verse 8, Ozias is
Azariah or Uzziah (2kings.15:1-7;). Between Jehoram and
Uzziah 3 kings reigned that are not mentioned in this
genealogy (Ahaziah, 2kings.8:25-26; Jehoash,
2kings.12:1; and Amaziah, 2kings.14:1-2;). All names are
not necessary in a royal genealogy. Verse
11,Jechonias=Jechoniah or Coniah (2kings.24:6-16;).
Between him and Josiah were 2 more kings not listed here
(Jehoahaz and Jehoiakim,2kings.23:31-24:6;. Following
him Zedekiah reigned and the kingdom of Judah came to an
end (2kings.24:6-25:30;)

So, Jesus being an adopted son, and eldest of Joseph
fulfilled the legal right. And being Mary's son
fulfilled the prophetic.

[ddc101]

Bro.J.I.
My previous pastor taught one night where only the line of Joseph was acceptable due to a curse.Have you found this anywhere in your study of bible geneology? By the way i love
textural critisism.It makes you think and dig deeper.ddc