February 1, 2009 8:42 AM
Sam wrote:
Genealogy of the greatest man to ever walk this earth. 42 generations worth, all the way back to the father of religion today, Abraham. The guy that 'begat' (KJV) Isaac, and almost killed him in a sacrifice. The guy that is known even today by the Muslims who 'begat' another son (Abraham's (or Abram, if you prefer) first son--anybody recall his name without looking it up?) by his slave woman, Hagar (and hence THEIR religion was started). Abraham, of which Paul describes truth faith in God. Yup, all the way back to Abraham we find a litany of men whom God used for one MAIN purpose, to have a son who would have a son who would have a son, and so forth, until Joseph was born and married the mother of Jesus, Mary. So, after reading this long list, you must realize the Jesus was probably not related to Abraham at all, yet this genealogy was spelled out for us. WHY? No where do we get the ancestrial list of Mary...I mean, she MIGHT have been a descendant of Abraham (interfamily marriages were common back then), but we don't really know, do we? So, the question of the day (ask a minister today) why the genealogy given in Matthew 1 was given at all, as it tends to show that Jesus was related to Abraham only by marriage, and had no blood relationships as did these 42 generations of men. Reply to this
February 2, 2009 8:13 AM
Johnbob wrote:
I think the genealogy was given to establish the history and legitimacy of Jesus' claim amongst the Jews. From what I read, it seems to be standard for Hebrew biographies to start out this way.
I seemed to recall that not all generations were represented, which was common in Hebrew tradition when writing genealogy. Matthew's genealogy is apparently the legal genealogy instead of the bloodline genealogy, since Jesus was adopted by Joseph. Reply to this
February 2, 2009 1:52 PM
Dustin wrote:
The answer to the genealogies i found in "The Gospel of Matthew" by G. Steve Kinnard. He says to be a priest required lineage, something important to the Jews. He then goes on and starts with David to show lineage to show that Jesus is "a descendant of David and a king in the order of the great King David." Through the genealogy "Matthew crowns Jesus as King." Reply to this
February 2, 2009 2:06 PM
Dustin wrote:
i found another answer to the genealogies of Mary. Back in those days they did not keep the lineage of the women. Reply to this
February 2, 2009 8:20 AM
Dustin wrote:
Lots of begots in this one. But my question is why in verse 21 does the angel tell joseph to name the baby 'Jesus' and then in 23 say to name Him 'Immanuel' then in 25 Joseph names the baby 'Jesus'?
But with these verses i now understand that besides the voice you hear in your head the Holy spirit will also answer your prayers in dreams. Reply to this
February 2, 2009 8:24 AM
Johnbob wrote:
Can you imagine finding out that your fiancee is pregnant? And that she claims to have been impregnated by the Holy Spirit? the bible often glosses over the emotions of the situation - can you imagine what Joseph was feeling? Yet Joseph was a righteous man who wanted to divorce her quietly. There are no implications for us - just admiration for Joseph. Reply to this
Genealogy of the greatest man to ever walk this earth. 42 generations worth, all the way back to the father of religion today, Abraham. The guy that 'begat' (KJV) Isaac, and almost killed him in a sacrifice. The guy that is known even today by the Muslims who 'begat' another son (Abraham's (or Abram, if you prefer) first son--anybody recall his name without looking it up?) by his slave woman, Hagar (and hence THEIR religion was started). Abraham, of which Paul describes truth faith in God. Yup, all the way back to Abraham we find a litany of men whom God used for one MAIN purpose, to have a son who would have a son who would have a son, and so forth, until Joseph was born and married the mother of Jesus, Mary.
So, after reading this long list, you must realize the Jesus was probably not related to Abraham at all, yet this genealogy was spelled out for us. WHY? No where do we get the ancestrial list of Mary...I mean, she MIGHT have been a descendant of Abraham (interfamily marriages were common back then), but we don't really know, do we?
So, the question of the day (ask a minister today) why the genealogy given in Matthew 1 was given at all, as it tends to show that Jesus was related to Abraham only by marriage, and had no blood relationships as did these 42 generations of men.
Reply to this
I think the genealogy was given to establish the history and legitimacy of Jesus' claim amongst the Jews. From what I read, it seems to be standard for Hebrew biographies to start out this way.
I seemed to recall that not all generations were represented, which was common in Hebrew tradition when writing genealogy. Matthew's genealogy is apparently the legal genealogy instead of the bloodline genealogy, since Jesus was adopted by Joseph.
Reply to this
The answer to the genealogies i found in "The Gospel of Matthew" by G. Steve Kinnard. He says to be a priest required lineage, something important to the Jews. He then goes on and starts with David to show lineage to show that Jesus is "a descendant of David and a king in the order of the great King David." Through the genealogy "Matthew crowns Jesus as King."
Reply to this
i found another answer to the genealogies of Mary. Back in those days they did not keep the lineage of the women.
Reply to this
Lots of begots in this one. But my question is why in verse 21 does the angel tell joseph to name the baby 'Jesus' and then in 23 say to name Him 'Immanuel' then in 25 Joseph names the baby 'Jesus'?
But with these verses i now understand that besides the voice you hear in your head the Holy spirit will also answer your prayers in dreams.
Reply to this
Can you imagine finding out that your fiancee is pregnant? And that she claims to have been impregnated by the Holy Spirit? the bible often glosses over the emotions of the situation - can you imagine what Joseph was feeling? Yet Joseph was a righteous man who wanted to divorce her quietly. There are no implications for us - just admiration for Joseph.
Reply to this