Ancient Genealogical Records Prove King David’s Descendants Are Alive Today

http://www.breakingisraelnews.com/74034/king-davids-descendants-ready-rebuild-davidic-kingdom-jerusa ^ | 08/16/16 | Adam Eliyahu Berkowitz

[Ancesthntr]

“showing him to be the 89th generation

So what does that mean? Literal generations, like each one about 70 years? 6230 years ago?”

---

No, that is NOT what is meant. How old was your father when you were born? 25? 30? 35? How old was your grandfather when your father was born? Etc., etc., through the ages. I don’t know the precise number of years in a generation (even population scientists disagree, and there is tremendous variations based on the time period, culture, world events, etc.), but I would venture to say something like 30-33 1/3 years. So 89 generations would be somewhere between 2670 and 2966 years. King David lived about 3,000 years ago, so this is plausible. In my own family, there is a separation of 141 years between my father’s, father’s father (born 1863) and my son (born 2004). 4 generations in 141 years is 35.25 years per generation - so if that pattern continued for 89 generations you’d be at 3,137 years - before King David’s birth.

70 years is the Biblical length of a typical life (once you got past the childhood diseases) free of combat, NOT the length of time between generations.

[Ancesthntr]

Please see #21. 20-25 years is too short. That may be the typical time when a person has their first child, but it is far from the time of the last child. Many people (especially men, and this particular subject is about patrilineal descent) have kids in their late 30s and even in their 40s - and this has been the case going back thousands of years. Average the age of the father when his youngest and his oldest child are born, and THAT will be the length of an average generation. Likely, the average is somewhere around 30 - 33 1/3 years.

[Ancesthntr]

“This is offensive.”

---

WHAT is offensive - an article discussing a small number of Jews who can trace their descent back to King David?

[T-Bone Texan]

Why is this offensive?

I think it’s neat!

[Blennos]

Please see #21. 20-25 years is too short. That may be the typical time when a person has their first child, but it is far from the time of the last child. Many people (especially men, and this particular subject is about patrilineal descent) have kids in their late 30s and even in their 40s - and this has been the case going back thousands of years. Average the age of the father when his youngest and his oldest child are born, and THAT will be the length of an average generation. Likely, the average is somewhere around 30 - 33 1/3 years.

This makes sense. Thanks.

[MHT]

Which “sealer” was your ancestor?

[buffaloguy]

The generations are not computed but each generation has names, birth and death stats. Real people and families.

[Pollster1]

Taking just one of David’s children, Solomon, who is reported as having seven hundred wives and three hundred concubines, this is no surprise. Even if those numbers are inexact, it would be amazing if none of them had surviving descendants.

[Oberon]

Which “sealer” was your ancestor?

I'm uncertain of that, but I'm descended from 14 of the approved "gateway ancestors" referenced by the Baronial Order of Magna Carta on their website.

Oh, and John Lackland. Wouldn't want to leave him out.

[AZLiberty]

there must be MILLIONS of descendants...

If there were only hundreds, they would have to be as inbred as British royalty.

[higgmeister]

showing him to be the 89th generation

So what does that mean? Literal generations, like each one about 70 years? 6230 years ago?

Actually you don't need to consider a full 70 years as a generation. One generation to another is between the child bearing age of each married couple. It is about ten generations of my family that have been in America. This probably averages out to 30 years between each generation. My great grandfather fought in the Civil War which illustrates much older generations. My father was the youngest son of my grandfather's second wife.

[katana]

Efforts to introduce this reality into mainstream Judaism have met with surprising resistance

At least they're consistent. They reacted the same way to David's most famous descendant.

[Dr. Sivana]

The research is facilitated by the fact that a number of European monarchs throughout history have gone to great lengths to prove family ties to the Davidic Dynasty, and a solid ancestry has been established.

So . . . was W. Herbert Armstrong and the "Worldwide Church of God" right about the Queen of England after all?

http://www.biblemysteries.com/library/queen.htm

[higgmeister]

I made my post 31 before I read your post. My observations about my own family substantiate your figures. Pretty cool.

I should note that the Civil War forestalled my great grandfathers parenting by about five years. Other wars or similar disasters through the ages may have had the same effect on some generations.

[Little Ray]

The Jews don’t need anyone from the House of David - they need Levites so they make the appropriate sacrifices on the Mount.

[freepertoo]

David’s grandmother, Ruth, was a gentile. So David’s descendant and the Messiah (Jesus) is relevant to both gentiles and Jews. I’ve always loved this!

[Ancesthntr]

“The Jews don’t need anyone from the House of David - they need Levites so they make the appropriate sacrifices on the Mount.”

---

The second part is true, the first part...uh, not so much.

The long-promised Messiah (Moschiach) who will bring peace to the world, etc., etc. (he’s got a BIG job ahead of him) will be a man, and specifically a man descended through his father, grandfather, etc., etc. from King David, through David’s son, King Solomon. So, ultimately, YES the House of David is necessary.

[minnesota_bound]

So do I get the Kings gold? : )

[pabianice]

The offense is in calling Jews stupid or worse for not accepting Jesus as the Messiah.

[fella]

Did not the Christians there come from Jewish converts?