Posted on 12/27/2017 9:26:15 AM PST by Salvation
Monsignor Pope Ping!
They were no ordinary shepherds. They were Levites that kept the sacrificial lambs for use in the Temple.
In order to assure they were preserved "without blemish" the shepherds would wrap them in "swaddling clothes."
Thus the shepherds were able to readily recognize "The Lamb of God." wrapped in swaddling clothes.
Also, as I have been reciting Luke Chapter 2 every Christmas Eve since 1980, it occurred to me about 15 years ago that the manger is mentioned three times in the KJV of Luke Chapter 2.
Jesus also told Peter three times in John 21:17 to "Feed my sheep"
I then realized that mentioning the manger was Christ as the Bread of Life as "Feed My Sheep."
If there is one thing about Our Heavenly Father, it is that He uses symbolism A LOT!
The other thing about Our Father is that He has fixed it so there is always more intricate marvels to discover in His Word!
Did Adam have a belly button?
““He was made … of the seed of David according to the flesh,”
This puzzles me. St. Joseph was of the line of David, but if Jesus was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit, how is Jesus of the seed of David?
Or was Adam created a child or a grown man? And if God can create a human as a fully matured human then he could certainly create a universe that was fully matured.
Wasn’t Mary also of the line of David? I think I read that somewhere.
A quick DDG scan seems to show that it is in dispute.
It would answer my question, though.
If you’ll notice the genealogies of Jesus in Matthew and Luke are different. Why? Luke had access to the living Mary who provided Luke with the genealogy of *her* roots which traced back to King David. Matthew’s gospel (which was written for the Jews) has the traditional genealogy of the paternal line of Joseph back to King David.
If Joseph was not Jesus’ physical father, he was still the earthly father in the line of David which is how the Jews counted the line of succession. Mary, the physical mother, also traces back to David so then there is no argument as to whether Jesus had royal blood lines. Both my blood (Mary) and by title (Joseph), he was the descendant of David, thus fulfilling prophecy.
“Luke had access to the living Mary who provided Luke with the genealogy of *her* roots which traced back to King David.”
I just skimmed an article that claimed there is no concrete indication in Luke that the lineage in question is Mary’s and not Jesus’s.
In Joseph's (the legal) side, he was descended through David's son Solomon; on Mary's side, he was descended through another of David's sons, Nathan: not Nathan the prophet, but David and Bathsheba's third (living) son (after their first infant that died unnamed) -- probably named by Bathsheba in honor of the prophet Nathan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_(son_of_David)
`
`
If it is Mary’s lineage, it *has* to also be Jesus’ lineage. But it’s not Joseph’s lineage.
Mary followed the Christian movement after her Son’s (physical) death and made herself available to Jesus’ disciples. Luke, a physician and historian in documenting the life of Jesus and the early Christian church (which we call Luke and Acts) was likely to have encountered Mary and asked her about Jesus’ life.
If you’ll notice, there are anecdotes in Luke that probably only Mary would know first-hand. It’s fairly easy to connect Luke’s gospel with access to Mary’s accounts of what she heard and saw regarding Jesus’ life.
Both Mary and Joseph descended from David’s line.
Mary’s lineage is detailed in Luke 3: 23-38.
Joseph’s lineage is detailed in Matthew 1: 1-17
Per the MacArthur Study Bible Notes: Luke 3:23–38 Luke’s genealogy moves backward, from Jesus to Adam; Matthew’s moves forward, from Abraham to Joseph. Luke’s entire section from Joseph to David differs starkly from that given by Matthew. The two genealogies are easily reconciled if Luke’s is seen as Mary’s genealogy, and Matthew’s version represents Joseph’s. Thus the royal line is passed through Jesus’ legal father, and his physical descent from David is established by Mary’s lineage. Luke, unlike Matthew (see note on Matt. 1:3), includes no women in his genealogy—even Mary herself. Joseph was “the son of Heli” by marriage (Heli having no sons of his own), and thus is named here in Luke 3:23 as the representative of Mary’s generation.
Sorry for the above incomplete post. Let’s try this again.
Both Mary and Joseph descended from David’s line.
Mary’s lineage is detailed in Luke 3: 23-38.
Joseph’s lineage is detailed in Matthew 1: 1-17
Per the MacArthur Study Bible Notes: Luke 3:23–38 Luke’s genealogy moves backward, from Jesus to Adam; Matthew’s moves forward, from Abraham to Joseph. Luke’s entire section from Joseph to David differs starkly from that given by Matthew. The two genealogies are easily reconciled if Luke’s is seen as Mary’s genealogy, and Matthew’s version represents Joseph’s. Thus the royal line is passed through Jesus’ legal father, and his physical descent from David is established by Mary’s lineage. Luke, unlike Matthew (see note on Matt. 1:3), includes no women in his genealogy—even Mary herself. Joseph was “the son of Heli” by marriage (Heli having no sons of his own), and thus is named here in Luke 3:23 as the representative of Mary’s generation.
If there is one thing about Our Heavenly Father, it is that He uses symbolism A LOT!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The OT is a prediction of the events that took place in the NT.
The NT seems to be the OT with some refinements
“was likely to have”
Well, “likely to” is only “likely to.” It leaves me wanting more.
Inimicitias ponam inter te et mulierem,
et semen tuum et semen illius:
ipsa conteret caput tuum,
et tu insidiaberis calcaneo ejus.
“Semen” is usually translated as offspring but KJV says Gen. 3: 15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
The emnity was between the “seed” of eve = Jesus and the devil. Mary was/is the new Eve.
“and His genetic or natural genealogy via Mary in Luke 3.”
Could you point me to where it says that this is Mary’s lineage?
Interesting, but I don’t see how it answers my question.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.