Posted on 07/10/2018 5:36:55 AM PDT by Gamecock
At first glance, the beginning of Matthew is a less-than-exciting literary starting point of the New Testament. It is a list of “begats” tracing Jesus’ lineage back to Abraham.
What this beginning lacks in literary punch it makes up for in theological significance. Among other things, the genealogical tables of the New Testament place the gospel squarely on the plane of history. Jesus was born “in the fullness of time”—His ministry is defined and interpreted against the background of Old Testament history.
The New Testament provides two genealogical tables for Jesus, one by Matthew and one by Luke. These tables differ at significant points. Matthew was writing for a Jewish audience and Luke for a Gentile audience. Matthew was concerned to show that Jesus legally descended from David and was therefore a descendant of Judah to whom the messianic kingship was promised. Matthew treats the legal descent of Jesus and limits the lists to three groupings of fourteen generations, allowing himself to make omissions.
Luke follows the natural descent with greater detail. He takes the list back to Adam, as it was a central theme in his Gospel to set forth the universality of the gospel. Jesus is indeed the Son of Abraham and the Son of David, but He is also the new Adam who comes to redeem not only Israel but men and women from every tribe and nation.
Coram Deo
Who is Jesus to you?
Passages for Further Study
Matthew 1:16 and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.
Galatians 4:4 But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law,
Ephesians 1:10 as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.
Ping
Ah, and here I thought this article was going to detail how in Matthew it shows he is descended from David through Solomon. While in Luke it shows he is descended from David through Nathan. God had promised that His eternal King would come from David’s offspring (2 Samuel 7, 1 Chronicles 17).
Into a more complex matter is why both Mary and Joseph’s lineages matter. As previously stated, God had promised to bring an heir from David’s line. However, the rightful heirs through Solomon line ended with Jeconiah. The man had not retained God or His rules and God cursed this line in Jeremiah 22:30 “For none of his descendants shall prosper, sitting on the throne of David, and ruling anymore in Judah.”
So how could Jesus be descended from Solomon’s cursed line? As most people are aware, Jesus was born from a virgin birth by a woman named Mary. Her husband was Joseph, the descendant of Jeconiah. Because of Joseph’s adoption of Christ, he could pass the right to rule onto Jesus. Mary, a daughter of David>Nathan, gave Jesus the blood line of David. There are over 20 generations from David > Joseph and Mary.
The Jewish line goes through the wife - not the husband.
Respectfully, how did Jesus descend through all those begats if his mother was a virgin?
I don’t see any difference of this between the account in Genesis. This tracked Father-to-son as well. When talking of a lineage of kings, you would track father-to-son as well.
Anyways, I am not claiming to be an expert on social methods of Jews.... however, it does sound like there is a very interesting research question here that I’ve not looked into before.
No...a Jewish woman does make a child Jewish, but the father determines the lineage and tribe. The sons of Aaron are the “Kohanes” (priests) not the daughters, for example. Mary cannot “inherit the blood line” of David. Only Joseph can. But then of course if he is not the father...
Being of a virgin would only negate the first tree of two people. Otherwise, His family tree would look like that of any other person.
Joseph was considered His adoptive father. So in this case, Jesus didn’t have DNA from Joseph’s line. However, adoptive children are still grafted into a family tree just as any other child.
Maybe because Mary had no brother and married into the same tribe? It seems she would fit this legal loophole founded for Zelophehad’s daughters:
Say to the Israelites, ‘If a man dies and leaves no son, give his inheritance to his daughter. - Numbers 27:8
This is what the LORD commands for Zelophehad’s daughters: They may marry anyone they please as long as they marry within their father’s tribal clan. - Numbers 36:6
Attractive explanation.
Thank you.
Mary was the biological mother; and in Jewish law, this makes Jesus a Jew. As to the father, even in U.S. law, the man who is married to the mother at the time of the birth of a child is the legal father, regardless of whether he is the biological father.
See chart at post 11, just above. It attributes Mary’s descent from Nathan and Joseph from Solomon.
That is completely untrue for Jews. If a Jew is a member of the Kohane (priest) or Levite tribes, for example, ONLY natural born children inherit that sacred title. Adopted sons do not.
One is Mary’s, though she is not listed. She isn’t listed because she merely conveyed Jesus Hebrew right to her father’s name, lineage and inheritance. She was an eldest daughter of a Judite, in the Kingly lineage of David.
Since she hadn’t any brothers, her father’s line would be passed through her to her first born son. From the mouth of God to Moses, the only requirement was for her to marry within her tribe, Judah, which she did. Jesus inherited her father’s name, rights and inheritance, from her father, not from Mary, but through her.
In Genesis 'lines' went through the men. Adam's genealogy is listed. Cain has his own genealogy. Now when exactly did somebody change the genealogy to follow the woman... Christ was conceived with out the man, but He was the only one since Genesis. Those first formed did not have flesh parents.
How did Mary get here? She has a long line of begats, from the tribes of Judah and Levi, as foretold. The conception of Christ was foretold, NO flesh man would be required.
Mary's father was from the tribe of Judah and her mother was from the tribe of Levi... which fulfilled the prophecy.
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.