Posted on 01/29/2018 5:26:26 AM PST 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!
These passages have always confused me. If we believe that Jesus is the son of the virgin Mary, what is the point of tracing Joseph’s blood-line?
From what I understand, both Mary and Joseph had family going back to King David and also the Priestly line. Giving His genealogy meant Lord Jesus had claims both to the throne of Israel and also the Priesthood. He had to have both.
A good bibical commentary would clear up your confusion....
I agree. My theology training has shown that Matthew was the lineage of Joseph and Luke was showing the lineage of Mary. Joseph’s lineage showed the priestly side of His lineage while the Luke showed the kingly side. Mary (Jesus’ blood relative) was indeed a direct descendant of David, this would make her son “the seed of David” in keeping with Messianic prophecies.
Jesus existed before Mary. She was a surrogate mother.
I was at the LDS library when the lineage of someone came in all the way back to Adam and Eve. The librarians were having a real chuckle.
***what is the point of tracing Joseph’s blood-line?***
To prove Joseph was NOT the father of Jesus. Among his ancestors is Jechoniah, of whom it was foretold his childern would NEVER set on the throne of Judea.
Mary’s family line is in LUKE.
Oh, and one thing people aren’t tacking on is this: That through Joseph, the rightful decedent of the throne, could pass that right to his ‘adoptive’ child Jesus.
So Mary had the pure line of David while Joseph could pass on the authority.
bump for later
Very nice. I will have to look up a higher def copy and use it in a sermon. Thank you.
Great point. I remember reading that in a commentary a few years ago but had forgotten the details.
I’m astounded by the Bible. Will never find all the mysteries in my lifetime. Then I hit on Ivan Panin a decade ago and all the 7’s mathematically in both Greek and Hebrew...I don’t like getting caught up in numerology and such but when we see these genealogies they are there for a reason. Bigger picture or smaller picture in the genealogies, it’s all so amazing I can merely glory in His plan, His design and wonder at His love for us.
Wikipedia's page about the MOTB is rather slanted against the museum, writing indignantly as if America's earliest white settlers were not overwhelmingly various types of Protestants (they resent the plain facts of history); but other reviewers have praised the MOTB, such as this article from The Federalist.
A Jewish scholar who has viewed collections in Israel and New York refutes many of the criticisms and says the MOTB's Jewish materials are an "invaluable contribution" to Jewish cultural literacy.
And -- there's no entry fee.
Doubt I’ll ever visit DC but that museum would interest me. I’d like to camp there for a few months or until the cloud moves me in these days of the earth dwellers bringing back paganism exponentially these days.
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.