Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Have any of you seen the show Brain Games on National Geographic?
On that show, they give you tests and you try to follow images on the screen - the point being that what we focus on does not entirely describe the entire picture on the screen. I feel like that's what's going on here.
The OP presents a scenario, and we focus on it. And in the process, we miss or forget some things.
First, both Matthew and Luke portray correctly the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. What this means is that there is no earthly father of Christ - because if there was an earthly father, then He would be of Adam - and if He is a part of Adam, then He would not be without sin and could not have defeated death, and so on.
So - these genealogies are subject to the purposes and the audience of the authors.
-------------------------------------------
For Matthew - his audience is the Jews. His genealogy focuses on aspects important to Jews, which are the legal and prophetic. The first verse sets the tone.
Matthew 1:1 - The record of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham:
The use of the word son does not mean a literal son in the sense of a nuclear family. Matthew's version traces the line through Joseph - Jesus' LEGAL guardian.
Matthew also skipped some people. Maybe to make it in nice neat groups of 14 - I don't know, but it had been done in the OT. Comapre Ezra 7:3 to 1 Chronicles 6:7-10. Ezra skipped six generations.
My point with Matthew is the father/son designation is not meant solely to display a relationship by birth - but more of a legal requirement, or a kinship.
-----------------------------------------
Luke's gospel was to a Greek audience. They didn't care about the legal or prophetic aspects. Luke wanted to connect Christ to God. He was countering the idea that Jews thought they were more superior because Christ was Jewish. By connecting Jesus to God, it served as an encouragement to Greeks that they were not inferior to the Jews.
He has already described the virgin birth and Jesus' baptism before going through his genealogy. So he focuses on Jesus' HUMAN connection to Mary. Luke mentions Jesus as the supposed son of Joseph, but the son of Eli. Eli is probably Mary's father, and Joseph is his son-in-law. This would have been very easy to find out since Mary was very young upon birthing Jesus, and Eli was most likely still living.
God promised that Jesus would come through David. Both lineages do exactly that. So prophecy lines up in both up to that point and divert from there. Your "jesus never existed" reference website shows that.
It's one thing to acknowledge to lack understanding and seek and answer.
It's a different thing to assume that a person today would know more than God (suggesting what should be in the Bible) and have a better understanding than people who lived in that day and in that culture. The word for this is pride and God hates it. Repentance is necessary.
There's only one Nathan that existed in that day? It's probably another Nathan. Another erroneous unfounded assumption.
Because this is all that you do.
Because you choose to lean on your own understanding instead of the Bible that God provides.
Because if someone gives a reasonable answer you continue to stand on your faulty assumptions instead of trusting that God knows what's in His word.
It was another Nathan? but no Solomon? I laugh at how hard some people strive to flatter themselves with the false religions of their anscestors and friends instead of being humbled by the truth. DRob even admits the Christians and other religionists lie for their false religion depending on what audience their demons urge them to attempt to trick.
God promised that Jesus would come through David. Both lineages do exactly that. So prophecy lines up in both up to that point and divert from there. Your "jesus never existed" reference website shows that.
RESPONSE:
No. Both 2 Samual and 1 Chronicles show that the messiah would be the biological offspirng of BOTH David and Solomon. Not David and Nathan, a son that never sat on the throne.
Lets look at the souce documents one more time.
2 Samuel 7:12-13
12When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come forth from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. 13He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever.
1 Chronicles 22:9-11 9See, a son shall be born to you; he shall be a man of peace. I will give him peace from all his enemies on every side; for his name shall be Solomon,* and I will give peace* and quiet to Israel in his days. 10He shall build a house for my name. He shall be a son to me, and I will be a father to him, and I will establish HIS royal [that is Solomon's] throne in Israel for ever.” 11Now, my son, the Lord be with you, so that you may succeed in building the house of the Lord your God, as he has spoken concerning you.
Thus Luke's David-Nathan genealogy doesn't even get off the ground!
Last edited by ancient warrior; 07-02-2013 at 02:56 PM..
Reason: additional material
No. Both 2 Samual and 1 Chronicles show that the messiah would be the biological offspirng of BOTH David and Solomon. Not David and Nathan, a son that never sat on the throne.
Lets look at the souce documents one more time.
2 Samuel 7:12-13
12When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come forth from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. 13He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever.
1 Chronicles 22:9-11 9See, a son shall be born to you; he shall be a man of peace. I will give him peace from all his enemies on every side; for his name shall be Solomon,* and I will give peace* and quiet to Israel in his days. 10He shall build a house for my name. He shall be a son to me, and I will be a father to him, and I will establish HIS royal [that is Solomon's] throne in Israel for ever.” 11Now, my son, the Lord be with you, so that you may succeed in building the house of the Lord your God, as he has spoken concerning you.
Thus Luke's David-Nathan genealogy doesn't even get off the ground!
Read it carefully.
2 Samuel 7:12-16 - "When your days are complete and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your descendant after you, who will come forth from you, and I will establish his kingdom. 13 "He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. 14 "I will be a father to him and he will be a son to Me; when he commits iniquity, I will correct him with the rod of men and the strokes of the sons of men, 15 but My lovingkindness shall not depart from him, as I took it away from Saul, whom I removed from before you. 16 "Your house and your kingdom shall endure before Me forever; your throne shall be established forever.
The kingdom of Solomon is established forever - as Matthew had in his genealogy. That's LEGAL. It doesn't say anything about seed or anything by birth - it's says house and kingdom.
Fact is, writers 2000 years ago didn't view the construction of things like genealogies the way we do today; and didn't view the need for slavish accuracy in recounting tales or reconciling the details of history (those tendencies are a modern, post-Enlighentment phenomenon). Matthew and Luke selected the names they did to make a point, not just to echo back the "factually accurate" genealogies of the Messiah back to the origins of humankind.
I believe fundamentalists of all stripes fall into error when they attempt to view things like these genealogies (or the creation myths in Genesis) through a modern lens: modern history's primary goal is to reflect events as accurately as possible; this is a fruit of the enlightenment ... and as much as fundamentalists would like to deny it, belief systems like creationism and intelligent design that specialize in "far-fetched reasoning" are much a product of the enlightenment as the anti-theology of Richard Dawkins ... as are the attempts to reconcile the lists in Matthew and Luke as though they were intended by the authors to be accurate renditions of historical events (or the similar attempts to "harmonize" the gospel accounts where they disagree ... in particular the Gospel of John vs the synoptics, which don't mention the disciple Jesus loved among many other things).
Yes, Luke "got it wrong" ... but I have to wonder if his response to you all pointing this out to him would be, "But that's not my point ..."
Everything you say is true. And that would be Luke's attitude if he were asked. But he would be just as aghast as most non-Fundamentalists currently are at what has happened to the Church Jesus Christ established. The problems encountered in Luke's genealogy wouldn't be an issue if the Fundamentalists weren't so insistent that the New Living Testament is the absolute perfect, "inerrant" word of God, meaning it is without a single error.
I express my own person opinion, but it is one that is shared by millions of Christians: The Fundamentalist Corporate Church Machine running Christianity today is the most corrupt and destructive force to hit Christianity since it was established 2000 years ago. The Fundamentalist Corporate Church Machine is responsible for driving more people away from Christianity than the pitiful few it brings in. Eventually, as Bishop Spong frequently says, the whole organization will collapse----and the sooner the better, far as I'm concerned.
>>Luke listed Jesus' mother's side, his maternal side.<<
There are several obvious problems with that explanation.
It was thought that the entire offspring existed in the fathers' "seed" (Gr. sperma). The woman's body only nourished the offspring if she was "fertile" or not if she was barren.
Accordingly, Jewish genealogy only passed through males. (See if you can find any exception in the Old Testament).
Today we recognize the absence of the "Y" chromosone in a female. Therefore, if there was no male involved and Jesus came from David's blood by way of Mary, Jesus would have lacked the "Y" chromosone and been female.
Still, most importantly, 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles are specific. The messiah had to be a biological descendent of BOTH David and Solomon. Nathan wasn't in that lineage and never was a king of Isreal. Hence the David-Nathan-Mary claim would be contradictory to scripture.
Thaaaaaannnnk you, ancient warrior.
I'd love to see the David/Nathan/Mary crowd wiggle out of that one.
Quote:
There's only one Nathan that existed in that day? It's probably another Nathan.Another erroneous unfounded assumption.
On whose part, Rob???? Oh, you've come up with some good ones, but that doesn't take the cake--it takes the entire bakery!
Honest, Rob. Some of the things you say are so outlandish, I truly think you are taking the bunch of us for a ride.
It was another Nathan? but no Solomon? I laugh at how hard some people strive to flatter themselves with the false religions of their anscestors and friends instead of being humbled by the truth. DRob even admits the Christians and other religionists lie for their false religion depending on what audience their demons urge them to attempt to trick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte
On whose part, Rob???? Oh, you've come up with some good ones, but that doesn't take the cake--it takes the entire bakery!
Honest, Rob. Some of the things you say are so outlandish, I truly think you are taking the bunch of us for a ride.
Think about what you saying. Nathan the Prophet is the same person named in Luke's genealogy as David's son.
Is that what you are telling me?
FYI - Solomon's birth thru David is clear.
2 Samuel 12:24 - Then David comforted his wife Bathsheba, and went in to her and lay with her; and she gave birth to a son, and he named him Solomon.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
