Jesus as the Messiah of the Holy Bible?

Fake · Tiger Joined: 03 May 2003 Posts: 862

Within the Bible, there is two, when compared to each other, unmergeable pedigree's to establish Jesus' relationship to King David (will take the final blow last)

The first is Matt 1:1-16, the second is Luke 3:23-34
The fist pedigree is written from Jesus and back to David, the second is written from David forth to Jesus.
If we reverse the second (Luke's pedigree) list to the order of Matt's, we'll find that there's only 4 names that are in correct order with each other, namley
1) Jesus
2) Joseph
4) Mattan/Mattat
and
28/43) David

The question here begs to be asked, why is one pedigree 27 generations long, while the other is 42 names long? This is a difference of 15 generations. Not even in the genealogy prior to David are they in agreeance.
The two lists give two different fathers to Joseph, already here is a quite big problem.
The next problem arrives when anyone claim that one of the two pedigree's is not of Joseph, but by Mary.
As a woman, Mary couldn't have been David's heir to the throne, thus it's impossible for Jesus to be the heir of David, remember, Joseph had nothing to do with the conception of Jesus.And furthermore, it states in Luke 1:36 that she's the relative of Elizabeth, mother of John the Baptist, descendant of Aaron, not David.
So, my question is simply, how do you justify Jesus as the Messiah spoken of in the Old Testament, when everything in the New Testament is in total disagreeance with the former?

Jesus is NOT the Messiah spoken of in the early books of the Bible.

Fake
_________________
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do.
When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

“If there is a God, atheism must seem to Him as less of an insult than religion.”

Dshadna · German Shepherd Joined: 21 Apr 2003 Posts: 344

Just an answer to your question: This will be long, if you'd rather go to the website, look for it at the end of the posts.
****
Please remember, I am in no way claiming to have written this article or anything therein, save anything you will find defined in red, and the astricks added to help facilitate reading and what was a new page in the original text.

Matthew's genealogy of Jesus
Matthew wrote to the Jews to present Jesus as King of the Jews. The account is in Matthew 1:1-17.
It begins by showing Jesus was a legal heir to the throne of David, by virtue of his lineage. This fact is immediately set forth in verse one, which states Jesus was the "son of David, the son of Abraham." His kinship to David the King of Israel is mentioned before that of Abraham, the father of Israel.
Matthew's genealogy traces the ancestors of Joseph, the legal father of Jesus.

Structure of Genealogy
Matthew's structure descends from father to son, beginning with Abraham. Additionally, he divides the genealogy into three groups of fourteen generations, separated by important historic points (Matthew 1:17).

Three Divisions
The three divisions of Matthew's genealogy are:

Abraham to the reign of King David (Matthew 1:2-6).
David's kingdom to the Babylonian captivity (Matthew 1:6-11).
Release from Babylonian captivity to Christ (Matthew 1:12-16).

Names in Matthew's Account
The names in each division appear below.

To see this list, you will need to go to this link as I simply cannot get the list to line up regardless of what I do.

http://www.lifeofchrist.com/life/genealogy/matthew.asp

An Abridged Genealogy
Matthew abridged the genealogy by omitting some names that appear in earlier records. Some speculate that the abridged arrangement was intended to aid in memorization. Genealogical abridgement has biblical precedent, as was disussed earlier.

Repeated Names
It is important to note that Matthew did not say there was a total of 42 generations (i.e. 14 multiplied by 3). He respectively indicated that there were 14 generations from Abraham to David, 14 from David to the Babylonian Captivity, and 14 from the release to Christ.

The names of David and Jeconiah are repeated in the genealogy. David's name was repeated because he was alive when the first division ended, and when the second division began.

Jeconiah's name may have been repeated because of a transcription error. Jeconiah's father was Jehoiakim. The names had similar spellings. Given the fact that some ancient manuscripts contain both names, it is not unreasonable to admit that a transcriber may have overlooked the different spellings, and repeated Jeconiah's name.

****
Luke's Genealogy of Jesus
This record is in Luke 3:23-38. Luke was a physician. He carefully investigated the life of Christ, and wrote the books of Luke and Acts (Colossians 4:14, Luke 1:1-4, Acts 1:1).

Luke's Audience
The original readers of Luke's works were Greek Christians. While Matthew wrote to the Jews, Luke wrote to the Greeks.
Matthew's genealogy emphasized Jesus' claim to the throne of David. Since Luke's readers were less concerned about the fulfillment of Jewish prophecy, his genealogy focused on Jesus' descent from God. It placed no emphasis on Jesus being the descendant of King David.

Reason for Differences
Differences between the genealogies of Matthew and Luke may be attributed to the fact that Matthew traced the ancestry of Joseph, while Luke traced the that of Mary.

Unique Placement of the Genealogy
The placement of Luke's genealogy is after the baptism of Christ. When Jesus was baptized, God said "This is my beloved son." Immediately following this event, as if to prove God's declaration, Luke inserted the genealogy.

Encouragement to Greek Christians
The genealogy culminated by showing Jesus was the "son of Adam, the son of God" ( Luke 3:28 ) This emphasized the humanity of Jesus, and the equality of all christians, regardless of ethnic backgrounds.
Christians of Jewish descent originally considered Greek Christians as inferior to themselves (Acts 15:1-31, Galatians 2:11-16). Luke's genealogy underscored the fact that Jesus was the son of God. Since all men are made in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27), this may have been a source of encouragement to the Greek Christians.

*****

Joseph in Christ's genealogy
Matthew and Luke showed that Joseph was a legal parent, but not a genetic parent to Jesus. Jesus was miraculously conceived in Mary, through the Holy Spirit. By virtue of being Mary's husband, Joseph was considered the father of Jesus. Since Jesus was born into Joseph's family, he was a legal heir. Through Joseph, Jesus obtained a rightful claim to the throne of David.

Although Jesus was a legal descendant to Joseph, he was not a physical descendant. Luke's genealogy directly addressed this issue by stating Jesus was "supposedly the son of Joseph" (Luke 3:23). Clearly, people had assumed that Joseph was the biological father of Jesus, when in fact he was not (Matthew 13:55).

Who was Joseph's Father?
At first glance, Matthew and Luke appear to be in disagreement as to who Joseph's father was. Matthew states he was the son of Jacob, while Luke states he was the son of Heli. Fortunately, an unlikely source has aided scholars in unraveling this mystery.

The Jerusalem Talmud indicates that Mary was the daughter of Heli (Haggigah, Book 77, 4). Joseph was the son-in-law of Heli. Luke could rightfully call Joseph the "son of Heli" because this was in compliance with use of the word "son" at that time. Moreover, designating a son-in-law as a son had scriptural precedent. Refer to Son in Jewish Genealogies for more on this topic.
Thus, Joseph was the son of Jacob, and the son-in-law of Heli.

*****

Alleged Discrepancies
A discussion of the genealogies would be incomplete without considering some of the apparent discrepancies between the records. Some of the most common objections are raised here.
Those which are addressed in greater detail in the preceding information, are briefly recapped.

1. If Matthew indicated there were 42 generations from Abraham to Jesus, why do only 40 names appear in his genealogy?

This is a common objection, which a cursory look at Matthew 1:17 would seem to justify.
However, careful examination shows that Matthew broke the genealogy down into three historic divisions, each of which contained fourteen generations. Two of the names are repeated. David's was repeated because he was alive when the first division ended, and the second division began.
It is widely held that Jeconiah's name was repeated because of a mistranslation. Jeconiah's father's name was Jehoiakim. The names had similar spellings. Apparently the oversight of transcribers caused the name to be repeated. This scenario has added credibility because some ancient manuscripts actually do contain both names.

2. Matthew's genealogy is inconsistent with Old Testament records, that show Matthew skipped generations.

Matthew's genealogy was deliberately abridged. This may have been to aid in memorization of the tables. Old Testament writers also abridged their genealogical records, so Matthew had scriptural precedent to do so (compare Ezra 7:3 with 1 Chronicles 6:7-10).

3. Comparison shows that Matthew and Luke did not record the same names in their genealogies. Since they are not in harmony with each other, one or both of them must be erroneous.

Matthew and Luke traced two family histories. Matthew recorded the ancestors of Joseph, the legal father of Jesus. Luke recorded the ancestors of Mary, the biological mother of Jesus. The divergence of names is natural, given the fact that both authors presented two different family trees.

4. Luke stated that Joseph was the son of Heli, while Matthew stated he was the son of Jacob.

The Jerusalem Talmud shows that Joseph was the son-in-law of Heli. Joseph's father was Jacob. It was customary to refer to a son-in-law as a son in the first century. So Luke's statement was culturally correct.
*****

The Curse of Jehoiakim
An unusual curse in Jeremiah 36:1-32 gives new insight into the virgin birth of Jesus.

The Curse
Jehoiakim was a king of Israel. He angered God by burning a scroll that Jeremiah the prophet wrote. God cursed Jehoiakim by indicating that none of his children would sit on the throne of David (Jeremiah 36:29-31). And although Jehoiakim had children, scripture shows that none of them ever reigned as King David had.

The Problem
Joseph, the father of Jesus, was one of Jehoiakim's descendants (through Jeconiah). Joseph's offspring could not claim David's throne because of the curse. Jesus laid claim to the throne of David (Luke 1:32, Acts 2:30, Hebrews 12:2). If Jesus had been born of Joseph, the curse would have been contradicted.
Also, God had promised David that one of his physical descendants would reign on the throne of his kingdom forever (2 Samuel 7:12-13). As explained above, Joseph was excluded from being the genetic father of the future king of Israel.
It was impossible to fulfill the requirements of both curse and promise by natural means. One man had to be both heir to and offspring of David, without being the genetic descendant of Jehoiakim. This problem required a divine solution.

The Solution
God created a solution through the miracle of the virgin birth. Although Joseph was one of Jehoiakim's offspring (through Solomon), Mary was not. She was a descendant of Nathan, one of David's other sons (Luke 3:31). God's promise to David was fulfilled because Mary was the biological parent of Jesus.
The virgin birth also addressed the curse God had pronounced upon Jehoiakim. Kingship was an inherited right. By Joseph, Jesus inherited a legal claim to the throne of David. However, he was exempt from the curse of Jehoiakim because Joseph was not his genetic father.
So the miracle of the virgin birth accomplished God's will in two ways. First, it granted Jesus a legal claim to the throne of David. And second, it maintained the integrity of the curse God had pronounced upon Jehoiakim. Indeed, Jesus was not one of Jehoiakim's offspring.
*****
*Footnote:
Genealogical abridgement
Genealogical abridgement occurs not only in Matthew 1:1, but also in the Old Testament. Compare Ezra 7:3 with 1st Chronicles 6:7-10, and you can see how Ezra deliberately skipped six generations from Meriaoth to Azariah (son of Johanan).
Son could also be used to describe kinship without sonship. Although Zerubbabel was the nephew of Shealtiel (1st Chronicles 3:17-19), he was called the "son of Shealtiel" (Ezra 3:2, Nehemiah 12:1, Haggai 1:12).
Jair is another example of this principle. He was a distant son-in-law of Manasseh (1st Chronicles 2:21-23 and 7:14-15); yet, he was called the "son of Manasseh" (Numbers 32:41, Deuteronomy 3:14, 1st Kings 4:13).
The point to remember is that the word son can be applied to several types of relationships.

http://www.lifeofchrist.com/life/genealogy/print.asp

Raz · Not So Newbie Joined: 06 May 2003 Posts: 6

Dshadna · German Shepherd Joined: 21 Apr 2003 Posts: 344