URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       <
       form action=&amp
       ;amp;amp;quot;https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; method=&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;p
       ost&
       quot; target=&am
       p;amp;amp;quot;_top&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;input type=&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;hidden&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; name=&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;cmd&a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; value=&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot
       ;_s-xclick&a
       mp;amp;quot;&amp
       ;amp;amp;gt; &am
       p;amp;amp;lt;input type=&amp
       ;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;hidden&amp
       ;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; name=&amp
       ;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;hosted_button_id&a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; val
       ue=&
       quot;DKL7ADEKRVUBL&a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;quot;&amp
       ;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;input type=&amp
       ;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;image&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; src=&a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;https://www.payp
       alobjects.com/en_US/i/btn/btn_donateCC_LG.gif&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; border=&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;0&a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; nam
       e=&q
       uot;submit&a
       mp;amp;quot; alt=&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;quot;PayPal - The safer, easier way to pay online!
       &quo
       t;&g
       t; &
       lt;img alt=&
       amp;amp;quot;&am
       p;amp;amp;quot; border=&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;0&a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; src=&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;https://www.paypalobjects.com
       /en_US/i/scr/pixel.gif&a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; width=&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;1&a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot; height=&amp
       ;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;1&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;quot;&am
       p;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt; &a
       mp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/form&
       amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;
  HTML https://3169.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Words of God - Christian Theology w/Bladerunner
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 10014--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
       By: guest116 Date: January 31, 2020, 10:30 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       There is a really good book in my opinion that covers the
       genealogy and the known historical facts of Jesus of Nazareth.
       It is insightful at the same time as being controversial.   It
       is more academic than theological.
       #Post#: 10019--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
       By: Geoff Date: February 1, 2020, 6:31 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=703.msg10009#msg10009
       date=1580514499]
       [quote author=Geoff link=topic=703.msg10000#msg10000
       date=1580474078]
       [quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=703.msg9971#msg9971
       date=1580347164]
       [quote author=Geoff link=topic=703.msg9230#msg9230
       date=1576546060]
       [quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=703.msg9227#msg9227
       date=1576542126]
       [quote author=Geoff link=topic=703.msg9210#msg9210
       date=1576471382]
       [quote]Your questioning the KJV can also be discussed in a
       different thread should you wish it.
       Your question about the WORD of GOD in JOHN 1:1 and my use of it
       can be discussed in a different thread if you wish.
       However, I would like to clear up the Joseph, May and Heli
       "assumption" as you called it....
       In Luke 3:23.(KJV) [color=red]."And Jesus himself began to be
       about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed ) the son of
       Joseph, which was the son of Heli,"
       Your word "assumption" kind of hit me wrong. Needless to say, I
       went back to research it a little more and here is the answer as
       given to you by GOD himself....
       "AS WAS SUPPOSED"
       meaning..νομίζω nomízō,
       nom-id'-zo; from G3551; properly, to do by law (usage), i.e. to
       accustom (passively, be usual); by extension, to deem or
       regard:—suppose, thing, be wont.
       So Joseph was a son to heli according to customs of Israel
       concerning the issues brought about by Zelophehad. A Son-in-law
       adopted......
       Outline of Biblical (KJV) Usage :   to hold by custom or usage,
       own as a custom or usage, to follow a custom or usage, it is the
       custom, it is the received usage , to deem, think, suppose
       Hope you have a good evening.
       Blade[/color]
       [/quote]
       Yes I thought you would get there sooner or later but let's not
       wrap it up quite so soon...
       Here is a list of every usage of the word translated "supposed"
       in the KJV.
       Check out the context of every time it is used and tell me I
       cannot hold the view I have; that people thought that Jesus was
       Joseph's actual son.
       G3543
       νομίζω
       nomizō
       Total KJV Occurrences: 15
       supposed, 4
       Mat_20:9-10 (2), Luk_3:23, Act_7:25, Act_21:29
       supposing, 4
       Luk_2:44, Act_14:19, Act_16:27, 1Ti_6:5
       think, 4
       Mat_5:17, Mat_10:34, Act_17:29, 1Co_7:36
       suppose, 1
       1Co_7:26
       thought, 1
       Act_8:20
       wont, 1
       Act_16:13
       Now apply the verses I gave in support of the supposition that
       everyone had concerning the father of Jesus.
       Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother
       called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and
       Judas?
       Luk 2:48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother
       said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold,
       thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.
       Luk 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of
       age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the
       son of Heli,
       Luk 4:22 And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious
       words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not
       this Joseph's son?
       Joh 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have
       found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did
       write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.
       Joh 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph,
       whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I
       came down from heaven?
       Next.
       Luk 3:23  And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of
       age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the
       son of Heli,
       Luk 3:24  Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of
       Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna,
       which was the son of Joseph,
       Luk 3:25  Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of
       Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli,
       which was the son of Nagge,
       Luk 3:26  Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of
       Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of
       Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
       Luk 3:27  Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of
       Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of
       Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
       Luk 3:28  Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of
       Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam,
       which was the son of Er,
       Luk 3:29  Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of
       Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of
       Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
       Luk 3:30  Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of
       Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan,
       which was the son of Eliakim,
       Luk 3:31  Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of
       Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of
       Nathan, which was the son of David,
       Luk 3:32  Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed,
       which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which
       was the son of Naasson,
       Luk 3:33  Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of
       Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares,
       which was the son of Juda,
       Luk 3:34  Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of
       Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara,
       which was the son of Nachor,
       Luk 3:35  Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of
       Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber,
       which was the son of Sala,
       Luk 3:36  Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of
       Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe,
       which was the son of Lamech,
       Luk 3:37  Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of
       Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of
       Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
       Luk 3:38  Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth,
       which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.
       How many of these sons were "supposed" by their contemporaries
       to be the son of...
       In fact, isn't it true that you are indeed "supposed" or
       "assumed" to be the son of your father by the majority of the
       people who know you? How many people 'actually know' you are?
       Luke, said at the beginning of his Gospel...
       Luk 1:1  Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in
       order a declaration of those things which are most surely
       believed among us,
       Luk 1:2  Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the
       beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
       Luk 1:3  It seemed good to me also, having had perfect
       understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto
       thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
       Luk 1:4  That thou mightest know the certainty of those things,
       wherein thou hast been instructed.
       In light of this statement he also said:
       Luk 3:23  And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of
       age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the
       son of Heli,
       In other words, Jesus... being as everyone supposed, the son of
       Joseph....
       Let's be honest, the statements above demonstrate that everyone
       did think Jesus was the son of Joseph, including Luke.
       [/quote]
       Jesus is the  legal son of Joseph...and the legal son of Heli,
       according to customs.....
       We are at an end here........Thank you for the discussions and
       Hope you have a great day tomorrow and and a safe evening.
       Blade
       [/quote]
       Blade.
       Are you sure you haven't just partaken of my evil deeds?  :)
       2Jo 1:9  Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the
       doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the
       doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
       2Jo 1:10  If there come any unto you, and bring not this
       doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God
       speed:
       2Jo 1:11  For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his
       evil deeds.
       [/quote]
       OH MY? we know Jesus was born of Mary...Who was Mary's father is
       the question and Luke 3 tells us by using; NOT assumptions but
       rather deductive reasoning, that Heli adopted Mary's Husband,
       Joseph because of a civil law, GOD gave Israel in the
       Wilderness.
       Blade
       [/quote]
       True. We know Jesus was born of Mary.
       It's what Luke tells us.... that you WANT to be... indeed, have
       concluded MUST be, because... That's where the problem lies.
       If you were to just let Luke say what he says without thinking
       about the because...
       Why do I know this? Because I've been there myself.
       I know I won't ever convince you. It's not my job.  :)
       But just so you know, there's no point in you repeating yourself
       to me, because, as I'm sure you know, once you see something
       that's been there in front of you for so long, there's no going
       back.
       That's our biggest problem with all of our theology, we know the
       answer all too often before we research, and therefore all the
       research points us in one direction...
       Thanks for the discussion Blade, I know you mean well.
       [/quote]
       I just don;'t understand what you are trying to say...That Heli
       is not Mary's Father?
       are you trying to decide if there were TWO Josephs?
       That Heli is Joseph's father. Luke (3:23, KJV)
       That Jacob is Joseph's Father. (Mat 1:16, KJV)
       What are you trying to say?
       Mat 1:16 (KJV).]."And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of
       whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ."
       OK, here we Know that:
       1. Jacob is the Father of Joseph? right?????
       2. Joseph is the Husband of Mary?   right?????
       3. Mary is the Mother of Jesus ?????   right???
       Are we on the same page to this point?????
       Luke 3:23..(KJV)..."And Jesus himself began to be about thirty
       years of age, being (as was supposed ) the son of Joseph, which
       was the son of Heli,"
       OK, Here we see that:
       1. Jesus is the Son of Joseph ("as was supposed" according to
       customs-Adopted)
       2. Joseph is the Father-in-law of Heli.
       3. Joseph (the father of Jesus) is the son of Heli.
       OK,   where are you at right here?
       Let me add two more item to this discussion.
       1. Both Matthew and Luke genealogies are identical from Adam to
       Abraham.
       2. "The term in Luke 3:23 is nomizo in Greek: reckoned as by
       law. Joseph was adopted by Heli in accordance to the exception
       in the Torah for inheritance through brotherless sisters given
       to Zelophehad (Numbers 27:1-11; Joshua 17:3-6; Ezra 2:61; cf.
       Nehemiah 7:63; Numbers 32:41; 1 Chronicles 2:21-23, 34-35). "
       (Koinonia House,The Gospel in Quadraphonic:)
       I really would like to understand your rejection of whatever it
       is that you are trying to say...Please help me understand your
       postion(s) on these two scriptures..
       Blade
       [/quote]
       Blade.
       Okay, I'm saying that Luke is the authority I accept as the
       Divinely inspired version of events. If one reads the first
       three chapters of Luke without any preconceived notions about
       Jesus' parentage, taking into account the promises made to David
       concerning his posterity and reading the account of Mary's
       visitation by the angel Gabriel, one can only come to the
       conclusion that Jesus' conception was made possible by the power
       of the Holy Spirit alone. Joseph, the son of Heli was his father
       but had zero physical involvement in his conception.
       Matthew's genealogical record is flawed in so many ways that it
       is impossible that it was Divinely inspired, let alone the
       dubious references to fulfilment of prophecy. But then, maybe
       you think there's a reasonable explanation based on... :)
       So there you go, you asked, I gave. Make of it what you will.
       I'm thinking this will be goodbye on this topic...
       Geoff.
       #Post#: 10020--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
       By: Geoff Date: February 1, 2020, 6:36 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Mark Schmidt link=topic=703.msg10014#msg10014
       date=1580531454]
       There is a really good book in my opinion that covers the
       genealogy and the known historical facts of Jesus of Nazareth.
       It is insightful at the same time as being controversial.   It
       is more academic than theological.
       [/quote]
       And the name of that book would be?
       #Post#: 10022--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
       By: guest8 Date: February 1, 2020, 6:29 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Geoff link=topic=703.msg10019#msg10019
       date=1580560260]
       [quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=703.msg10009#msg10009
       date=1580514499]
       [quote author=Geoff link=topic=703.msg10000#msg10000
       date=1580474078]
       [quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=703.msg9971#msg9971
       date=1580347164]
       [quote author=Geoff link=topic=703.msg9230#msg9230
       date=1576546060]
       [quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=703.msg9227#msg9227
       date=1576542126]
       [quote author=Geoff link=topic=703.msg9210#msg9210
       date=1576471382]
       [quote]Your questioning the KJV can also be discussed in a
       different thread should you wish it.
       Your question about the WORD of GOD in JOHN 1:1 and my use of it
       can be discussed in a different thread if you wish.
       However, I would like to clear up the Joseph, May and Heli
       "assumption" as you called it....
       In Luke 3:23.(KJV) [color=red]."And Jesus himself began to be
       about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed ) the son of
       Joseph, which was the son of Heli,"
       Your word "assumption" kind of hit me wrong. Needless to say, I
       went back to research it a little more and here is the answer as
       given to you by GOD himself....
       "AS WAS SUPPOSED"
       meaning..νομίζω nomízō,
       nom-id'-zo; from G3551; properly, to do by law (usage), i.e. to
       accustom (passively, be usual); by extension, to deem or
       regard:—suppose, thing, be wont.
       So Joseph was a son to heli according to customs of Israel
       concerning the issues brought about by Zelophehad. A Son-in-law
       adopted......
       Outline of Biblical (KJV) Usage :   to hold by custom or usage,
       own as a custom or usage, to follow a custom or usage, it is the
       custom, it is the received usage , to deem, think, suppose
       Hope you have a good evening.
       Blade[/color]
       [/quote]
       Yes I thought you would get there sooner or later but let's not
       wrap it up quite so soon...
       Here is a list of every usage of the word translated "supposed"
       in the KJV.
       Check out the context of every time it is used and tell me I
       cannot hold the view I have; that people thought that Jesus was
       Joseph's actual son.
       G3543
       νομίζω
       nomizō
       Total KJV Occurrences: 15
       supposed, 4
       Mat_20:9-10 (2), Luk_3:23, Act_7:25, Act_21:29
       supposing, 4
       Luk_2:44, Act_14:19, Act_16:27, 1Ti_6:5
       think, 4
       Mat_5:17, Mat_10:34, Act_17:29, 1Co_7:36
       suppose, 1
       1Co_7:26
       thought, 1
       Act_8:20
       wont, 1
       Act_16:13
       Now apply the verses I gave in support of the supposition that
       everyone had concerning the father of Jesus.
       Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother
       called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and
       Judas?
       Luk 2:48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother
       said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold,
       thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.
       Luk 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of
       age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the
       son of Heli,
       Luk 4:22 And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious
       words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not
       this Joseph's son?
       Joh 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have
       found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did
       write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.
       Joh 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph,
       whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I
       came down from heaven?
       Next.
       Luk 3:23  And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of
       age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the
       son of Heli,
       Luk 3:24  Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of
       Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna,
       which was the son of Joseph,
       Luk 3:25  Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of
       Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli,
       which was the son of Nagge,
       Luk 3:26  Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of
       Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of
       Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
       Luk 3:27  Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of
       Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of
       Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
       Luk 3:28  Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of
       Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam,
       which was the son of Er,
       Luk 3:29  Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of
       Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of
       Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
       Luk 3:30  Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of
       Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan,
       which was the son of Eliakim,
       Luk 3:31  Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of
       Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of
       Nathan, which was the son of David,
       Luk 3:32  Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed,
       which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which
       was the son of Naasson,
       Luk 3:33  Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of
       Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares,
       which was the son of Juda,
       Luk 3:34  Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of
       Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara,
       which was the son of Nachor,
       Luk 3:35  Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of
       Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber,
       which was the son of Sala,
       Luk 3:36  Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of
       Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe,
       which was the son of Lamech,
       Luk 3:37  Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of
       Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of
       Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
       Luk 3:38  Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth,
       which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.
       How many of these sons were "supposed" by their contemporaries
       to be the son of...
       In fact, isn't it true that you are indeed "supposed" or
       "assumed" to be the son of your father by the majority of the
       people who know you? How many people 'actually know' you are?
       Luke, said at the beginning of his Gospel...
       Luk 1:1  Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in
       order a declaration of those things which are most surely
       believed among us,
       Luk 1:2  Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the
       beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
       Luk 1:3  It seemed good to me also, having had perfect
       understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto
       thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
       Luk 1:4  That thou mightest know the certainty of those things,
       wherein thou hast been instructed.
       In light of this statement he also said:
       Luk 3:23  And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of
       age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the
       son of Heli,
       In other words, Jesus... being as everyone supposed, the son of
       Joseph....
       Let's be honest, the statements above demonstrate that everyone
       did think Jesus was the son of Joseph, including Luke.
       [/quote]
       Jesus is the  legal son of Joseph...and the legal son of Heli,
       according to customs.....
       We are at an end here........Thank you for the discussions and
       Hope you have a great day tomorrow and and a safe evening.
       Blade
       [/quote]
       Blade.
       Are you sure you haven't just partaken of my evil deeds?  :)
       2Jo 1:9  Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the
       doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the
       doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
       2Jo 1:10  If there come any unto you, and bring not this
       doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God
       speed:
       2Jo 1:11  For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his
       evil deeds.
       [/quote]
       OH MY? we know Jesus was born of Mary...Who was Mary's father is
       the question and Luke 3 tells us by using; NOT assumptions but
       rather deductive reasoning, that Heli adopted Mary's Husband,
       Joseph because of a civil law, GOD gave Israel in the
       Wilderness.
       Blade
       [/quote]
       True. We know Jesus was born of Mary.
       It's what Luke tells us.... that you WANT to be... indeed, have
       concluded MUST be, because... That's where the problem lies.
       If you were to just let Luke say what he says without thinking
       about the because...
       Why do I know this? Because I've been there myself.
       I know I won't ever convince you. It's not my job.  :)
       But just so you know, there's no point in you repeating yourself
       to me, because, as I'm sure you know, once you see something
       that's been there in front of you for so long, there's no going
       back.
       That's our biggest problem with all of our theology, we know the
       answer all too often before we research, and therefore all the
       research points us in one direction...
       Thanks for the discussion Blade, I know you mean well.
       [/quote]
       I just don;'t understand what you are trying to say...That Heli
       is not Mary's Father?
       are you trying to decide if there were TWO Josephs?
       That Heli is Joseph's father. Luke (3:23, KJV)
       That Jacob is Joseph's Father. (Mat 1:16, KJV)
       What are you trying to say?
       Mat 1:16 (KJV).]."And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of
       whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ."
       OK, here we Know that:
       1. Jacob is the Father of Joseph? right?????
       2. Joseph is the Husband of Mary?   right?????
       3. Mary is the Mother of Jesus ?????   right???
       Are we on the same page to this point?????
       Luke 3:23..(KJV)..."And Jesus himself began to be about thirty
       years of age, being (as was supposed ) the son of Joseph, which
       was the son of Heli,"
       OK, Here we see that:
       1. Jesus is the Son of Joseph ("as was supposed" according to
       customs-Adopted)
       2. Joseph is the Father-in-law of Heli.
       3. Joseph (the father of Jesus) is the son of Heli.
       OK,   where are you at right here?
       Let me add two more item to this discussion.
       1. Both Matthew and Luke genealogies are identical from Adam to
       Abraham.
       2. "The term in Luke 3:23 is nomizo in Greek: reckoned as by
       law. Joseph was adopted by Heli in accordance to the exception
       in the Torah for inheritance through brotherless sisters given
       to Zelophehad (Numbers 27:1-11; Joshua 17:3-6; Ezra 2:61; cf.
       Nehemiah 7:63; Numbers 32:41; 1 Chronicles 2:21-23, 34-35). "
       (Koinonia House,The Gospel in Quadraphonic:)
       I really would like to understand your rejection of whatever it
       is that you are trying to say...Please help me understand your
       postion(s) on these two scriptures..
       Blade
       [/quote]
       Blade.
       Okay, I'm saying that Luke is the authority I accept as the
       Divinely inspired version of events. If one reads the first
       three chapters of Luke without any preconceived notions about
       Jesus' parentage, taking into account the promises made to David
       concerning his posterity and reading the account of Mary's
       visitation by the angel Gabriel, one can only come to the
       conclusion that Jesus' conception was made possible by the power
       of the Holy Spirit alone. Joseph, the son of Heli was his father
       but had zero physical involvement in his conception.
       Matthew's genealogical record is flawed in so many ways that it
       is impossible that it was Divinely inspired, let alone the
       dubious references to fulfilment of prophecy. But then, maybe
       you think there's a reasonable explanation based on... :)
       So there you go, you asked, I gave. Make of it what you will.
       I'm thinking this will be goodbye on this topic...
       Geoff.
       [/quote]
       If you insist Geoff we can terminate this thread. However, I
       assure you I was only simply trying (with an open mind) to
       understand you thought patterns on this subject....
       Now you opened up another stream, Matthew. As you
       said:"Matthew's genealogical record is flawed in so many ways
       that it is impossible that it was Divinely inspired, let alone
       the dubious references to fulfilment of prophecy. "
       What is your proof of what you say...?????
       [color=green] "dubious references to fulfullment of Prophecy" is
       another stream but it can wait until another time.
       Blade [/color]
       #Post#: 10027--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
       By: Geoff Date: February 2, 2020, 5:48 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=703.msg10022#msg10022
       date=1580603367]
       [quote author=Geoff link=topic=703.msg10019#msg10019
       date=1580560260]
       [quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=703.msg10009#msg10009
       date=1580514499]
       [quote author=Geoff link=topic=703.msg10000#msg10000
       date=1580474078]
       [quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=703.msg9971#msg9971
       date=1580347164]
       [quote author=Geoff link=topic=703.msg9230#msg9230
       date=1576546060]
       [quote author=Bladerunner link=topic=703.msg9227#msg9227
       date=1576542126]
       [quote author=Geoff link=topic=703.msg9210#msg9210
       date=1576471382]
       [quote]Your questioning the KJV can also be discussed in a
       different thread should you wish it.
       Your question about the WORD of GOD in JOHN 1:1 and my use of it
       can be discussed in a different thread if you wish.
       However, I would like to clear up the Joseph, May and Heli
       "assumption" as you called it....
       In Luke 3:23.(KJV) [color=red]."And Jesus himself began to be
       about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed ) the son of
       Joseph, which was the son of Heli,"
       Your word "assumption" kind of hit me wrong. Needless to say, I
       went back to research it a little more and here is the answer as
       given to you by GOD himself....
       "AS WAS SUPPOSED"
       meaning..νομίζω nomízō,
       nom-id'-zo; from G3551; properly, to do by law (usage), i.e. to
       accustom (passively, be usual); by extension, to deem or
       regard:—suppose, thing, be wont.
       So Joseph was a son to heli according to customs of Israel
       concerning the issues brought about by Zelophehad. A Son-in-law
       adopted......
       Outline of Biblical (KJV) Usage :   to hold by custom or usage,
       own as a custom or usage, to follow a custom or usage, it is the
       custom, it is the received usage , to deem, think, suppose
       Hope you have a good evening.
       Blade[/color]
       [/quote]
       Yes I thought you would get there sooner or later but let's not
       wrap it up quite so soon...
       Here is a list of every usage of the word translated "supposed"
       in the KJV.
       Check out the context of every time it is used and tell me I
       cannot hold the view I have; that people thought that Jesus was
       Joseph's actual son.
       G3543
       νομίζω
       nomizō
       Total KJV Occurrences: 15
       supposed, 4
       Mat_20:9-10 (2), Luk_3:23, Act_7:25, Act_21:29
       supposing, 4
       Luk_2:44, Act_14:19, Act_16:27, 1Ti_6:5
       think, 4
       Mat_5:17, Mat_10:34, Act_17:29, 1Co_7:36
       suppose, 1
       1Co_7:26
       thought, 1
       Act_8:20
       wont, 1
       Act_16:13
       Now apply the verses I gave in support of the supposition that
       everyone had concerning the father of Jesus.
       Mat 13:55 Is not this the carpenter's son? is not his mother
       called Mary? and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and
       Judas?
       Luk 2:48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother
       said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold,
       thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing.
       Luk 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of
       age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the
       son of Heli,
       Luk 4:22 And all bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious
       words which proceeded out of his mouth. And they said, Is not
       this Joseph's son?
       Joh 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have
       found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did
       write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.
       Joh 6:42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph,
       whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I
       came down from heaven?
       Next.
       Luk 3:23  And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of
       age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the
       son of Heli,
       Luk 3:24  Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of
       Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna,
       which was the son of Joseph,
       Luk 3:25  Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of
       Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli,
       which was the son of Nagge,
       Luk 3:26  Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of
       Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of
       Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
       Luk 3:27  Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of
       Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of
       Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
       Luk 3:28  Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of
       Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam,
       which was the son of Er,
       Luk 3:29  Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of
       Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of
       Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
       Luk 3:30  Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of
       Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan,
       which was the son of Eliakim,
       Luk 3:31  Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of
       Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of
       Nathan, which was the son of David,
       Luk 3:32  Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed,
       which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which
       was the son of Naasson,
       Luk 3:33  Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of
       Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares,
       which was the son of Juda,
       Luk 3:34  Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of
       Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara,
       which was the son of Nachor,
       Luk 3:35  Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of
       Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber,
       which was the son of Sala,
       Luk 3:36  Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of
       Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe,
       which was the son of Lamech,
       Luk 3:37  Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of
       Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of
       Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
       Luk 3:38  Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth,
       which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.
       How many of these sons were "supposed" by their contemporaries
       to be the son of...
       In fact, isn't it true that you are indeed "supposed" or
       "assumed" to be the son of your father by the majority of the
       people who know you? How many people 'actually know' you are?
       Luke, said at the beginning of his Gospel...
       Luk 1:1  Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in
       order a declaration of those things which are most surely
       believed among us,
       Luk 1:2  Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the
       beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word;
       Luk 1:3  It seemed good to me also, having had perfect
       understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto
       thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,
       Luk 1:4  That thou mightest know the certainty of those things,
       wherein thou hast been instructed.
       In light of this statement he also said:
       Luk 3:23  And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of
       age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the
       son of Heli,
       In other words, Jesus... being as everyone supposed, the son of
       Joseph....
       Let's be honest, the statements above demonstrate that everyone
       did think Jesus was the son of Joseph, including Luke.
       [/quote]
       Jesus is the  legal son of Joseph...and the legal son of Heli,
       according to customs.....
       We are at an end here........Thank you for the discussions and
       Hope you have a great day tomorrow and and a safe evening.
       Blade
       [/quote]
       Blade.
       Are you sure you haven't just partaken of my evil deeds?  :)
       2Jo 1:9  Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the
       doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the
       doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
       2Jo 1:10  If there come any unto you, and bring not this
       doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God
       speed:
       2Jo 1:11  For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his
       evil deeds.
       [/quote]
       OH MY? we know Jesus was born of Mary...Who was Mary's father is
       the question and Luke 3 tells us by using; NOT assumptions but
       rather deductive reasoning, that Heli adopted Mary's Husband,
       Joseph because of a civil law, GOD gave Israel in the
       Wilderness.
       Blade
       [/quote]
       True. We know Jesus was born of Mary.
       It's what Luke tells us.... that you WANT to be... indeed, have
       concluded MUST be, because... That's where the problem lies.
       If you were to just let Luke say what he says without thinking
       about the because...
       Why do I know this? Because I've been there myself.
       I know I won't ever convince you. It's not my job.  :)
       But just so you know, there's no point in you repeating yourself
       to me, because, as I'm sure you know, once you see something
       that's been there in front of you for so long, there's no going
       back.
       That's our biggest problem with all of our theology, we know the
       answer all too often before we research, and therefore all the
       research points us in one direction...
       Thanks for the discussion Blade, I know you mean well.
       [/quote]
       I just don;'t understand what you are trying to say...That Heli
       is not Mary's Father?
       are you trying to decide if there were TWO Josephs?
       That Heli is Joseph's father. Luke (3:23, KJV)
       That Jacob is Joseph's Father. (Mat 1:16, KJV)
       What are you trying to say?
       Mat 1:16 (KJV).]."And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of
       whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ."
       OK, here we Know that:
       1. Jacob is the Father of Joseph? right?????
       2. Joseph is the Husband of Mary?   right?????
       3. Mary is the Mother of Jesus ?????   right???
       Are we on the same page to this point?????
       Luke 3:23..(KJV)..."And Jesus himself began to be about thirty
       years of age, being (as was supposed ) the son of Joseph, which
       was the son of Heli,"
       OK, Here we see that:
       1. Jesus is the Son of Joseph ("as was supposed" according to
       customs-Adopted)
       2. Joseph is the Father-in-law of Heli.
       3. Joseph (the father of Jesus) is the son of Heli.
       OK,   where are you at right here?
       Let me add two more item to this discussion.
       1. Both Matthew and Luke genealogies are identical from Adam to
       Abraham.
       2. "The term in Luke 3:23 is nomizo in Greek: reckoned as by
       law. Joseph was adopted by Heli in accordance to the exception
       in the Torah for inheritance through brotherless sisters given
       to Zelophehad (Numbers 27:1-11; Joshua 17:3-6; Ezra 2:61; cf.
       Nehemiah 7:63; Numbers 32:41; 1 Chronicles 2:21-23, 34-35). "
       (Koinonia House,The Gospel in Quadraphonic:)
       I really would like to understand your rejection of whatever it
       is that you are trying to say...Please help me understand your
       postion(s) on these two scriptures..
       Blade
       [/quote]
       Blade.
       Okay, I'm saying that Luke is the authority I accept as the
       Divinely inspired version of events. If one reads the first
       three chapters of Luke without any preconceived notions about
       Jesus' parentage, taking into account the promises made to David
       concerning his posterity and reading the account of Mary's
       visitation by the angel Gabriel, one can only come to the
       conclusion that Jesus' conception was made possible by the power
       of the Holy Spirit alone. Joseph, the son of Heli was his father
       but had zero physical involvement in his conception.
       Matthew's genealogical record is flawed in so many ways that it
       is impossible that it was Divinely inspired, let alone the
       dubious references to fulfilment of prophecy. But then, maybe
       you think there's a reasonable explanation based on... :)
       So there you go, you asked, I gave. Make of it what you will.
       I'm thinking this will be goodbye on this topic...
       Geoff.
       [/quote]
       If you insist Geoff we can terminate this thread. However, I
       assure you I was only simply trying (with an open mind) to
       understand you thought patterns on this subject....
       Now you opened up another stream, Matthew. As you
       said:"Matthew's genealogical record is flawed in so many ways
       that it is impossible that it was Divinely inspired, let alone
       the dubious references to fulfilment of prophecy. "
       What is your proof of what you say...?????
       [color=green] "dubious references to fulfullment of Prophecy" is
       another stream but it can wait until another time.
       Blade [/color]
       [/quote]
       I'll have to get back to you Blade as I'll be out of range for a
       several days.
       I don't want to terminate, I just didn't expect you would want
       to continue after I explained that position.
       
       #Post#: 10035--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
       By: Wayne Gabler Date: February 2, 2020, 8:53 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I would agree that Luke contains the names of Mary's fathers
       tree. This is more about putting some names to the books that
       match the witnesses rather than which Scribe copied the version
       that was used in 323AD.
       Matthew, Mark and Luke all contain two stories that only 3
       Apostles saw, Peter and the brothers James and John. The Gospel
       of John was written by the 2nd disciple of his that followed
       Jesus that did not become an Apostle, so the term Gospel of John
       the Baptist should be applied. This verse might help.
       Lu:24:10:
       It was Mary Magdalene,
       and Joanna,
       and Mary the mother of James,
       and other women that were with them,
       which told these things unto the apostles.
       #Post#: 10038--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Genealogy of Jesus
       By: guest8 Date: February 2, 2020, 10:04 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Wayne Gabler link=topic=703.msg10035#msg10035
       date=1580698434]
       I would agree that Luke contains the names of Mary's fathers
       tree. This is more about putting some names to the books that
       match the witnesses rather than which Scribe copied the version
       that was used in 323AD.
       Matthew, Mark and Luke all contain two stories that only 3
       Apostles saw, Peter and the brothers James and John. The Gospel
       of John was written by the 2nd disciple of his that followed
       Jesus that did not become an Apostle, so the term Gospel of John
       the Baptist should be applied. This verse might help.
       Lu:24:10:
       It was Mary Magdalene,
       and Joanna,
       and Mary the mother of James,
       and other women that were with them,
       which told these things unto the apostles.
       [/quote]
       there were four apostles present. You missed Andrew.
       But Matthew, Mark and  Luke, the three synoptic Gospels were
       thus authored by the one who told the Apostles in the first
       place.....John a separate but the same gospel.
       Matthew was a tax Collector and a Jew....Therefore we see Jesus
       through Jewish Eyes and thoughts.
       Mark was a pen writer (secretary) and thus we see Jesus as a
       Servant.
       Luke, A doctor gives  a view of Jesus as a Man
       John the same (beloved) John in Revelation, shows us Jesus
       Christ as GOD!
       All  four Gospels are GOD authored with all the personality and
       character traits of each writer shown within the writing of each
       Book.
       * you said: "which Scribe copied the version that was used in
       323AD."
       What scribe......in 323 AD and your references....
       Blade
       #Post#: 11114--------------------------------------------------
       The Genealogy of Jesus
       By: guest8 Date: March 19, 2020, 12:04 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=Wayne Gabler link=topic=703.msg10035#msg10035
       date=1580698434]
       I would agree that Luke contains the names of Mary's fathers
       tree. This is more about putting some names to the books that
       match the witnesses rather than which Scribe copied the version
       that was used in 323AD.
       Matthew, Mark and Luke all contain two stories that only 3
       Apostles saw, Peter and the brothers James and John. The Gospel
       of John was written by the 2nd disciple of his that followed
       Jesus that did not become an Apostle, so the term Gospel of John
       the Baptist should be applied. This verse might help.
       Lu:24:10:
       It was Mary Magdalene,
       and Joanna,
       and Mary the mother of James,
       and other women that were with them,
       which told these things unto the apostles.
       [/quote]
       so you deny the WORD of GOD and His POWER!
       psa 12:6-7..(KJV).."The words of the LORD are pure words: as
       silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
       v7..Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from
       this generation for ever."
       Blade
       #Post#: 17730--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Genealogy of Jesus: Comments
       By: patrick jane Date: September 18, 2020, 6:06 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [img]
  HTML https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/118931.jpg?w=940[/img]
  HTML https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2020/september/andrew-wilson-jesus-genealogies-matthew-luke.html
       God Knew What He Was Doing When He Gave Jesus Two Family Trees
       How to sort out the many disparities between the genealogies of
       Matthew and Luke.
       Problems in Scripture work like speed bumps: They may be
       frustrating, and they can do damage to the unwary, but they
       effectively slow us down and focus our attention. Tensions
       provoke thought. Apparent contradictions force us to wrestle
       with texts in greater detail. When God inspired them, he knew
       what he was doing.
       Studying the Gospels, we immediately encounter the problem of
       major differences between the genealogies of Jesus in Matthew
       and Luke. Matthew 1 lists 42 generations going back to Abraham;
       Luke 3 has 77 generations going back to Adam. Of the dozens of
       names between David and Jesus, only five appear on both lists.
       Worse, Jesus has two different paternal grandfathers: Jacob
       (Matt. 1:16) and Heli (Luke 3:23).
       Efforts to sort out the disparities often focus on Matthew’s
       side, partly because his genealogy looks more theologically
       motivated—the numerous gaps, the women who feature, the three
       groups of 14, and so on. Luke, we assume, is giving “just the
       facts,” while Matthew is fiddling with them to make a point. But
       this demeans both the historian in Matthew and the theologian in
       Luke. I think Luke’s genealogy has a theological agenda just as
       strong as Matthew’s, if not more so.
       Consider how he lists 77 generations from Adam to Christ. That
       number points to the Sabbath. It reminds us of the 77-fold
       vengeance of Lamech (Gen. 4:24) and the 77-fold forgiveness of
       Jesus (Matt. 18:22). It evokes the Jubilee year (Lev. 25:8–55),
       observed once for every seven sets of seven years. Jesus
       proclaims his fulfillment of the Jubliee promise in Luke
       4:16–21, a development foreshadowed two chapters earlier, when
       the summons to report home for a census recalls the Jubilee
       command to return to one’s “family property” (Lev. 25:10).
       It’s also noteworthy that Luke introduces his genealogy not at
       the start of Jesus’ life but at the start of his ministry, when
       he was “about thirty years old” (3:23). Thirty is a striking
       number. Priests began their ministry at that age (Num. 4:3), the
       same age at which David became king (2 Sam. 5:4) and Ezekiel saw
       prophetic visions of God (Ezek. 1:1). By inserting his genealogy
       at this stage, Luke is connecting Jesus’ ancestry to his
       ministry as prophet, priest, and king. By tracing it back to
       Adam, not just Abraham, he portrays Jesus as a prophet to the
       nations, a priest for all peoples, and king of the whole earth.
       Then there is the question of Jesus’ paternal grandfather(s).
       Ever since the early third century, people have speculated that
       Joseph had two fathers, either because he was legally adopted or
       because he was the child of a levirate marriage. (In this Jewish
       custom, if a man died without children, his brother would marry
       the widow to preserve the family line.) If so, then Joseph was
       the son of both Heli and Jacob. That always sounded like
       apologetic desperation to me. But then I started noticing all
       the other references in Luke 3 to levirate marriage or legal
       adoption.
       One relates to Herod and his brother Philip (Luke 3:1). Herod
       had married Philip’s wife, angering observant Jews—and
       eventually getting John the Baptist beheaded (Mark 6:17). So
       Luke’s account of Jesus’ adult life begins with a man enacting
       an adulterous “levirate marriage” while his brother was still
       alive.
       Another concerns Jesus himself: “He was the son, so it was
       thought, of Joseph” (Luke 3:23). Legally, Jesus was Joseph’s
       son, but Joseph was not his biological father. As Gabriel
       explained to Mary, Jesus would be called “Son of the Most High”
       and “Son of God” (1:32, 35).
       We even find an example in John the Baptist, who famously
       contrasts himself with one “the straps of whose sandals I am not
       worthy to untie” (3:16). Untying a sandal strap was the key
       moment in the halizah, the process that released a man from
       levirate marriage (Deut. 25:9; Ruth 4:7). Perhaps, as Gregory
       the Great argued, John was declaring himself not just beneath
       Christ but also unworthy to displace him as Israel’s true
       husband. John is the best man, not the bridegroom (John 3:29).
       #Post#: 17874--------------------------------------------------
       Re: The Genealogy of Jesus: Comments
       By: guest8 Date: September 22, 2020, 8:59 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       [quote author=patrick jane link=topic=423.msg17730#msg17730
       date=1600470418]
       [img]
  HTML https://www-images.christianitytoday.com/images/118931.jpg?w=940[/img]
  HTML https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2020/september/andrew-wilson-jesus-genealogies-matthew-luke.html
       God Knew What He Was Doing When He Gave Jesus Two Family Trees
       How to sort out the many disparities between the genealogies of
       Matthew and Luke.
       Problems in Scripture work like speed bumps: They may be
       frustrating, and they can do damage to the unwary, but they
       effectively slow us down and focus our attention. Tensions
       provoke thought. Apparent contradictions force us to wrestle
       with texts in greater detail. When God inspired them, he knew
       what he was doing.
       Studying the Gospels, we immediately encounter the problem of
       major differences between the genealogies of Jesus in Matthew
       and Luke. Matthew 1 lists 42 generations going back to Abraham;
       Luke 3 has 77 generations going back to Adam. Of the dozens of
       names between David and Jesus, only five appear on both lists.
       Worse, Jesus has two different paternal grandfathers: Jacob
       (Matt. 1:16) and Heli (Luke 3:23).
       Efforts to sort out the disparities often focus on Matthew’s
       side, partly because his genealogy looks more theologically
       motivated—the numerous gaps, the women who feature, the three
       groups of 14, and so on. Luke, we assume, is giving “just the
       facts,” while Matthew is fiddling with them to make a point. But
       this demeans both the historian in Matthew and the theologian in
       Luke. I think Luke’s genealogy has a theological agenda just as
       strong as Matthew’s, if not more so.
       Consider how he lists 77 generations from Adam to Christ. That
       number points to the Sabbath. It reminds us of the 77-fold
       vengeance of Lamech (Gen. 4:24) and the 77-fold forgiveness of
       Jesus (Matt. 18:22). It evokes the Jubilee year (Lev. 25:8–55),
       observed once for every seven sets of seven years. Jesus
       proclaims his fulfillment of the Jubliee promise in Luke
       4:16–21, a development foreshadowed two chapters earlier, when
       the summons to report home for a census recalls the Jubilee
       command to return to one’s “family property” (Lev. 25:10).
       It’s also noteworthy that Luke introduces his genealogy not at
       the start of Jesus’ life but at the start of his ministry, when
       he was “about thirty years old” (3:23). Thirty is a striking
       number. Priests began their ministry at that age (Num. 4:3), the
       same age at which David became king (2 Sam. 5:4) and Ezekiel saw
       prophetic visions of God (Ezek. 1:1). By inserting his genealogy
       at this stage, Luke is connecting Jesus’ ancestry to his
       ministry as prophet, priest, and king. By tracing it back to
       Adam, not just Abraham, he portrays Jesus as a prophet to the
       nations, a priest for all peoples, and king of the whole earth.
       Then there is the question of Jesus’ paternal grandfather(s).
       Ever since the early third century, people have speculated that
       Joseph had two fathers, either because he was legally adopted or
       because he was the child of a levirate marriage. (In this Jewish
       custom, if a man died without children, his brother would marry
       the widow to preserve the family line.) If so, then Joseph was
       the son of both Heli and Jacob. That always sounded like
       apologetic desperation to me. But then I started noticing all
       the other references in Luke 3 to levirate marriage or legal
       adoption.
       One relates to Herod and his brother Philip (Luke 3:1). Herod
       had married Philip’s wife, angering observant Jews—and
       eventually getting John the Baptist beheaded (Mark 6:17). So
       Luke’s account of Jesus’ adult life begins with a man enacting
       an adulterous “levirate marriage” while his brother was still
       alive.
       Another concerns Jesus himself: “He was the son, so it was
       thought, of Joseph” (Luke 3:23). Legally, Jesus was Joseph’s
       son, but Joseph was not his biological father. As Gabriel
       explained to Mary, Jesus would be called “Son of the Most High”
       and “Son of God” (1:32, 35).
       We even find an example in John the Baptist, who famously
       contrasts himself with one “the straps of whose sandals I am not
       worthy to untie” (3:16). Untying a sandal strap was the key
       moment in the halizah, the process that released a man from
       levirate marriage (Deut. 25:9; Ruth 4:7). Perhaps, as Gregory
       the Great argued, John was declaring himself not just beneath
       Christ but also unworthy to displace him as Israel’s true
       husband. John is the best man, not the bridegroom (John 3:29).
       [/quote]
       "Then there is the question of Jesus’ paternal grandfather(s).
       Ever since the early third century, people have speculated that
       Joseph had two fathers, either because he was legally adopted or
       because he was the child of a levirate marriage. (In this Jewish
       custom, if a man died without children, his brother would marry
       the widow to preserve the family line.) If so, then Joseph was
       the son of both Heli and Jacob. That always sounded like
       apologetic desperation to me. But then I started noticing all
       the other references in Luke 3 to levirate marriage or legal
       adoption."
       Because Heli had only the one daughter, Mary the law concerning
       'no legal sons to inherit' came into effect. Mary
       would be able to inherit her fathers land, etc. if He adopted
       her husband. Thus He had a son-in-law and a adopted son.
       This is why Jesus had two paternal grandfathers, one biological
       and one legal.
       Blade
       
       *****************************************************
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page