Why NOT Christ Lineage through Joesph's boodline, Instead of Judah's

Arachnophelia, You are not counting as Matthew is counting.Matthew's counting includes David twice. He closes one section and opens another. David closes the section of the fathers and also opens the section of the kings.Now here is how Matthew counted the generations:"Thus all the generations from Abraham until David are fourteen generations,

​

And from David until the deportation to Babylon, fourteen generations,

​

And from the deportation to Babylon until the Christ, fourteen generations. (Matt. 1:17)This message has been edited by jaywill, 01-12-2006 09:57 PM

well, that's one more problem, not one less. david is one person, not two, and there are 41 generations, not 42. but even still, the net effect is the same as my guess that you were making the first one 13. matthew then counts 14 kings of judah (there were at lest 18 in the line of descent), and pushes jeconiah off the end. this is simply because he was considered king while in exile -- it doesn't mean he wasn't king.and it's still not really all that important if josiah is considered the last rightful king of judah (which matthew seems to be doing, since he leaves out jehoiakim). whether or not he was king, it's still the wrong line. it should go through zedekiah, i believe.This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 01-12-2006 10:09 PM

---

אָרַח

The counting is not according to man's way with man's priorities. The counting is according to God's way with God's priorities.Yes David is one person. And yes math wise it is "sneaky" to count David twice. I agree.But David is the foreshow and precurser of Jesus Christ. So David carries more weight. David closes one era and opens another era. That is because Christ Himself closes one era and opens another era.The weight of David the king (and I believe he is the only one who is specifically called "the king") carries more weight. So the Holy Spirit counts David as the terminal point of the generations of the fathers and the starting point of the age of the kings.Its not anybody. Its David the king a real symbol of Christ the Son of God and Offspring of David.David carries more weight.

I think that I proved sufficiently that the logic that God changed His course from the point of the line corruption starting with Jeconiah is virtually the same as the logic that it started with the line corruption from Solomon.I presented much more scriptural proof that Solomon was the decisive case than anyone presented that Jeconiah was the case. (altough Jeremiah's prophecy is clearly a rejection of Jeconiah's line).The Orthodox reasoning is identical in nature to the interpretation I have given to Matthew's geneology.Therefore I count the greater weight of the evidence to be that from Solomon God altered what we might expect and went with the line from Nathan.This message has been edited by jaywill, 01-16-2006 07:20 AM

You still haven't got a bloodline from Jesus to Solomon though!Well, as long as it sits right in your mind, carry on.Brian.

well, this is just one more case of the deceptive and sneaky god of the christians.know what "liar" is in greek? i'll give you a hint, it's not theos.

---

אָרַח

If I showed you an example of this "sneaky" accounting fully in the Old Testament, would you apologize for your above comment?Yes or No will be a good answer.If you say "No" I will not bother to show you the exact same kind of acounting in the Old Testament.It's up to you. No need for me to waste my time if you are not willing to retract your insult.This message has been edited by jaywill, 01-16-2006 09:39 PMThis message has been edited by jaywill, 01-16-2006 09:41 PM

it doesn't matter. i could show you a few examples of god some apparently dishonest things too, also in the old testament.but this is not really god being sneaky. it's human beings doing it, and then claiming it's god. god is the reason we count david twice. it's not an insult. it's a valid point. how can we claim to follow god and not the devil if our god lies?

---

אָרַח

having david twice looks more like the author was trying to come up with a number he liked, rather than having anything to do with god, but saying god did this is basically saying god is lying or being deceptive, rather than facing the reality that man wrote the book and added things that they wanted! yes the whole 40 years thing, it shows they had a thing for 40 years,numberology was a common belief, then and now

I must be missing something.We have two genealogies of a guy who wasn't even Jesus' father, so that really should be the end of the story.The virgin birth (as well as other things) negates the possibility that Jesus was the messiah, there is no need to mutilate the Bible. The Bible makes it abundantly clear that Jesus could not have been the messiah.The only sensible way forward is to admit that the author of matthew made a huge error in allocating Jesus a 'virgin birth', and that Joseph was indeed Jesus' father. The Jeconiah line curse can be explained by God's forgiving nature when He informs Zerubabbel that:Haggai 2:20-13The word of the LORD came to Haggai a second time on the twenty-fourth day of the month: 21 "Tell Zerubbabel governor of Judah that I will shake the heavens and the earth. I will overturn royal thrones and shatter the power of the foreign kingdoms. I will overthrow chariots and their drivers; horses and their riders will fall, each by the sword of his brother.

​

" 'On that day,' declares the LORD Almighty, 'I will take you, my servant Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel,' declares the LORD, 'and I will make you like my signet ring, for I have chosen you,' declares the LORD Almighty." This implies that the curse was lifted, why else would God choose Zerubabbel?So, it is easy to give Jesus a bloodline to David (and Solomon) and we do not have to mutilate the Bible to do so. All we have to do is admit that the author of Matthew made a mistake, and being honest, Matthew's Gospel is full of mistakes, so it is not a problem to do so.So, we have Joseph as Jesus father, and God lifts the curse on Jeconiah's line, hey presto.Oops, forgot one important point, Jesus was never crowned king of Israel!Oh well, almost had it Brian.

The problem with that is the Zerubbabel never became King. He had great power yes, but he was never king.THe prohibition still held true

I think Brian thinks that just because God chose him that must mean he chose him for the Messianic line.God chose people who were under a curse of some kind.He chose Rehab from cursed Jericho and Ruth from the cursed Moabites. And everyone under the curse that fell upon mankind from Adam whom God "chose" were also under a curse.This message has been edited by jaywill, 01-17-2006 02:16 PMThis message has been edited by jaywill, 01-17-2006 02:17 PMThis message has been edited by jaywill, 01-17-2006 02:17 PM

The only thing the 'curse' did is prohibit people from becoming the King of Israel..The person in question did not become king.SImple as that.

Hi Ramoss, I don't see how that is a problem. If God lifted the curse, then it would allow any of Zerubabbel's descendants to have a legal right to the throne.Remember God said that "I will be his father, and he will be my son. When he does wrong, I will punish him with the rod of men, with floggings inflicted by men. But my love will never be taken away from him, as I took it away from Saul, whom I removed from before you. Your house and your kingdom will endure forever before me ; your throne will be established forever.' " It's kind of difficult to imagine that God would make this promise and then break it, whereas it is very easy to imagine that God could forgive someone and remove a curse.When Jeconiah was cursed God said:Jeremiah 22:24-30"As surely as I live," declares the LORD, "even if you, Jehoiachin son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, were a signet ring on my right hand, I would still pull you off. I will hand you over to those who seek your life, those you fear”to Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and to the Babylonians. I will hurl you and the mother who gave you birth into another country, where neither of you was born, and there you both will die. You will never come back to the land you long to return to."

​

Is this man Jehoiachin a despised, broken pot, an object no one wants?

​

Why will he and his children be hurled out, cast into a land they do not know?

​

O land, land, land, hear the word of the LORD!

​

This is what the LORD says: "Record this man as if childless,
a man who will not prosper in his lifetime, for none of his offspring will prosper, none will sit on the throne of David or rule anymore in Judah."But, Haggai 2:20-23 The word of the LORD came to Haggai a second time on the twenty-fourth day of the month: "Tell Zerubbabel governor of Judah that I will shake the heavens and the earth. I will overturn royal thrones and shatter the power of the foreign kingdoms. I will overthrow chariots and their drivers; horses and their riders will fall, each by the sword of his brother.

​

" 'On that day,' declares the LORD Almighty, 'I will take you, my servant Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel,' declares the LORD, 'and I will make you like my signet ring, for I have chosen you,' declares the LORD Almighty." I think that the term 'signet ring' is very important here. God uses the term when He cursed Jehoiachin, He mentions removing the ring and removing Jehoiachin. But, in Haggai, the signet ring motif reappears, this time as Zerubabbel is chosen. Signet rings were used as seals, this could mean that God is using Zerubabbel to reseal the deal made with David all those years before.Also, I am pretty sure that there are a few Rabbinical texts that claim that the curse was lifted.Zerubabbel may have been the resumption of the messianic line, and with Joseph being his descendant, we would have that bloodline if we ignore the silly virgin birth mistake that the author of Matthew made.Brian.

Matthew and Luke must have made the same typo, huh?