Bible Options Bible Study Software
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Messiahs' genealogy?
#21
In the first day; Get Over Death ALMIGHTY (EL"SHADUA) GOD created The Light.

This ALWAYS has been,(in this flesh) The Plan of Salvation from Our Father YAHAVEH, in & through Christ/Messiah.

Problem with the King Line is, that they were expecting Christ/Messiah as Melchezidek the first time, Good News IS, it WILL be Melchezidek this time, Christ/Messiah in the Spirirt, not this flesh.

Just to set the record straight for Our Big Daddy LOVE, before HE does HIS strange act; The Lake of Fire. EEEEEEEKKKKKKK!!!!!!!

Praise be to YAHAVEH

Judah be to YAHAVEH"S Saviour

Christ Messiah, The High Priest (in this flesh) For one & ALL, since his appearance in this flesh.

The NEW way to contact Our Father, IF, IF, IF, one does it Christs Way, and NOT the way of man.
#22
(03-19-2013, 04:14 PM)Nachshon Wrote:
(03-17-2013, 05:35 PM)MessianicJew Wrote:
(03-14-2013, 08:28 PM)Nachshon Wrote: 3.) You can't inherit tribal lineage through a mother, only a physical father.

Why then are you considered Jewish through a mother?
Jewishness is determined by the mother, tribal lineage through the father.
These are two separate issues.

What is Jewishness? It is amazing how convoluted you make it out to be.

Tribal lineage is all there is, and all there ever will be. Nothing in the Torah describes Jewishness, the word isn't written.
#23
(03-19-2013, 06:09 PM)benyosef Wrote: So, you're saying Joseph, via adoption, gave Jesus his own cursed lineage?

No.
#24
(03-14-2013, 08:28 PM)Nachshon Wrote:
(03-14-2013, 12:56 PM)Oliver Wrote: I await your discussion…
1.) So, how does these conflicting geneaologies confirm Yeshua's right to the Davidic throne?

2.) Mary's geneaology is not stated anywhere in the NT.

3.) You can't inherit tribal lineage through a mother, only a physical father.

I'll answer out of order.

2.) Actually Mary's linage is stated in the book of Luke. If you read that book, you will find that Luke is giving the account speaking about Mary. Matthew is giving Josephs linage. That is why there are differences.

3.) Incorrect. If a father only has daughters, the daughters are able to inherit the land which is thru tribal linage.

1.) Jesus, thru Mary is of the linage of David, so Jesus is a son of David, and a son of God. Now this is a most amazing fulfillment. Going back in history, the children of Israel asked for a human king, so they would be like other nations. God granted this request, but stated this request was a rejection of God as King over Israel.

1 Sam. 8:4 Then all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah; 5 and they said to him, “Behold, you have grown old, and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now appoint a king for us to judge us like all the nations.” 6 But the thing was displeasing in the sight of Samuel when they said, “Give us a king to judge us.” And Samuel prayed to the Lord. 7 The Lord said to Samuel, “Listen to the voice of the people in regard to all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from being king over them.

God was to be King of Israel. Saul was selected to be King and we know the results were not good. Then David became King and David was a man who was faithful to God, so God honored David by saying the Messiah would be a son of David and sit on David's throne. By saying 'David's throne' was God relinquishing His right to be King of Israel? No, a human king was still a rejection of God being king. Amazingly Jesus solves the problem. Jesus is a son of David. But Jesus inherits the throne because Jesus is the Son of God, so the throne is returned to it's rightful place, and at the same time the throne goes to a son of David. As the Messiah, Jesus not only fulfills all of the prophesy but corrects the rejection of God as King.
#25
(03-22-2013, 04:01 AM)Jans Wrote: I'll answer out of order.

2.) Actually Mary's linage is stated in the book of Luke. If you read that book, you will find that Luke is giving the account speaking about Mary. Matthew is giving Josephs linage. That is why there are differences.

3.) Incorrect. If a father only has daughters, the daughters are able to inherit the land which is thru tribal linage.

1.) Jesus, thru Mary is of the linage of David, so Jesus is a son of David, and a son of God. Now this is a most amazing fulfillment. Going back in history, the children of Israel asked for a human king, so they would be like other nations. God granted this request, but stated this request was a rejection of God as King over Israel.
2.)Luke mentions nothing that this is Mary's lineage, Where do you get this? Even if this was true, tribal lineage cannot pass to the child as evidenced in 3.) below.

3.) Tribal lineage does not pass through the mother as evidenced by Numbers 27:4, 27:7-8, 36:1-10, Joshua 17:4-6. Only tribal land/property transfers to daughters in the case of no male inheritors. The daughters of Zelophehad married within their tribe to maintain tribal lineage. Why? Because their husband transfered that to their children and family. Tribal lineage is through the physical/biological father. Don't confuse the two.

1.) I've already answered this with 2.) and 3.) above.
#26
Nachshon Ben Avraham
Malachi 3:22

There is no such verse in Malachi what verse did you mean????????
#27
MJ: “Paul doesn't make a connection between Melchizedek having no parents and being a sign though…Paul says [Jesus] is 'after the order' of Melchizedek…”
Paul says “Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the son of God; abideth a priest continually” (Hb 7:3), essentially saying he came from nowehere, born from no one (except maybe G-D), and lives eternally. If so, maybe Nebuzaradan, Rezin King of Aram, Pharoah, and other people in Torah are like G-D’s sons since they too have no recorded lineage. You said no, since “none of those men are written to be a sign the Lord himself would send,” but, I ask, if Malchitzedek was not written to be a sign either, where does Paul get this idea that if the Torah doesn’t record someone’s lineage they can be considered G-D’s son?

Another thing I never understood is if Christianity is insistent Jesus had no human father, why does the NT constantly call him “son of man?”

MJ: “No one can see the Sabbath…yet the Sabbath is written as a sign…Other viewers would have began to recognize [Jesus], he was teaching at a very young age, he grew in stature and God gave him favor among men…”
My question is, if Isaiah is giving Ahaz a sign that the prophecy will occur, why give an invisible sign? Isaiah didn’t give Ahaz the sign of Sabbath, he gave him the sign of a child’s maturity, which can be visually recognized. The question remains: Can a virgin birth be a sign? Your comment that others saw Jesus teaching at a young age doesn’t answer the question because that has nothing to do with Mary’s sexual experience or lack thereof. When she was pushing baby Jesus in the pram, were people able to see he was the messiah because his mother is clearly a virgin? Can you tell if someone is a virgin by looking at them?
#28
Jans, what is peculiar is that Luke (1:27) took the time to tell us that Joseph was from David’s line, yet said nothing of Mary’s tribe. The gospel writers clearly understood the rule that women do not transfer tribal affiliation, as both mention only the men, and none of the women.

Your interpretation of I Samuel 8 and the ensuing conclusion is novel, but slightly off the mark. To say “a human king was still a rejection of God being king” goes against what we see in Torah. For example, in the End of Days G-D will be recognized by the whole Earth as King (Zechariah 14:9) and all mankind will worship Him (Isaiah 66:23). At the same time, there will be a human king sitting on David’s throne (Ezk 37:24, Jer 30:9). Thus, we can have a human king and still serve G-D, our King. Even Moses tells the nation that a king is permitted (Deuteronomy 17:14-20), and Jacob alluded to this as well (Genesis 49:10).

Does Jesus solve any issues here? No. In practice, all kings in Judah were male-line descendants of Solomon, son of David. Even if Luke was indeed speaking of Mary's line, hers will certainly not be a kingly line, since Luke traces through a non-kingly son of David, i.e. Nathan. Thus, Luke’s lineage is absolutely worthless when determining who can be king in Judah.
#29
2Sa 7:14 I will be to him for a father, and he shall be to Me for a son
1Ch 17:13 I will be to him for a father, and he shall be to Me for a son
Psa 2:6 'Truly it is I that have established My king upon Zion, My holy mountain.'
Psa 2:7 I will tell of the decree: the LORD said unto me: 'Thou art My son, this day have I begotten thee. [JPS-1917]

There can be no doubt that all the above verses, in context, are spoken ‘by’ YHVH ‘of’ David.

Act_13:33 that God has fulfilled this [promise] for us their children, having raised up Jesus, as it also has been written in the second Psalm, 'You are My Son; today I have begotten You.' [Psalm 2:7]
Heb_1:5 For to which of the angels did He ever say, "You are My Son, today I have begotten You?" and again, "I will be to Him for a father, and He will be to Me for a Son?" [Psalm 2:7; 2Sam 7:14; 1Chron 17:13]
Heb_5:5 In the same way also Christ did not glorify Himself to become High Priest, but the One having said to Him, "You are My Son, Today I have begotten You." [Psalm 2:7] [ALT]

Yet in the NT these verses are ascribed to the Messiah by Paul and the author of the letter to the Hebrews [Paul?].

Here is a presentation of the gospel according to the revelation given to Paul:
#30
Act 13:26 “Men, brothers, sons of the race of Abraham, and those among you who fear God, to you the message of this salvation has been sent.
Act 13:27 For those dwelling in Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they did not know Him, nor the voices of the Prophets which are being read according to each Sabbath, condemning him, they fulfilled the Scriptures.
Act 13:28 And finding no cause for death, they asked Pilate that He be executed.
Act 13:29 And when they finished all the things having been written about Him, taking Him down from the tree, they put Him in a tomb.
Act 13:30 But God raised Him from the dead;
Act 13:31 who appeared for many days more to those going up with Him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are His witnesses to the people.
Act 13:32 And we proclaim to you the good news of the promise which was made to the fathers,
Act 13:33 that God has fulfilled this promise for us to their children, when He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm: 'You are My Son, today I have begotten You.'
Act 13:34 "And that He raised Him from the dead, no longer being about to return to corruption, thus He has said: 'I will give you the sure decrees of God concerning David.'
Act 13:35 "Therefore also in another Psalm He says, 'You will not allow Your Holy One to see corruption.'
Act 13:36 "For David indeed in his own generation, having served by the purpose of God, died, and was buried with his fathers, and saw corruption;
Act 13:37 but He whom God raised up did not see corruption.
Act 13:38 Therefore let it be known to you, brothers, that through this Man forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you,
Act 13:39 and from all things from which you could not (by the Law of Moses) be justified, by Him everyone that believes is justified.” [EMTV]


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)