If you did not read the bible don't even bother to answer. ALready enough embarassments of non educated Christans in this section of yahoo.
2006-07-07
05:18:49
·
29 answers
·
asked by
PicassoInActions
3
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
OK i see some ppl trying to point to Mary instead of Joseph. Is any1 wants to prove thier claim?
I did not find anywhere in the bible where it says related trough Mother to David. SO may be instead inventing our own theory we can still try to find the answer or admit that there is no answer?
2006-07-07
05:26:23 ·
update #1
Many ppl i see gets angry when i said its embarassing for Christian to be uneducated and if you note the answers i get now are way better than answers i got for my others question.
Yes i did generalise and probably should not but the result is better than previous once.
At least even ppl who did not read the bible trying to look up few things now.
Peace.
2006-07-07
05:29:17 ·
update #2
to smart one "God's plan of salvation is simple enough for everyone to understand. You don't need degrees. As a Christian, I'm embarassed by your comment.
"
Well that's the most terrible part because ppl like you gives wrong msg and interpretations to others. Salvation is not simple and its not only by Grace or faith. Read bible again . There are many different pasages that tells you what salvation is and just because you decide to take the most convinient one for your self does not mean you can fool other ppl.
2006-07-07
05:34:17 ·
update #3
So unless you saying Mathey lied than you can get your salvation just by faith.
Matt. 19:16-18 "And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me."
2006-07-07
05:34:55 ·
update #4
Although Joseph was from the house of David (Luke 1:27, 2:4), Mary appears to have been from the house of Judah since her cousin Elizabeth (Luke 1:36) was a daughter of Aaron, i.e. from the house of Judah (Luke 1:5). Moreover, Mary's name is never mentioned in the genealogy of Luke 3, and only arises incidentally in that of Matthew 1. Both genealogies clearly pertain to Joseph. Both clearly trace the descent of Joseph, not Mary. In fact, none of the genealogies in either the Old or New Testament trace the lineage of a woman. Women are never given a position of such importance in the Bible as to merit a genealogy, and there is no evidence Luke 3 provides an exception. The superiority granted men in the Bible would forestall any possibility of women being considered as equals.
2006-07-07
05:49:55 ·
update #5
For that to be, then his mother, Mary, would have to be a descendant of David. If his step father, Joseph, was a descendant, then Joseph and Mary were related by blood. If Jesus was the son of Joseph, then He could not be the son of God. If he was the son of God, how can he be descended from David?
Unless through his mother's heritage?
2006-07-07 05:23:19
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes, he was the descendant of David. While Mary shows the blood connection as shown in the genealogy as laid out in Luke chapter 3.
Joseph, on the other hand shows, shows the direct link (know what I am trying to say, but words escaping me at the moment) to the throne. Joseph line to the throne of David though legitimate had been severed by God. So that anyone born of Josephs family tree could never be King of Israel.
Take a look at both genealogies of Christ to see where the line breaks off and then check with the old testament to see why.
He truly was the son of David or descendant if you prefer.
Now if you will check the genealogy in Luke chapter three verses 31 and 32. David is mentioned. Now bear in mind this is Mary's bloodline to the throne.
In Matthew chapter 1 verses 5 and 6 we see David again. This would be the same David that God placed on the throne after Saul.
Read further beyond these verses the bloodlines to the throne become different. One is of a bloodline that God said would not rule on the throne, this is Joseph's line. The other is Mary's.
Both bloodlines of Jesus' human parents go back to King David.
Nuff said.
2006-07-07 12:38:20
·
answer #2
·
answered by caedmonscall99 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Oy vey.
Genesis 12:3 says the Messiah would be from the seed of Abraham (this is how one Hebrew man blessed ALL the nations of the world -- not just the jews); Isaiah 9:6-7 explains the Messiah would be heir to the throne of David.
Those mentioning Mary are correct: Luke traces Mary's genealogy, not Joseph's, as many suppose due to the wording. The actual Greek words make this clear; unfortunately, the English translation confuses many.
Read more here:
http://www.messianicassociation.org/a-agf-throne.htm
Danielle: you are greatly misinformed. If "alma" does not mean "a virginal young woman," then why did Jews translating the OT into Greek ( The Septuagint) use the Greek word for "virgin?" Read here: http://www.septuagint.org/LXX/Isaiah/Isaiah7.html
2006-07-07 12:34:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by Suzanne: YPA 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, there are two problems with the NT on this issue.
1. The genealogy is that of Mary - This is inadequate, since if he is claimed to be the Jewish messiah, and according to Jewish tradition he must be descended on his father's side, Mary's genealogy is irrelevant.
2. He was adopted by Joseph -According to Jewish law, adoption does not change the status of the child. If an Israelite is adopted by a Cohen, (A descendant of Aaron the High Priest), the child does not become a Cohen, likewise if a descendant of David, adopts someone who is not, he does not become of the tribe of Judah and a descendant of David.
2006-07-10 15:39:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by Quantrill 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes. The Bible goes into great detail about the geneology of David because it is only through the cleansing of the blood lineage could God accept Jesus as sinless and able to act in a pure way. We find in the Bible that Zaccarriah was the husband of Mary and also that John the Baptist and Jesus were step brothers, a necessary result to indemnify the original course of the Fall of Man. This gives absolute credence to Jesus as the "Son of God", since he was the first sinless man ever born.
The idea of a virgin birth was adopted by early Donatists to ward off accusations that Jesus was the antichrist. Since then it is not been explained due to the fractious nature of Christianity.
Proof and references available upon request. The devil in you will decide that this is heresy but you must prevail and just believe the truth. God only works in laws that he creates and never violates his laws. Miracles are adaptations of laws and principles, but these laws and principles are never violated.
2006-07-07 12:34:39
·
answer #5
·
answered by J 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yah, sure, if only by marriage. His dad, Joseph, was of the tribe of David, and had to return to the City of David for the Census (which is why Mary had to give birth in a Bethlehem manger). Mary's lineage is not given definitively, and God (Jesus' da) was certainly not "a descendant of David," so, it is not real clear. But legally (and how else could you answer this question), he was Joseph's son and Old Joe the Carpenter was of David's line.
2006-07-07 12:22:52
·
answer #6
·
answered by Grendle 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes, the New Testament gives both bloodlines (Mary & Joseph) although I believe 100% in the virgin birth.
God's plan of salvation is simple enough for everyone to understand. You don't need degrees. As a Christian, I'm embarassed by your comment.
http://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-genealogy.html
2006-07-07 12:27:02
·
answer #7
·
answered by frankyglitz 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Being the son of Mary Jesus was a descendant of David.
By being the adoptive son of Joseph Jesus was the legal descendant and heir of David.
Luke proves this point. showing Jesus was a direct descendant of David and thus had a natural claim upon David’s throne. Matthew’s genealogy shows that Jesus had only a legal claim to it.
2006-07-07 12:24:40
·
answer #8
·
answered by Uncle Thesis 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I have read the bible in depth for 30 years. No, the geneologies in Matthew & Luke are contradictory, so we cannot know for certain if he was descended from David or a Roman soldier. If we can trust the account of Matthew and Luke, then Joseph wasn't his dad. But for sure he did not come from bible-god.
2006-07-07 12:25:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes he was a genetic descendant of David through Mary, however Joseph's line counts into his ancestry too because Jesus was legally Joseph's Son by Adoption (and Adopted lineage rights are inheirited).
2006-07-07 12:25:32
·
answer #10
·
answered by MrCool1978 6
·
0⤊
0⤋