2 Abraham begot Isaac, Isaac begot Jacob, and Jacob begot Judah and his brothers. 3 Judah begot Perez and Zerah by Tamar, Perez begot Hezron, and Hezron begot Ram.
Matthew Chapter 1:2-3 (New King James Version)
Notice Issac's brother isn't mentioned, Jacob's brother isn't mentioned, Judah's brother's are mentioned but not named, neither is the sister, and not to muddy the waters but Judah had other children (I think in Genesis they didn't survive very long).
Just curious. Cause it seems Perez is the ancestor and the brother isn't essential to the geneology.
2006-07-20 03:27:54 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Mathew was a Jew and was writing a Jewish Geneology the Geneology of David included the Story of Tamar the important part isn't the brothers it was the Righteousnous (siq) of Tamar this was so important to Jewish tradition at the time that Tamar is almot always mentioned in Conjunction with the birth of Perez and his brother. The story of Tamar and her struggles for Justice under the law are still very important to us as christians.
2006-07-20 03:34:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Perez Genealogy
2016-12-11 17:26:06 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Both say they are the genealogy of the step-father of Jesus. 1 Timothy 1:4 and Titus 3:9 say to not speculate over the genealogies. "Son of" means descendant of, not direct descendant of. The genealogies are not complete, but are more like saying someone is a descendant of George Washington and not including all the people in between.
2016-03-16 22:33:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Didn't you notice that both of Jesus' genealogies terminate not in Mary, supposedly the only person who anything to do with him biologically, but in Joseph? Why not ask about that? And you should get on the discrepancies between Matthew's and Luke's genealogies; they are totally irreconcilable.
Short answer: the people writing/compiling the gospels had various purposes in mind in impressing their readers with Jesus' genealogical credentials. In terms of "history," they're not worth much. That's why the oldest gospel, Mark, doesn't bother with either the virgin birth or the royal genealogies.
2006-07-20 03:32:54 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Begot? Christianity? Jesus? Dying?
What is the Imacculate Conception supposed to mean?
(NOT A VIRGIN BIRTH! - Google Imacculate Conception. What else do you falsely believe? )
Jesus, the basis of Christianity? .
If Jesus died, he could NOT have been God.
Gods do not die? Do they?
If Jesus 'died' on Friday and 'undied' on Sunday, what else besides Saturday was sacrificed?
Did Jesus give up Saturday for us? Big deal!
If Jesus died for our sins, there should not be any more sins, else why go through with it?.
If Jesus really DIED, he should be dead, dead, dead!
If you swallow this stuff, you are not going to like the folks who don't. You want them to swallow it too.
Christians want everyone to convert to their non-thinking in order to be 'saved'.
Believing and not thinking is like choosing a mental illness and becoming lost.
What is a Christian Principle?
2006-07-20 03:30:13 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would love to answer this question but instead i find myself responding to Chazerai.
First and foremost by your response you, yourself do believe that Jesus existed and through that should also believe that the flesh of Jesus died. Although it is hard for you to accept his spirit will never die, i.e. the Holy Spirit. His flesh was then brought back to life to wash YOU free of YOUR sin.
If you chose not to accept this gift it is your choice. No one will attempt to Force you to believe anything you do not believe. Consider this for example:
When you sit on a chair (or sat on a chair for the first time), does someone need to force you to believe that the chair will hold you? No, you just believe it will. Likewise, I, as do millions of others, believe that the chair will hold, and that Jesus rose from the dead and has washed us clean of sin and one day we will all see his face and His glory in heaven.
Now, off my soap box.
There are many translation to the Bible and they may all have different agendas in translation. Believe what you believe.
2006-07-20 03:47:06 · answer #6 · answered by Which 1's Pink 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Familial lines in the OT are not as clear cut as they are today. If a man died, his brother was allowed to marry his widow. This action meant the brother became father to any children. IOW the kids went from being nieces and nephews to sons and daughters.
Also, adoption took place. See the Book of Ruth when Ruth gave birth, her son was put on her mother-in-law's knees. The women gave thanks, saying God has given (Ruth's mother-in-law, forget her name) a son." While the child was actually her grandson, it became recorded as her son as well.
2006-07-20 03:32:01 · answer #7 · answered by wiregrassfarmer 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
brothers are almost never mentioned in biblical genealogy. Just look at the generations from Adam to Noah it lists from father to son and not the dozens of other kids they must have had.
2006-07-20 03:32:40 · answer #8 · answered by Gamla Joe 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
who knows ... perhaps because they were twins ... although I guess Jacob & Esau were too. Maybe Perez & Zerah were identical twins :O)
Incidentally, Isaac didn't have a brother ... only a half-brother Ishmael
2006-07-20 03:30:57 · answer #9 · answered by mom1025 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe Matthew was a big fan of Zerah and wanted to give him a shout-out?
2006-07-20 03:32:09 · answer #10 · answered by anthonydavidpirtle 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋