Did Jesus come from the genealogy from Solomon or Nathan, the sons of King David?
Hints:
Luke 3, Matthew 1
2006-07-21 05:06:22 · 10 answers · asked by Rock123 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Ok, for those that don't understand the question. How about Mary's genealogy?
2006-07-21 05:38:02 · update #1
23 Furthermore, Jesus himself, when he commenced [his work], was about thirty years old, being the son, as the opinion was,
of Joseph,
[son] of He′li,
24 [son] of Mat′that,
[son] of Le′vi,
[son] of Mel′chi,
[son] of Jan′na·i,
[son] of Joseph,
25 [son] of Mat·ta·thi′as,
[son] of A′mos,
[son] of Na′hum,
[son] of Es′li,
[son] of Nag′ga·i,
26 [son] of Ma′ath,
[son] of Mat·ta·thi′as,
[son] of Sem′e·in,
[son] of Jo′sech,
[son] of Jo′da,
27 [son] of Jo·an′an,
[son] of Rhe′sa,
[son] of Ze·rub′ba·bel,
[son] of She·al′ti·el,
[son] of Ne′ri,
28 [son] of Mel′chi,
[son] of Ad′di,
[son] of Co′sam,
[son] of El·ma′dam,
[son] of Er,
29 [son] of Jesus,
[son] of E·li·e′zer,
[son] of Jo′rim,
[son] of Mat′that,
[son] of Le′vi,
30 [son] of Sym′e·on,
[son] of Judas,
[son] of Joseph,
[son] of Jo′nam,
[son] of E·li′a·kim,
31 [son] of Me′le·a,
[son] of Men′na,
[son] of Mat′ta·tha,
[son] of Nathan,
[son] of David,
32 [son] of Jes′se,
[son] of O′bed,
[son] of Bo′az,
[son] of Sal′mon,
[son] of Nah′shon,
33 [son] of Am·min′a·dab,
[son] of Ar′ni,
[son] of Hez′ron,
[son] of Pe′rez,
[son] of Judah,
34 [son] of Jacob,
[son] of Isaac,
[son] of Abraham,
[son] of Te′rah,
[son] of Na′hor,
35 [son] of Se′rug,
[son] of Re′u,
[son] of Pe′leg,
[son] of E′ber,
[son] of She′lah,
36 [son] of Ca·i′nan,
[son] of Ar·pach′shad,
[son] of Shem,
[son] of Noah,
[son] of La′mech,
37 [son] of Me·thu′se·lah,
[son] of E′noch,
[son] of Ja′red,
[son] of Ma·ha′la·le·el,
[son] of Ca·i′nan,
38 [son] of E′nosh,
[son] of Seth,
[son] of Adam,
[son] of God.
2006-07-21 05:14:00 · answer #1 · answered by megan w 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
David,Solomon or Nathan are physical genealogy for Jesus to understand the rationalists but Jesus come from heaven by Holy spirit
2006-07-21 05:24:21 · answer #2 · answered by kindigari a 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He came through the line of Nathan, which did not suffer the curse of Jehoiakim (Jeremiah 36). Mary was the blood descendant who bore Jesus.
Her husband Joseph was of the line of Solomon, and because he was the stepfather to Jesus, he wasn't part of the cursed line.
Note to Picasso, four women were used in Matthew's genealogy, so let's not even go there with the whole "women were nothing" line.
2006-07-21 05:14:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well some non educated ppl will claim one of those genealogies are pointing to mary while they did not even bother to look trough them
Jesus can be only descendat of David if his Father was Joseph and not GOD.
ANd female in the bible is the property so they never use female to atribute anything in those times. And the answer from the bible and not some1 interpretation that Jesus is the son of GOD and not Joseph which means he is not descendat from David and GOD brouke his promiss.
It 's interesting that 1000 years after david died those creative writters could trace Joseph line and poor ppl did not even had anything to write on it.
some1 wrote "There are two geneologies. One of them is Joseph's, and the other is Mary's. If you read the text in it's entirety, you'll see this. "
Well ask the same geniuos to show you where does it points to Mary. I bet the guy heard it but never even bother to read him self.
Does not get more pathetic than this.
"Women did not count in reckoning descent for the simple reason that it was then believed that the complete human was present in the man's sperm (the woman's egg wasn't discovered until 1827). The woman's womb was just the soil in which the seed was planted. Just as there was barren soil that could not produce crops, so also the Bible speaks of barren wombs that could not produce children." [1]
.
A physical connection could be made through Mary, if it could be shown that she was the subject of Luke's genealogy and a physical descendant of David. Unfortunately for Christians, Luke's genealogy isn't based on Mary, but on Joseph; and the neither of the four gospels (nor the rest of the NT) say anything about Mary's parentage which could lead us to believe she was of the tribe of Judah and a descendant of David.
In fact, it seems that Mary could have been a Levite, though we can't be absolutely certain. The only information we have about her parentage is through a statement from Luke that she was the cousin of Elizabeth, the wife of Zechariah and mother of John the Baptist, who was "a daughter of Aaron" the Levite (Luke 1:5,36). Now there's a bit of a sticky wicket, eh?
And even if a connection to David could be made through Mary, which I deny Luke's genealogy does, then the problems persist because Luke's genealogy goes through Nathan (Luke 1:31) who was never a king in Judah. As mentioned above, the promise of a kingdom was through Solomon; ergo, Luke's genealogy, even if it is based on Mary, which it isn't, destroys the claim that Jesus was the rightful heir to the throne of David, because it ignores the royal line of descent through Solomon.
2006-07-21 05:12:58 · answer #4 · answered by PicassoInActions 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes he came from the line of David because women were not considered for that and because he's the step father that qualifies him as 100% family.
2006-07-21 05:40:09 · answer #5 · answered by sweetdivine 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who is Solomon Alex?
2006-07-21 05:12:53 · answer #6 · answered by Makemeaspark 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, Jesus is a cook at the Taco Bell down the street.
TFTP
2006-07-21 05:09:43 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
There are two geneologies. One of them is Joseph's, and the other is Mary's. If you read the text in it's entirety, you'll see this.
2006-07-21 05:12:38 · answer #8 · answered by no1home2day 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Jesus came from heaven
2006-07-21 05:10:32 · answer #9 · answered by john_0502000 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Mary.
2006-07-21 05:09:47 · answer #10 · answered by Sir J 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋