The Messiah is supposed to come from King David's line. But when you read Jesus' geneology Joseph is from King David's line not Mary. If you wiped out all of King David's line Jesus could still be here if Mary was indeed a virgin when she got pregnant with Jesus. For Jesus to be from King David's line Joseph would have to be his dad. So could someone please explain this to me.
2007-09-07 04:22:25 · 18 answers · asked by Jessy 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Your questions raises questions.
I think most understand the Bible is a work of many interpretations.
One critical aspect of the bible is not the text, but how the text is Interpreted.
If all is taken LITRALLY i must agree it makes no sense and is confusing.
Consider it a Symbolic form of communications and never to be taken literally.
Jesus is not from the line of King David. And Mary of course was a symbolism of a mother; she was not literally pregnant.
If you look at it ALL in Symbolism it comes pretty clear wiuth some grey areas; one must be open to see from all angles and messages will pop out clearly from time to time.
Consider that the 12 deciples represent mans 12 principle characteristics...
Or that In Revelation the beast and 666 is about man, his self delusions (the liar) and so on.
Start reading more and look at the symbolism and see if it starts m,aking more sense; be sure to study up on Edgar Cayce, his works, as well as Jane Roberts and the "Seth-Speaks" works as it tends to clarify issues into "Modern language" more readliy interpreted as you can relate to it better than 2000 yr old wording.
2007-09-07 05:34:12 · answer #1 · answered by Adonai 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Slight. All Luke and Matthew knew was that the Messiah had to be descended from David, and that bloodline had to come through the male line. It was also traditional at that time that a man who did remarkable things as an adult pretty much had to have a remarkable birth, preferably being born to a goddess or a virgin or a priestess or something like that. So you got the Virgin Birth, and neither writer seems to have thought through the concept that this meant Jesus was not related to Joseph after all. Today such a plot hole would get the manuscript thrown out, or at least sent back for a rewrite, but they didn't have editors back then. Matthew and Luke were writing independently for different audiences, so the incompatible stories (and many others like them) circulated until they were brought together in the Christian canon a hundred years later.
2016-05-18 22:57:27 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are two answers to this question. First, under Jewish laws, a child who is adopted (as Jesus was by Joseph) is considered to be the same as a biological child. As an adopted child, Jesus would have inherited the throne (had Joseph been the king) same as a "non-adopted" child would have. So legally, he was an heir to the throne of David.
Jesus also was a biological decendant of David, because his mother Mary was also a descendent of David through his son Nathan. You will find Mary's bloodline in Luke 3.
So she shared just as much "blood" with David as would Joseph. Biologically, Jesus was also a child of David.
Just before the Babylonian Captivity, the king of Israel so angered God that he delcared no child from that king would ever again sit on the throne of Israel. It was taken from him and given to his younger brother. All kings after that came through the brother's bloodline.
So Jesus had to be a legal heir to the throne (which he was through Joseph) and also a blood descendent of David, but not through the line of kings, which he was through Mary.
So he fulfilled both the requirements needed to be the Messiah - a legal heir to the throne, and from David's bloodline but not through the other kings.
2007-09-07 04:37:56 · answer #3 · answered by dewcoons 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Mary was also from King David's line.
2007-09-07 04:35:08 · answer #4 · answered by sparki777 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The simple answer is, that based on the Gospels' account of Jesus birth, it is impossible for him to be of the Davidic Line as he had no human father. Even if the claim is made, spuriously, that Mary was of the Davidic line, this is irrelevant as it is the paternal line that establishes kingship, the maternal merely confirms it.
2007-09-07 04:42:02 · answer #5 · answered by mzJakes 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Mary's mother was of the Tribe of Judah, the King line (the House of David is the Tribe of Judah)
Marys Father was of the Leviticus Priest Line. Jesus was born equally into the King line and the Priest line, making him both King and High Priest after the order of Melchesidek.
(Marys 1st cousin Elizabeth, the mother of John the Baptist, was a daughter of one of the sons of Aaron; another of those sons of Aaron of that Priestline, was Marys father).
2007-09-07 04:32:35 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
This question has been answered many times, Mary is from the line of David. Her genealogy is given in the gospel.
2007-09-07 05:00:54 · answer #7 · answered by Steel Rain 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You're right: If Joseph wasn't his biological father, then he wasn't biologically in Kind David's blood line.
But St. Joseph did raise Him with Mary, so Jesus was a part of Joseph's household. Maybe that was what they were going for.
2007-09-07 04:29:24 · answer #8 · answered by Acorn 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I guess that is just one of many oversights which the New Testament has been the source of. Of course rational people understand that Joseph most likely was his father,otherwise he would have helped stone Mary to death when he found out she was pregnant.
AD
2007-09-07 04:39:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
...he was Joseph's foster child. Who's line did Mary spring from? Rasputan the mad monk?
2007-09-07 06:34:53 · answer #10 · answered by Perry's Corner 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋