Looking At The Genealogy of Jesus

[bondurango]

The two genealogies are ahistorical, obfuscations. The genealogies are NOT separate bloodlines & Luke makes no claim to be a bloodline of Mary.  The two form ONE genealogy that weaves into and out of each other. It is a matter of correlating them as one to the scientific data instead of vainly looking for evidence to support an obfuscation when the historical & archeological evidence is overwhelmingly against it. The truth is that biblical chronology is FALSE and, purposely, misleading.

[chrispalasz]

If it were about the math, you'd be right, but it's not. The genealogy listed in Matthew doesn't match with the genealogy in the Old Testament. He skips names.

[looncraz]

Average age, only 200 years ago, was in the 30 to 40s.

An average age of 38 years would be highly suspect.

Regardless of this, the accuracy of record keeping MUST be questioned. Most of the authors of the bible never claimed to be inspired by God to write anything.

In fact, those that did suggest such things, were not included in the official bible ( such as the book of Enoch ).

An old book with some truth, some lies, some good lessons, some bad ones. Very human in origin.

Missing data.

[pgfracing]

Your comments are without citing sources. If you want to convince someone to change their mind it would be helpful if you could cite some sources. God bless

[LoraSinger]

pgf - "Your comments are without citing sources".

How many sites do you need to read to consider it as being as a cited source?

"If you want to convince someone to change their mind"

I really don't care if you change your mind,pg, because I know that against all information and fact, you will choose to believe a story which amounts to a fairy tale.

By the way, what about the march to town of the dead saints - No reply?

[pgfracing]

One cited source would be good. Matthew1944 has not provided one site or source for an original Torah. If you have no information to base your statements off, you have almost 0. I'm not familiar with the march to town of the dead saints, so I can't offer a reply one way or the other today, Lord willing in the future. God bless

[Matthew1944]

pgf - "I'm not familiar with the march to town of the dead saints"

Matthew 27:52 and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised;

Matthew 27:53 and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.

Cited source:

1. outreachjudaism(dot)org/mary(d­ot)html

2. torahatlanta(dot)com/articles/­Problems%20with%20Jesus'%20Lin­eage(dot)htm

3. geocities(dot)com/paulntobin/g­enealogy(dot)html

[Matthew1944]

pgf - You can also try googling "jewish lineage adopted children" - Under books(dot)google(dot)ca, you will find an article called

"A handbook for the Jewish Home", under Jewish lineage which outlines the guidelines for adopted children, you will find that an adopted child always follows the lineage of his biological father and not his adopted father.

[pgfracing]

Can you show me a site that has the original Torah or one I can go visit in person? The Word (Bible) is the only source information I need to know how to choose life or death. Of course it's not the only source of information. God bless

[Matthew1944]

pgf - "Show me a site"

Try: outreachjudaism(dot)org/mary(d­ot)html

[Matthew1944]

pgf "The Word (Bible) is the only source information I need ......"

Well, isn't that special? However, the fact remains that your old testament has been very heavily edited from the original, added to and subtracted from. Your new testament began as a series of letters written from 40 to 90 years after the fact and up to then was passed by oral tradition with much adding to. Paul himself was a self confessed liar whi wasn't above spinning a tail in order to convert. Very weak base, pgf.

[Matthew1944]

One example of the bible being in error is right in the arrest of Jesus. A man could not be arrested one night and then tried and crucified the next day. Jewish law required that criers go out for 40 days looking for witnesses on behalf of the accused.  The bible story could only have been written by someone who knew nothing of Jewish laws.

[Matthew1944]

Thirdly, pgf - I believe that in Matthew there is the story about, at the time of the crucifixion, the earth giving up its dead saints who then went marching off to town in a tidy little group. A little far fetched, don't you think? Why didn't anybody notice it other than the bible writers?

If the bible is the only source of information that you need, you are sadly misinformed.

[pgfracing]

"If the bible is the only source of information that you need, you are sadly misinformed." If you remove the important information I put such as; for life or death it changes the meaning completely. When quoting someone it would be good to actually quote them. God bless

[LoraSinger]

pgf - "When quoting someone it would be good to actually quote them."

I wasn't quoting anyone, pgf.

"If you remove the important information I put such as; for life or death it changes the meaning completely"

Your "important information" is simply a belief system, one of many in the world and NOT the only one, no better or worse than the others.

[pgfracing]

Was referring to Matthew's comments about the quoting unless you have two YouTube accounts LoraSinger. God bless

[Matthew1944]

pgf - "unless you have two YouTube accounts"

Same household, pgf.

[pgfracing]

I went to the site and the first argument they show in their views is Numbers 1:18. Which does not say that the father must be the blood father, and says the son must be of the fathers house. If they are using the Old Testament as their law then they should be able to find an example. However I believe that the God does not contradict himself and you are not going to be able to provide an example. God bless

[Matthew1944]

pgf - "I went to the site and ......"

First of all, pgf, you went to your version of the old testament which is not the same as the original torah. Secondly Jewish laws and traditions are best interpreted by the people who have been practicing them for all these years. I have referred you to the Jewish but that doesn't seem to satisfy you. It would then appear that you simply want hang on to your belief at all costs. Do you actually think that the bible is the only source there is?

[pgfracing]

Jewish law uses the Old Testament. You won't find anything in the Old Testament supporting your claims. God bless you Matthew1944

[Matthew1944]

pgf - "Jewish law uses the Old Testament. You won't find anything in the Old Testament supporting your claims"

Don't need to pgf. Are you saying then that the rabbis don't know the laws and traditions of their own people. That site has already been given to you.

[pgfracing]

That is right that is why the Word shows two different lineages to show that he is not of Joseph's blood, but of Mary's. Donna Jones:"Why can't a person have a maternal lineage? The mother is just as important in a lineage as a father. That is as good as saying that every person that preceeded Mary was a non person. Mary was from the house of David and thus Jesus was from the house of David, and I am talking a direct blood line, not an adoptive blood line."

[Matthew1944]

pgf - "That is right that is why the Word shows two different lineages to show that he is not of Joseph's blood, but of Mary's"

Again, under Jewish law, Mary cannot pass anything but her Jewishness - never her lineage. In any case, her line did not come through Solomon. The messiah was to descend from David through Solomon, not Nathan.

[pgfracing]

Can you show me one verse in the old testament or new testament that states that?

[Matthew1944]

The new testament, pgf, was written well after the time of the event by people who, at times, knew nothing of Jewish customs. In fact, the trial of Jesus goes against all Jewish customs as well.

The bible is not an authority of anything, in spite of what you might think. I have given you Jewish sites from rabbis who have given you the laws and still you want to hold on to your illusions. Even your old testament is edited and not like the original.

[LoraSinger]

Neither of the geneologies is relevant. Either Jesus is the son of Joseph or he is not. If he is the son of god, then he has no claim to the house of David. An adoptive father, by Jewish law, cannot pass his lineage to an adopted son. If he is the son of Joseph, he still has no claim to the house of David because Joseph's line was disinherited. Being Mary's son only means that he was Jewish. He cannot receive lineage from the mother. Jesus had no claim to the house of David.

[pgfracing]

That doesn't make sense since the beginning of time, adoptive kids always had rights to the parents property. If I was an adoptive parent I would hope and expect to receive my parents property or debts when I die. God bless you LoraSinger

[Matthew1944]

pg - "That doesn't make sense since the beginning of time, adoptive kids always had rights to the parents property. "

Property but not lineage according to Jewish law.

[pgfracing]

So what you are saying is that they wouldn't let a adoptive kid carry on the family name? Are you sure about that? God bless

[Matthew1944]

pgf - re: passing down tribal lineage.

outreachjudaism(dot)org/mary(d­ot)html

[pgfracing]

I read some of that page it refers to Numbers 1:18, as proof. However that only states that it passed down by a fathers house, not a that the father must father the child. So if you lived under that house, you inherited rights if you were 21.

Numbers 1:18

and on the first day of the second month, they assembled the whole congregation together, who registered themselves by clans, by fathers' houses, according to the number of names from twenty years old and upward, head by head,

God bless

[Matthew1944]

pgf - By reading outreach Judaism, you are getting it "straight from the horse's mouth". Jesus was a Jew who lived by Jewish law. Jewish law has remained constant over the last 2000 years and who should know better how to interpret it?

[Matthew1944]

2) Lineage can only be passed from a father to a natural son. just as with the Kohanim (Priests), an adopted son cannot become a Kohane. So, too, a son adopted by a member of the royal line cannot become heir to the throne. In Matthew 1:11 it shows that Joseph was descended from a former king named Jechoniah. In Jeremiah 22, we see that Jechoniah's descendants are absolutely cut-off as heirs to the throne. Therefore anyone descended from Joseph was also cut-off as a candidate to be king.

[wbmac74]

come on jus cause its written in the bible dont make it true granted there is alot of historical facts we need to really research the facts instead of someone saying it true HEY MASS CONTROL

[azsuperman01]

You're requiring that every generation in Matthews list FOR 1100 YEARS is over a decade older than every generation in Luke's list! Matthew lists the royal line, and nearly every generation is a first born.

It's very unlikely that kings with 10+ wives and 20+ children would wait until they were nearly 40 to have their first... especially in an age without birth control.

[pgfracing]

Gen 17:17 Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed and said to himself, "Shall a child be born to a man who is a hundred years old? Shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?"

Gen 17:18 And Abraham said to God, "Oh that Ishmael might live before you!"

Gen 17:19 God said, "No, but Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his offspring after him. God bless

[azsuperman01]

pgfracing - According to the Bible, the days of people living 100's of years ended long before David.

[pgfracing]

I believe it was after the flood mans days were numbered to be 120years. This video shows a mathematical possibility if someone would have had a child when they were 16 then the average given in Matthews side could be corresponding 30 years. Your claim that it's not mathematically possible are false, that is all this video demonstrates. It is not intended to be a factual document. You are claiming that Joseph would have been hundreds of years old is not true.