Has any one ever asked this question?

dogon

Correct me if I have this wrong.

Jesus suposidly fulfilled the proficey that the meshia was to come from the line of David. Since Joseph was the decendent of David and Jesus was a "virgin" birth, how could he have fulfilled the proficey?

cameo-d

Jewish lineage is through the female. Female carries the mitochondrial DNA.

PEC

Philip

Barbie Doll

AudeSapere

Was Mary also through the line of David?

-Aude.

peacefulpete

Good observation, and one made many centuries ago. The simple answer is that there is tension in the stories because of mulitple traditons and texual developement. It is widely held that the virgin birth element is secondary, that is, added to this particular collection of story. We have the author/s of the gospel named Matthew adamantly denying Jesus was a decendant of David (22:42 and virgin story) and yet saying he was in the geneaology. The two traditions have never struck a peaceful resolution but have continued on as "mystery".

Darklighter

The official explanation is: Yes, both Mary and Joseph were descendant of David. Matthew "documents" Mary's geneology (no evidence of this), and Luke "documents" Joseph's.

The problem is, that doesn't address the issue that either Matthew or Luke lied. Because they both say the line is through Joseph. Was Joseph's father Heli or Jacob? He can't have two fathers... or can he? hmmmm

Oh and cameo-d: The mother may carry the mitocodria but the Jewish geneology was ALWAYS through the male. They believed that the sperm contained the whole zygote. Interestingly, in the Bible it was always the women that were "barren" and never the men. Possibly due to or at least related to this belief.

ataloa

If I remember right, we were taught that both Joseph and Mary were from David's line; but it was being Joseph's adopted son that gave Jesus the legal right to the throne.

Don't know if this is true, but I think it's what we studied.

peacefulpete

It gets complicated if you really research the details. The Jesus Nativity scene has direct literary relationship with the John the baptist nativity. In fact there is reason to believ the story was lifted from John legends and applied to Jesus later. The "virgin birth" element was so pervasive in the ancient world as a way to honor kings and demigods that it inevitably became part of the story. As it reads presently Mary is family to Martha who is Levite and therefore at least someone thought that having Jesus be born of a priestly family would be a nice touch.

cameo-d

but it was being Joseph's adopted son that gave Jesus the legal right to the throne.

That is an absurd statement. (not meant to you personally) Is this what watchtower teaches?

What would give Joseph entitlement to bestow Heavenly rights?

Or if this referred to a claim to ruling lineage...Jesus said his kingdom was not of this world.

So what sense could this possibly make? (again, not referring to you, but to this teaching; this concept of "legal right" )

Has any one ever asked this question?

Share this