"The messiah" was to come from the "line of David" right??

by stuckinarut2 12 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  stuckinarut2

  A huge realization hit me the other day while listening to a podcast that discussed the "lineage of Jesus".

  According to the bible, "the messiah" was to come through King Davids lineage.

  BUT, if you wade through the entire chapter of Matthew that lists "son of ...son of...son of...etc", it becomes obvious that Jesus DID NOT come through Davids line at all!

  In fact, that lineage lists JOSPEH (Mary's husband) as being in Davids line. Yet he supposedly had nothing to do with Mary's impregnation - as that was done by "Holy Spirit by Jehovah" before Joseph ever had relations with Mary! (if you believe that)

  (PS, that's another point too - Mary never gave consent, and so was effectively raped by Jehovah)

  So, somehow Jesus is supposed to be from David's line - But it was only via his STEP FATHER Jospeh.
• 

  MADMARY

  Hello Stuckinarut,

  Wow, what a catch! How astute you are!

  Jesus DID NOT come through Davids line at all!
  

  If Jesus is NOT a descendant of David then he is NOT a descendant of Adam & Eve either, which is a prerequisite of Genesis 3:15, right!?!

  Yes, I have notice some other things like the Davidic heir's kingdom is one lasts forever on earth not, not the kind of kingdom that ENDS with an 'until--UNTIL' he hands the keys back to his Father kind of kingdom.
  

  Hmmmm, this really makes you think...
  

  MM

  
  
• 

  Littleleslie

  Hello Stuckinarut2,

  This is a very excellent observation that you have made. In fact, I think this line of thought that you have suggested probes into what I believe is the very essence of why people do not understand the bible or bible prophecy. I believe this is actually a sacred secret.

  Just as Mad Mary pointed out above, Genesis 3:15 lays at the heart of this discussion because it was promised in that verse that someone from Adam and Eve, a sinful descendant, would be used by God to finally point mankind in the right direction and would bring them to a close relationship with God. (See Zechariah 8:20-23)

  However, when we really think about it, most of us would never really think that Jesus would be an actual descendant of Adam and Eve. But that is precisely what the churches and the Jehovah's Witnesses continually imply in their teaching. To that end, I want to direct you to a blog that goes into detail on this very question that you are raising.

  Here is the link to that very interesting information:

  www.yorww.com/mistake.html

  You will find in this blog many scriptural ideas to show that the promised Davidic heir who is a descendant of Adam and Eve is the one Jehovah would reveal in the last days as being the "servant" of God. (Isaiah 49:1-7) According to prophecy this one will be a light to the entire earth.

  Let's continue this conversation, it is of the utmost importance and I think you have raised a great question.

  Littleleslie
• 

  Drearyweather

  In fact, that lineage lists JOSPEH (Mary's husband) as being in Davids line.

  But Mary, who gave birth to Jesus, was a descendant of David.

  Mary never gave consent. and so was effectively raped by Jehovah

  Wrong.

  Before her impregnation, angel Gabriel told Mary that she would be impregnated by the Holy Spirit. Mary told the following words to the angel Gabriel, which shows she consented to it:

  Then Mary said: “Look! Jehovah’s slave girl! May it happen to me according to your declaration.” Luke 1:38

  So that was not rape. At verse 47, Mary says that she was 'overjoyed' with this news.
• 

  johnamos

  Matthew’s account is Joseph’s lineage with Jacob listed as Joseph’s father and Luke's account is Mary's lineage with Heli (her father) listed as Joseph's father(in-law).

  Matthew 1: 15 E·li´ud became father to El·e·a´zar; El·e·a´zar became father to Mat´than; Mat´than became father to Jacob; 16 Jacob became father to Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.

  Luke 3:23 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,

  
  
• 

  smiddy3

  Before her impregnation, angel Gabriel told Mary that she would be impregnated by the Holy Spirit. Mary told the following words to the angel Gabriel, which shows she consented to it:

  Then Mary said: “Look! Jehovah’s slave girl! May it happen to me according to your declaration.” Luke 1:38

  So that was not rape. At verse 47, Mary says that she was 'overjoyed' with this news.

  So then does that make Mary an adulteress ? Was she guilty of porneia ? a whore ?
• 

  Drearyweather

  So then does that make Mary an adulteress ? Was she guilty of porneia ? a whore ?

  No.

  Adultery is defined as "a voluntary sexual intercourse between a married person and a person who is not their spouse."

  porneia is a Greek word which refers to unlawful sexual intercourse

  whore is a woman who engages in sexual acts for money.

  To qualify for the above three parameters, sexual intercourse is necessary. Mary didn't have that. Hence she cannot be called the above.

  In modern days, we have surrogate mothers who bears a child on behalf of another woman, from her own egg fertilized by the other woman's partner/husband, without any sexual intercourse. Would you call a surrogate mother an adulteress or a whore?
• 

  Half banana

  If we are concerned with verifiable evidence we cannot use ancient genealogies, many of which include legendary or mythical ancestors. From a logical point of view (I'm being brutal here) how can we talk about the Bible as if it were factual or as if its prophecies were going to be fulfilled? Prophecy was always used to instill awe in the the poor sheeplike dependents of cult communities and the predictions made were never any practical use to any listener.

  As the GB now recognise 'prophecies' have to be re-interpreted after the event. What use is that! Actually it is an admission that prophecy is useless. . .

  I would add that by considering the dynamics of first and second century temple religion with many cults all seeking market dominance, the two lineages (yes belt and braces!) of Jesus would have been drawn up in an attempt to legitimise the particular god-man hero of the sect promoting Jesus as their christ. After all there were "many lords and many christs".
• 

  truth_b_known

  I thought Jewish linage was matriarchal. That being said, it wouldn't matter what tribe Joseph was a descendant. It only mattered what Mary's lineage was.
• 

  Sanchy

  DrearyWeather: In modern days, we have surrogate mothers who bears a child on behalf of another woman, from her own egg fertilized by the other woman's partner/husband, without any sexual intercourse. Would you call a surrogate mother an adulteress or a whore?

  Interestingly, Watchtower would indeed consider the practice of surrogate insemination "adultery" or "fornication". This as per the 1993 Awake 3/8, p26-27:

  Does surrogate motherhood honor marriage and keep the marriage bed undefiled? Simply put, no. Traditional surrogacy requires the insemination of the woman by donor sperm. The Bible’s view may be found at Leviticus 18:20, which says: “You must not give your emission as semen to the wife of your associate to become unclean by it.” There is no Biblical basis for making a distinction between insemination by intercourse and insemination artificially by donor implantation. Therefore, in either case, fornication or adultery is committed when insemination is accomplished by a male other than the woman’s legal husband.