son of David?

by peacefulpete 8 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    During the first 2 centuries BC and first century AD numerous would be messiahs and Jewish militant leaders made claims to being of the tribe of Judah and sons of David. How honest were they? According to the Jewish Encyclopedia any tribal claims were meaningless. Any claim to belong to an ancient family line was little more than a propaganda device. Why? Two reasons. First, During the long centuries of Babylonian, Syrian , Greek and Roman rule tribal distinction became impossible. Intermarrying between tribes was not unusual. I estimate that if only 1% of the Jews under this foreign rule married a fellow Jew of a different tribe in less than 200 years or 10 generations nearly every Jew could rightly claim to be of every tribe! Others are welcome to do some math as I am only estimating, but the point is clear. Any claim to be of the tribe of Judah would be nothing more than a politically handy exaggeration. The possible exception is the Levites who may possibly have maintained some semblence of tribal purity due to their occupation thru much of this time.

    Secondly, The family records were lost according to Jewish authorities during the reign of Herod 1 (possibly in a earthquake and fire in the temple in 31BC). This was a surprise to me as I was taught that this loss occured in 70CE. The JWs make much of this as disqualifying any self proclaimed Messiahs after 70CE as it was then impossible to "prove" his heritage. According to the Jewish records it really was not possible for about 100 years before that. And as explained above any claim to a tribal identity was meaningless. The Gospel writers include these claims for Jesus but do so in a way that is consistent with the facts here. The "geneologies" are obvious creations, and dealt with in literary fashion. I'm sure this has been discussed here before so I will not expound on the fictive aspects of the two geneologies.

  • noko
    noko

    The two geneologies of Mathew and then Luke indicate's to me the confusion which resulted from the destruction of the record. Amazing, thousands of years of keeping accurate records destroyed right around when the Messiah Jesus Christ was to appear or was even walking the earth! One of the primary reasons for this record to confirm the Messiah besides the legal aspect of property and hereditary disposition. Mathew accord is taken from Joseph who was not the natural father of Jesus as indicated by the scriptures. Luke also indicates the geneology of Joseph but is different from Mathew's. The scriptures say's clearly that Jesus is the Son of David and Jesus posed an interesting question "How is it they say that the Christ is David's son?" Luke20:41. Then again Jesus goes on asks another question as well "David, therefore, calls him 'Lord'; so how is he his son?"

    The answer I believe is right there in front of our eyes if we only search and ask for it and let the spirit direct us. In any case consider what the scriptures says when Jehovah told Nathan to tell David this:

    "And Jehovah has told you that a house is what Jehovah will make for you. 12 When your days come to the full, and you must lie down with your forefathers, then I shall certainly raise up your seed after you, which will come out of your inward parts; and I shall indeed firmly establish his kingdom. . ." Parts of 2Sam 7:11-12.

    2Sam 7:12-16 talks about the kingdom that will be firmly established, the house for Jehovah. Note it was to happen after David's death, Solomon was already king before David died. In addition this kingdom will last to time indefinite in which Solomon's did not. Now also look at this:

    Jehovah now said to Solomon: "For the reason that this has taken place with you and you have not kept my covenant and my statutes that I laid in command upon you, I shall without fail rip the Kingdom away from off you, and I shall certainly give it to your servant. " 1 King 11:11

    King Solomon broke the convenant with Jehovah with him, this you can read in 2 Chron 7:18-22, this is a different covenent then what David had with Jehovah. David's covenent was to come from his own inward parts, a king that will reign forever.

    To me the scripture is clear, Jesus farther is King David himself, his seed came directly coming from David's inward parts, which Jehovah had planted into the servant girl Mary. If a woman now can give birth to a child from her dead husbands years after his death then to say that Jehovah couldn't do something similar would be ridiculous.

  • noko
    noko

    Why is there no edit here?

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    the great sperm bank in the sky!

  • noko
    noko

    Here is another rendering of same verse from New King James:

    12 "When your days are fulfilled and you rest with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who will come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom."

    So who seed was it then that impregnated Mary? Mary had no relations with any man when she got pregnant with Jesus, do you believe that?

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    No I do not. If in fact Mary an Jesus were historical people, no I do not find any reason to believe that his birth was anything but natural. There is of course the very ancient rumor that his father was a Roman centurian but it is presently impossible to determine if he was even a historical charactor much less who his father was. Of course if you are proposing that Mary herself was like Jesus a fictional charactor who was created to serve as the vehicle mother to birth the mythological Savior. In that case I can say yes, I believe that myth states that Mary conceived without the aid of a man.

  • noko
    noko

    Mythological? So I take it you believe the Bible is a collection of well compiled myths then, right? Please correct me if I am wrong.

    I would argue differently that the Bible purpose was somewhat different, that the stories are well too organized and consistent to be part of fiction. There most be some reason why you are posting here as well. In any case, Jesus real farther on earth was David himself while his heavenly farther was Jehovah, just my belief in this matter.

  • peacefulpete
    peacefulpete

    Please do "argue differently". It is good and healthy to reflect upon the fact that the overwhelming majority of people of the world have not been as impressed as fundementalists are about the Bible. Also why do very knowledgeable scholars generally have a secular view of the book? I am aware that the standard answer are "ignorance" or "heart condition" however these are not objective and rational arguements. Religion's power to cloud the judgement is readiliy admitted by Christians when discussing Hindus or Muslims yet the possibility that what is true for these others may in fact be true for themselves is too easily dismissed. If you truly desire to understand my position we can discuss matters camly and rationally. My "reason" for posting is simple. I wish to help those who want to begin life new and sane. The first step to recovery from a Bible Literalist church is to analyse the Bible on it's own merit without the exegetical/theological elaborrations that layer the text with unintended and unjustified credibility. You may benefit by searching here at this site first as many discussions of this nature have transpired here. You may also choose to review my posting history to learn who I am. I added to this comment from last night.

  • noko
    noko

    Fair enough.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit