The Messiah Part III

He must be a decendant of Kind David. His father was not a decendant of King David. Your family line comes down from your Father. The fact that you are Jewish comes from the Mother. Fact! Shalom

Glad you brought that up, In the new testament there are two differnt geniologies given for jesus, this is done for sevral reasons. as you have stated the bloodline comes from the mother, but birth right comes from the father. and one of these bloodlines was ment for the jews and the other was for the gentiles, Now, let us look at the evidence: First, a review of the bloodline of Joseph with some added observations. Matthew addressed his Gospel to the Jews, who followed the Law of Moses (Mosaic Law). He wrote the genealogy of Jesus Christ in Matt 1:1-17, and he was careful to meet the legal requirements of the Mosaic Law. His was of the Public Record. In it he begins with Abraham and shows the line going through David and then Solomon and all the way down to Jesus Christ. Remember in verse 16, "And Jacob begot Joseph, the husband of Mary, and of HER was born Jesus who is called Christ." Matthew depicts Jesus Christ as "The Messiah". Clearly Matthew said that the blood father (begot) of Joseph was Jacob. Matthew had satisfied the Mosaic Law by showing the male ancestry of Jesus by going through Joseph instead of Mary. Keep in mind that this genealogy shows the legal, or royal, or public record, of descent and not the human descent. More evidence that Matthew shows the legal line of descent is in Matt 1:11-12 where a man named Jechonias is mentioned. See Jer 22:28-30 regarding Jechonias, as it states, "...for there shall not be a man of his seed that shall sit on the throne of David...". Luke has quite a different account of the genealogy of Jesus Christ. He wrote his Gospel to address the Gentiles who were not under the Mosaic Law, and for the most part were unfamiliar with it. He was also a physician, (Col 4:14). His interest, no doubt, was not in the legal aspect of the Genealogy of Jesus Christ, but of the human or natural bloodline, by depicting Jesus as the "Son of Man". Luke's Genealogy begins with Jesus Christ and goes backward in time, just the opposite of Matthew who started back and came forward. Luke's genealogy follows the custom of Private Records as explained above. Notice in Luke 3:23-38, that Luke's genealogy does go from Jesus Christ, through David, and back to Judah, continuing all the way to Adam, and then to GOD. By doing this he shows a tie between the "New Adam" (1Cor 15:45) and the first Adam. However, Luke shows the descendant of David to be Nathan (31), and not Solomon, as does Matthew. This alludes to the possibility that Luke's genealogy is for a different person other than Joseph. Let us have a closer look at verse 23 with three different Bibles. "And Jesus Himself, when He began His work, was about thirty years of age, -being as was supposed- the Son of Joseph, the Son of Heli, the Son of Matthat." Challoner-Rheims-Confraternity "When Jesus began His ministry he was about thirty years of age. He was the Son, as was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli, the son of Matthat..." New American Bible "And Jesus Himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the Son of Joseph, which was the Son of Heli, which was the son of Matthat..." King James This verse at first reading might seem to say that we have something amiss: 1. This verse appears to say that the father of Joseph is Heli, yet in Matthew we just saw that it was Jacob. How can Joseph have two fathers? In many places in Holy Scripture we must revert to the underlying Greek text in order to fully understand the verse. The Greek word used for "as was supposed, or, as was thought" is "Nomizo", which means: 1. To hold by custom or usage. 2. To follow by custom or usage. 3. It is the custom. 4. It is the received usage. 5. To deem, to think, to suppose. This matter can be made clearer by interpreting the verse as: "When Jesus began His ministry he was about thirty years of age. He was the Son (so it was thought, of Joseph) of Heli." The underlying Greek text supports this interpretation as, "...Joseph son of Heli", in the English translation, simply reads, "...Joseph of Eli". The word 'son' before Heli, is not in the Greek text. So in order to trace the bloodline of Jesus through Heli, we would first have to go through Mary, His mother. This shows that Heli would be the blood father of Mary, and the father in law of Joseph. Even though the name of Mary is not listed, in order to comply with Jewish custom, it is certainly implied. Matthew 1:15, shows that Matthan is the father of Jacob, and Luke 3:23-24, show that Matthat was the father of Heli. It is not known if Matthan and Matthat are the same person. If they are the same person, that would indicate that Jacob and Heli could be brothers if they had the same mother, or half brothers if they had different mothers, or one of them could have even been adopted from the tribe of Judah. Julius Africanus (160-240) wrote in his Epistle to Aristides that Jacob and Heli were half brothers. The Bible makes no distinction between genetic birth and adoption. See 2Sam 6:23, where Michol the daughter of Saul and the wife of David (1Sam 18:27) had no children. Yet in 2Sam 21:8, it says Michol had five sons. In reality, they were adopted sons of Merob. Jacob was the genetic father of Joseph. Heli, the father of Mary, was Joseph's father in law, his legal father.

Um, I thought Jesus was the son of GOD. What relevance does Joseph's bloodline have? Seeing as his only earthly parent was Mary, her bloodline would be the only one that matters in this context, such is my believe.