One of the reasons the Jews dont accept Jesus as the Messiah is the fact that he isnt from the lineage of David. The ancient and medieval church believed that Jesus’
humanity was a new creation, and therefore sinless. The
ancients commonly believed that the woman contributes
nothing to the physical being of the baby to be born. Ancient
people thought the child was only related to the father. The mother was nothing but a receptacle for the male sperm, which grew to become a child, which we now know to be a false understanding of genetics. Since this is so, it makes a mockery of the attempt to harmonize the genealogies of
Jesus given in Luke (3:23-37) and Matthew (1:1-17). They
cannot be legitimately harmonized anyway, but the best attempt is to argue that Luke traces Jesus’ royal lineage back through Mary, while Matthew traces his lineage back through Joseph. Even if this is the case, there are additional serious problems. If Jesus’ royal lineage is to be traced back through Mary, then Mary was just the receptacle of God’s seed, contributing nothing. And if that’s so, how can Jesus legitimately be of the Davidic lineage? However, if Jesus’ royal lineage is to be traced back through Joseph, and if Joseph was not the father, then we have the same problem. not forgetting that a man's genealogy is traced from his father's side (at least in that era)... In either case, how can
Jesus legitimately be of the Davidic lineage?

Both scriptures traced His lineage through Joseph. You're just confusing yourself

chicoMX:
Both scriptures traced His lineage through Joseph. You're just confusing yourself

Oga read it very well... ure d one confusing urself. its no longer news that the bible is filled with contradictions

chicoMX:
Both scriptures traced His lineage through Joseph. You're just confusing yourself

Don't mind him.

"If Jesus is Mary's seed from the lineage of David it's unacceptable, if he is from the lineage of Joseph, it's unacceptable too...yen yen yen"

Leonardemma1:


Oga read it very well... ure d one confusing urself. its no longer news that the bible is filled with contradictions

Matthew trace His legal line, by the virtue of the marriage, it establishes His claim and right to the throne of David. Matthew wanted to show Jesus’ legal right to the throne of David. Therefore his genealogy begins with Abraham and goes through David and his son Solomon to Jesus’ legal father, Joseph.

Matthew 1:16
Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, OF WHOM was born Jesus, who is called Christ."

Notice that he does not say ‘Joseph begat Jesus’ but that he was "the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born."

If there was any accusation made by hostile Jews that Jesus’ birth was illegitimate, the fact that Joseph was aware of the circumstances, married Mary and gave her the protection of his good name and royal lineage
refutes such slander.

Leonardemma1:
One of the reasons the Jews dont accept Jesus as the Messiah is the fact that he isnt from the lineage of David. The ancient and medieval church believed that Jesus’
humanity was a new creation, and therefore sinless. The
ancients commonly believed that the woman contributes
nothing to the physical being of the baby to be born. Ancient
people thought the child was only related to the father. The mother was nothing but a receptacle for the male sperm, which grew to become a child, which we now know to be a false understanding of genetics. Since this is so, it makes a mockery of the attempt to harmonize the genealogies of
Jesus given in Luke (3:23-37) and Matthew (1:1-17). They
cannot be legitimately harmonized anyway, but the best attempt is to argue that Luke traces Jesus’ royal lineage back through Mary, while Matthew traces his lineage back through Joseph. Even if this is the case, there are additional serious problems. If Jesus’ royal lineage is to be traced back through Mary, then Mary was just the receptacle of God’s seed, contributing nothing. And if that’s so, how can Jesus legitimately be of the Davidic lineage? However, if Jesus’ royal lineage is to be traced back through Joseph, and if Joseph was not the father, then we have the same problem. not forgetting that a man's genealogy is traced from his father's side (at least in that era)... In either case, how can
Jesus legitimately be of the Davidic lineage?

What is lineage

Are you the one that defines lineage

So God that says a child that's not the biological child of a man can inherit his property based on the legal ground He Himself being God permitted through Moses.


I am not even going to state all the articles online that claim to have researched that Mary was Hell's daughter and Joseph was his legal son.


So the Jews have absolute no excuse, but their own lack of knowledge or pride or deception from their Pharisees either way... There were Jews who believed and accepted Jesus.

Leonardemma1:
One of the reasons the Jews dont accept Jesus as the Messiah is the fact that he isnt from the lineage of David. The ancient and medieval church believed that Jesus’
humanity was a new creation, and therefore sinless. The
ancients commonly believed that the woman contributes
nothing to the physical being of the baby to be born. Ancient
people thought the child was only related to the father. The mother was nothing but a receptacle for the male sperm, which grew to become a child, which we now know to be a false understanding of genetics. Since this is so, it makes a mockery of the attempt to harmonize the genealogies of
Jesus given in Luke (3:23-37) and Matthew (1:1-17). They
cannot be legitimately harmonized anyway, but the best attempt is to argue that Luke traces Jesus’ royal lineage back through Mary, while Matthew traces his lineage back through Joseph. Even if this is the case, there are additional serious problems. If Jesus’ royal lineage is to be traced back through Mary, then Mary was just the receptacle of God’s seed, contributing nothing. And if that’s so, how can Jesus legitimately be of the Davidic lineage? However, if Jesus’ royal lineage is to be traced back through Joseph, and if Joseph was not the father, then we have the same problem. not forgetting that a man's genealogy is traced from his father's side (at least in that era)... In either case, how can
Jesus legitimately be of the Davidic lineage?

you need to study Jewish laws .supposing you married a wife and died before having a child . Then by Jewish law ,your junior brother Will impregnate your wife so as to raise children for you .those children are legally yours even if you are not their biological father .the will bear your name .That is Jewish law .it also applies when a man got only female children .one of the unmarried female child can sleep with a man in order to have a male child to bear her father's name (not the biological father's name ).So by Jewish law ,Joseph was the legal father of Jesus Christ.you got confused because you were using Nigeria law to analyse the situation.You have to use Jewish law at that time .Jesus was the offspring of David and the legal son of Joseph according to Jewish law .So he fulfilled all the requirements of the law to be the messiah

Kenneth4u205:
you need to study Jewish laws .supposing you married a wife and died before having a child . Then by Jewish law ,your junior brother Will impregnate your wife so as to raise children for you .those children are legally yours even if you are not their biological father .the will bear your name .That is Jewish law .it also applies when a man got only female children .one of the unmarried female child can sleep with a man in order to have a male child to bear her father's name (not the biological father's name ).So by Jewish law ,Joseph was the legal father of Jesus Christ.you got confused because you were using Nigeria law to analyse the situation.You have to use Jewish law at that time .Jesus was the offspring of David and the legal son of Joseph according to Jewish law .So he fulfilled all the requirements of the law to be the messiah

Was Joseph a king?.. Messiah means anointed King..

Kenneth4u205:
you need to study Jewish laws .supposing you married a wife and died before having a child . Then by Jewish law ,your junior brother Will impregnate your wife so as to raise children for you .those children are legally yours even if you are not their biological father .the will bear your name .That is Jewish law .it also applies when a man got only female children .one of the unmarried female child can sleep with a man in order to have a male child to bear her father's name (not the biological father's name ).So by Jewish law ,Joseph was the legal father of Jesus Christ.you got confused because you were using Nigeria law to analyse the situation.You have to use Jewish law at that time .Jesus was the offspring of David and the legal son of Joseph according to Jewish law .So he fulfilled all the requirements of the law to be the messiah

i should be the one telling u that cuz obviously u know nothing about jewish laws... Jesus was adopted by joseph. Adoption as u know it was derived from roman law and not Jewish law. In Judaism genealogy determines the status of your child.

malvisguy212:
Matthew trace His legal line, by the virtue of the marriage, it establishes His claim and right to the throne of David. Matthew wanted to show Jesus’ legal right to the throne of David. Therefore his genealogy begins with Abraham and goes through David and his son Solomon to Jesus’ legal father, Joseph.

Matthew 1:16
Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, OF WHOM was born Jesus, who is called Christ."

Notice that he does not say ‘Joseph begat Jesus’ but that he was "the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born."

If there was any accusation made by hostile Jews that Jesus’ birth was illegitimate, the fact that Joseph was aware of the circumstances, married Mary and gave her the protection of his good name and royal lineage
refutes such slander.

an adopted* son cannot and will never be an heir to any throne

BlueAngel444:


What is lineage

Are you the one that defines lineage

So God that says a child that's not the biological child of a man can inherit his property based on the legal ground He Himself being God permitted through Moses.


I am not even going to state all the articles online that claim to have researched that Mary was Hell's daughter and Joseph was his legal son.


So the Jews have absolute no excuse, but their own lack of knowledge or pride or deception from their Pharisees either way... There were Jews who believed and accepted Jesus.

mind you, we are talking about the throne here, not mere properties but nonetheless please include the bible verse where God said that cuz i know of the one about other family members in the absence of a son but not an adopted son or a total stranger

chicoMX:
Both scriptures traced His lineage through Joseph. You're just confusing yourself

He actually made a point but both Joseph and Mary were from David's lineage.

That's why God's holy spirit helped us to know that if critics argued against Jesus' royal lineage through his FOSTER father (Joseph), they can't deny his genealogy through Mary (his mother)

Luke traced his ancestral lineage through Mary (his mother) but Matthew traced it through Joseph (his foster father)

They can argue against the report of one witness but NOT two Witnesses on this same matter ! Deuteronomy 19:15

God bless you!

Maximus69:


He actually made a point but both Joseph and Mary were from David's lineage.

That's why God's holy spirit helped us to know that if critics argued against Jesus' royal lineage through his FOSTER father (Joseph), they can't deny his genealogy through Mary (his mother)

Luke traced his ancestral lineage through Mary (his mother) but Matthew traced it through Joseph (his foster father)

They can argue against the report of one witness but NOT two Witnesses on this same matter ! Deuteronomy 19:15

God bless you!

Thanks for this

chicoMX:


Thanks for this

You're welcome!

Leonardemma1:



an adopted* son cannot and will never be an heir to any throne

Matthew argument was that the fact that the Jews never used women as direct genealogical link and the way the Bible use the word "son" and father.

People who were adopted were considered "sons", and their "seed" throughout history. Even today, when people are adopted, they are considered part of the blood line in family trees, and take the family name, and inherit family fortunes as if they were the "seed".

Matthew 1:23, "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a SON"

The writers of the New Testament understood that in order to be a "son", one need not be a physical descendant. This is proof..

Leonardemma1:


i should be the one telling u that cuz obviously u know nothing about jewish laws... Jesus was adopted by joseph. Adoption as u know it was derived from roman law and not Jewish law. In Judaism genealogy determines the status of your child.

Jesus wasn't adopted by Joseph.the pregnancy occurred after he had already paid the bride price .Mary was already legally his wife .adoption not applicable in this case .if you buy a female goat and the goat get pregnant and gave birth in your house .doesn't the baby goat automatically become your goat also ?.do you go about telling people my adopted baby goat ?

sonmvayina:

Was Joseph a king?.. Messiah means anointed King..

very funny question

Kenneth4u205:
Jesus wasn't adopted by Joseph.the pregnancy occurred after he had already paid the bride price .Mary was already legally his wife .adoption not applicable in this case .if you buy a female goat and the goat get pregnant and gave birth in your house .doesn't the baby goat automatically become your goat also ?.do you go about telling people my adopted baby goat ?

Adoption is when you accept to be a parent to a child that isn't yours. Being married to mary doesn't automatically make Joseph the father of Jesus. He can accept or reject the responsibility. accepting it is simply adoption

malvisguy212:
Matthew argument was that the fact that the Jews never used women as direct genealogical link and the way the Bible use the word "son" and father.

People who were adopted were considered "sons", and their "seed" throughout history. Even today, when people are adopted, they are considered part of the blood line in family trees, and take the family name, and inherit family fortunes as if they were the "seed".

Matthew 1:23, "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a SON"

The writers of the New Testament understood that in order to be a "son", one need not be a physical descendant. This is proof..

Please can u name any adopted son that became a king in the bible?

Leonardemma1:


Please can u name any adopted son that became a king in the bible?

Even till our modern era... No monarchy allows adopted children to be included in line of succession

Kenneth4u205:
Jesus wasn't adopted by Joseph.the pregnancy occurred after he had already paid the bride price .Mary was already legally his wife .adoption not applicable in this case .if you buy a female goat and the goat get pregnant and gave birth in your house .doesn't the baby goat automatically become your goat also ?.do you go about telling people my adopted baby goat ?

we are talking of marriage between two humans and someone is comparing it to buying a goat [

Leonardemma1:


Please can u name any adopted son that became a king in the bible?

every son required a father, and both Matthew and Luke use the word "SON" in referring to JESUS, so who was HIS father ? I put it to you 1) that Jesus was actually the Son of God and
the natural heir to the Kingdom by miraculous birth through the virgin girl Mary, of David’s line, and (2) that Jesus was also the legal heir in the male line of descent from David and Solomon through his adoptive father Joseph .

malvisguy212:
every son required a father, and both Matthew and Luke use the word "SON" in referring to JESUS, so who was HIS father ? I put it to you 1) that Jesus was actually the Son of God and
the natural heir to the Kingdom by miraculous birth through the virgin girl Mary, of David’s line, and (2) that Jesus was also the legal heir in the male line of descent from David and Solomon through his adoptive father Joseph .

clearly u didn't read my post. except ure trying to say ure more familiar with Jewish laws than the Jews themselves

Leonardemma1:


clearly u didn't read my post. except ure trying to say ure more familiar with Jewish laws than the Jews themselves

who was the father of JESUS ? note: your argument only stand if you deny the deity of Jesus.

malvisguy212:
who was the father of JESUS ? note: your argument only stand if you deny the deity of Jesus.

well mary should be in a better position to answer that. note- Jesus never called himself the son of God

Leonardemma1:



well mary should be in a better position to answer that. note- Jesus never called himself the son of God

did you know why I ask you this question about the biological father of JESUS ? if Jesus were really Joseph’s son by blood, he could not claim to sit on David’s throne because of the Jeconiah curse; but
Jesus was not Joseph’s son, for he was born of the virgin Mary. when Matthew present his genealogy ,he had the jeconiah curse in mind. according to Matthew Joseph had the jeconiah blood in His vain. Matthew could've used Mary who have a direct lineage through Ruth ,Bathsheba and Nathan (David wife) . but since Matthew is tracing the Royal line, he opted for Solomon because Solomon is the hair to David throne.

^^^
Mary was a member of the house of David. But unlike Joseph, she came from David’s son, Nathan, not Solomon. Mary was a member of the house of David apart from Jeconiah. Since Jesus was Mary’s son, he too was a member of the house of David, apart from Jeconiah.

Leonardemma1:


Please can u name any adopted son that became a king in the bible?

Because many Kings never adopted a child... In this case, it's different. To a Jew, Jesus might not be fit to be his physical King cos He wasn't the legal son of Joseph or probably because of their hatred for Him and his teachings..Everything you wrote up there is an envious teaching by the Pharisees.. The same Jews that claimed a bastard can't rule over them, but after plagued by war, had to go call the bastard to rule? They are the most stubborn humans according to the bible...

Leonardemma1:



well mary should be in a better position to answer that. note- Jesus never called himself the son of God

Lol, and what did he mean when he said ""I and my Father in heaven"
https://www1.cbn.com/churchandministry/can-you-prove-jesus-god

movingclouds:

Lol, and what did he mean when he said ""I and my Father in heaven"
https://www1.cbn.com/churchandministry/can-you-prove-jesus-god

if anyone comes out and makes such statement and you believe just because he said so well.....

movingclouds:

Because many Kings never adopted a child... In this case, it's different. To a Jew, Jesus might not be fit to be his physical King cos He wasn't the legal son of Joseph or probably because of their hatred for Him and his teachings..Everything you wrote up there is an envious teaching by the Pharisees.. The same Jews that claimed a bastard can't rule over them, but after plagued by war, had to go call the bastard to rule? They are the most stubborn humans according to the bible...

that's the issue with Christianity. always different with Jesus. by the way can u give me the name of the bastard that ruled the jews? and the fact about Jews being stubborn does dat include Jesus and his disciples cuz i believe they were stubborn also

Leonardemma1:



that's the issue with Christianity. always different with Jesus. by the way can u give me the name of the bastard that ruled the jews? and the fact about Jews being stubborn does dat include Jesus and his disciples cuz i believe they were stubborn also

Jephthah was an example, thrown out of his father's house because they believed he was a bastard and a child of a prostitute.. But when the Ammonites came against them, they went to beg him and called him a man of valor... In Ezekiel 2:4, they were called stubborn children.. And there's something u need to learn, because people say Ibadan people are lousy doesn't mean they all are.... When you're in an argument, think only not to win, but to respect the other party...thats what this is about...