Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Paul - Mary genealogy
#31
Quote:Haggai 1:1

Therefore, all the biblical evidence strongly suggests that after Jeconiah had 37 years to think about his sins, he repents and the curse is lifted.

I wasn't aware of that mention of Zerubabel in Haggai (I'll include it now that I am), but I came up with similar conclusions (see footnotes 1-5):

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.amanyahu.com/Sebaryatha_d-Peshitta_b-Lishana_Aramaya/Mattai/Ch_1/">http://www.amanyahu.com/Sebaryatha_d-Pe ... ttai/Ch_1/</a><!-- m -->

1 The curse that was placed upon Yokhanea in Yirmeyahu 22:24-30 was lifted because of his later repentance as recorded in Sanhedrin 37a and implicitly shown in I Diwrei HaYamim 3:17-18 and Melakhim 25:27-28.

2 Gowra literally means 'protective male.' It is unclear whether this refers to Maryam's father or to her husband. If gowra refers to Maryam's father then it explains and confirms why tradition has always held that the genealogies in the Sebartha d'Mattai and the Sebartha d'Luqa aren't two conflicting records of Yosip's ancestry, but rather a unique case of separate maternal and paternal genealogies necessitated by the virgin birth. In which case, tribal heritage and primogeniture (inheritance rights passed from father to the oldest son) would be established through Yosip in Luqa, while a genetic descent from King Dawid could only be inherited and shown through Maryam, instead of a normal situation where the father's lineage alone would suffice for both purposes.

3 Mattai appears to have intentionally omitted such ancestors as Ahaziah, Joash, Amaziah, and Jehoiakim (I Diwrei HaYamim 3:10-16) in favor of making veiled references to Y'shu being Bar Dawid by means of three sets of 14 generations, since the total numerical value of the three letters which spell the name Dawid is 14. Although, there is Scriptural precedent to give abbreviated genealogies (II Shmuel 5:14-16 with I Diwrei HaYamim 14:3-7, etc.), such liberties being taken may also be an indication that this genealogy is of lesser importance (perhaps because of footnote 2 above) than the much more detailed one given in Luqa.

4 Literally 'her master.'

5 Y'shu HaMeshikha, although not biologically the son of Yosip, is the legitimate heir to the throne of Dawid through Yosip because as Sanhedrin 19b says:

"Her sister Merab gave birth to them and she raised them [II Shmuel 6:23, 21:8], therefore they are called by her name. This teaches that whoever brings up an orphan in his home is regarded, according to Scripture, as though the child had been born to him."

See also Exodus Rabbah 46:5 and Megilah 13a.

Shlama, Craig
Reply
#32
Paul Younan Wrote:I ignore a lot of what the Talmud says, actually everything it says. The Talmud is not an authority for me, the Aramaic sriptures are.

The Scriptures are inspired and infallible. The Talmud on the other hand is collection of formerly oral traditions from the successors to the Pharisees, useful as an authority in a like manner to other historical and theological works of men such Philo. Josephus, etc.

Quote:The Aramaic scriptures read "Yosef bar-Heli" in the third chapter of Luqa. I don't care what Ignatius, Chrysostom.... let alone the Talmud says about the topic. The only thing I care about is the text.

They used the Greek translations, and the Greek mistranslated it and the only reasonable solution they could find to explain the two contradicting genealogies of Yosip was to say the one in Luqa was Mary's (probably because of the detailed virgin birth story in it, despite what the genealogy itself said), and the one in Mattai was Yosip's. I was never very happy with that explanation even when all I had was the Greek, but accepted it because I couldn't come up with anything better myself. But, I see no validity in holding on to a direct contradiction in the Greek when there is a complete solution in the Aramaic, because of an Anti-Yeshu polemic in the Talmud (which may have been dependent upon the Greek tradition of Luke being Mary's genealogy) and the traditional workaround of those who used the inferior Greek texts which produced the workaround in the first place.

Shlama, Craig
Reply
#33
One problem;

Jan Wilsons Old Syriac:

S Jacob begat Joseph, the Joseph to whom was betrothed Mary the Virgin
C Jacob begat Joseph, he to whom was betrothed Mary the Virgin


If you look down the road some, this will eventually come up against the theory, and be used to debunk it.

Weather I agree or not, i do know that once you strike out boldly, such as this, and become a target, this will be put up against it. It's very specific, as you see, and it is a form of aramaic.
Reply
#34
Ah I was mixed up. I thought Jesus had His title of rightful king through Mary, but it seems through Joseph. I mixed that up with the Jeconiah issue, though that curse thing is still relevant as He is a descendant.

So basically, Joseph, husband of Mary, was the rightful king of Southern Israel?
Reply
#35
3 Mattai appears to have intentionally omitted such ancestors as Ahaziah, Joash, Amaziah, and Jehoiakim (I Diwrei HaYamim 3:10-16)

were these the cursed generations?
Reply
#36
drmlanc Wrote:Ah I was mixed up. I thought Jesus had His title of rightful king through Mary, but it seems through Joseph. I mixed that up with the Jeconiah issue, though that curse thing is still relevant as He is a descendant.

So basically, Joseph, husband of Mary, was the rightful king of Southern Israel?

Yes. Although, he genealogy in Mattai starts out as the rightful bloodline, they then converge in the persons of Shilathi'el and Zerubabel, and after that point we kinda have to guess. I think that we can safely assume that the genealogy in Luqa is the one which contains the title to the throne, because it is much easier to show a simple genetic descent from Dawid, than it is to document that you are THE BarDawid whose lineage entitles you to the throne above all his other descendents. Therefore, I think it is common sense that the one in Luqa would be the one containing the title to the throne simply because we know the one in Mattai is abbreviated and much less detailed.

Shlama, Craig
Reply
#37
D'oh! If the one in Luke has the title, why does the Mary genealogy in Mattai, have such leaders as Zerubabbel?

Did the rightful kingship of Southern Israel go to Jesus DIRECTLY, through Mary?
Reply
#38
How can the two lines converge in Selathiel and Zerubabel and then seperate again???
Reply
#39
Dave Wrote:3 Mattai appears to have intentionally omitted such ancestors as Ahaziah, Joash, Amaziah, and Jehoiakim (I Diwrei HaYamim 3:10-16)

were these the cursed generations?

No, of those four only Jehoiakim was, but we know implicitly that it must have been lifted because his son Yokhanea (who himself would was cursed in Yirmeyahu 22:24-30) became king.

Yirmeyahu 22:18-23

18
Therefore, thus says the LORD concerning Jehoiakim, son of Josiah, king of Judah: They shall not lament him, "Alas! my brother"; "Alas! sister." They shall not lament him, "Alas, Lord! alas, Majesty!"
19
7 The burial of an ass shall he be given, dragged forth and cast out beyond the gates of Jerusalem.
20
8 Scale Lebanon and cry out, in Bashan lift up your voice; Cry out from Abarim, for all your lovers are crushed.
21
I spoke to you when you were secure, but you answered, "I will not listen." This has been your way from your youth, not to listen to my voice.
22
The wind shall shepherd all your shepherds, your lovers shall go into exile. Surely then you shall be ashamed and confounded because of all your wickedness.
23
You who dwell on Lebanon, who nest in the cedars, How you shall groan when pains come upon you, like the pangs of a woman in travail!

Yirmeyahu 36:30
"Therefore thus saith the Lord of Jehoiakim king of Judah; He shall have none to sit upon the throne of David."

2 Melakhim 24:6
"So Jehoiachim slept with his fathers; and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead."

To avoid a direct contradiction with no other further Scriptural clarification on the issue, we are forced to read between the lines that sometime before his death he repented and the curse was lifted.

Shlama, Craig
Reply
#40
hmmm let me look around here a bit, think I seen something on it.
Reply
#41
drmlanc Wrote:How can the two lines converge in Selathiel and Zerubabel and then seperate again???

Since, we know who the father of Shilathi'el was, and it was NOT "Neri", we know that the "Neri" of Luqa must be either be the mother of Shilathi'el or the father of the mother of Shilathi'el, thus both lines reunite in the personages of Shilathi'el and Zerubabel, and then one of the younger sons of Zerubabel goes on to found the line that is recorded in Mattai (or perhaps Luqa, but obviously I think it was Mattai).

Shlama, Craig
Reply
#42
nothing except hearsay and such on sites about it.

without scriptural text to support, its guesswork. most of the talk about it pointed towards a period during the exile, sometime in there. again guesswork.
Reply
#43
does this help?

Who was Shealtiel's father?
If his mother had no brothers, then under the Mosaic law he could be reckoned under the mother's line. Meaning that he could be called the "descendant of" his grandfather on his mother's side.
Reply
#44
Dave Wrote:does this help?

Who was Shealtiel's father?
If his mother had no brothers, then under the Mosaic law he could be reckoned under the mother's line. Meaning that he could be called the "descendant of" his grandfather on his mother's side.

Yes, that would be the best explanation.

Shlama, Craig
Reply
#45
Okay, so perhaps Mary and Joseph shared lineages through Zerubabel. But, who was the rightful king? Joseph, or "Mary"?
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)