05-04-2008, 11:41 AM
Hello,
When one compares the Matthew 1 genealogy, one finds that Matthew just has proven a thing, the Messiah roots from David.
He mentions 14 generations 'before' exile, 14 after etc.
But when one compares Chronicles, Matthew skips generations! So, instead of 14 generations, he could have mentioned 28 generationes (I'm not being exactly by counting the registers in the OT, but you get the point).
So, Im not saying that Matthew was doing a sloppy job, I think he shortened it as he was interested in the Lords words, not in history.
So now I come to the point. The word 'Kitab' which exists in Hebrew/Arabic/Aramaic might mean more than we know.
Anyway, in Arabic, according to M. H. Ma'rifat, the word 'Kitab' has a root which means 'collection' or summary. So, was Matthew not just making a summary of the genealogy and is the ARamaic word, also lending this meaning: "Summary of..."???
Thanks for your thoughts!
When one compares the Matthew 1 genealogy, one finds that Matthew just has proven a thing, the Messiah roots from David.
He mentions 14 generations 'before' exile, 14 after etc.
But when one compares Chronicles, Matthew skips generations! So, instead of 14 generations, he could have mentioned 28 generationes (I'm not being exactly by counting the registers in the OT, but you get the point).
So, Im not saying that Matthew was doing a sloppy job, I think he shortened it as he was interested in the Lords words, not in history.
So now I come to the point. The word 'Kitab' which exists in Hebrew/Arabic/Aramaic might mean more than we know.
Anyway, in Arabic, according to M. H. Ma'rifat, the word 'Kitab' has a root which means 'collection' or summary. So, was Matthew not just making a summary of the genealogy and is the ARamaic word, also lending this meaning: "Summary of..."???
Thanks for your thoughts!