A useless genealogy

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

Joe Alward:
I *was* paying attention to what you wrote originally, which was

RevGaud
I beg to differ Joe, because you avoided the verses (Acts 2:30;
Rom 1:3) and their significance.

ALWARD
"If Biblegod is omniscient, why would he inspire Matthew to
include a
genealogy in his gospel which is totally useless?"

The genealogy is only useless in showing his ancestry, but it is
not
useless--period, as you said.  The Matthew genealogy is Joseph's,
and it's
important, evidently, because God  wanted us to know that there
were three
two-week groups (analogous to the six days of creation) of
important figures
which spanned the time between Abraham and Jesus.

Take a look at Helms one more time:

"Fourteen equals two 'weeks' of generations, and three two week
periods
(14 +14+14) equal six 'weeks' of pre-Christian generations in the
royal
line of Israel; thus, with Jesus begins the seventh, the
'sabbath' week
of Jewish monarchical history--the kingdom, restored under
Christ.
Matthew included a genealogy not because he was really interested
in the
ancestry of Jesus--presumably he had the wits to grasp the
pointlessness
of tracing the genealogy of Joseph, who his own narrative denies
is
Jesus' father--but because he was interested in the pattern, the
prophetic fulfillment".

RevGaud
Helms' little foray into biblical numbers is predicated on the
fact that Jesus would begin the seventh week BECAUSE HE WAS
MESSIAH. However, since Jesus is not Joseph's son, he doesn't
start any week, final or not, because he is NOT the son of David.
Can you not see this, Joe? There is NO prophetic fulfilment if
Jesus is not Joseph's son and thus not the son of David, on
which, I say again, HelmS bases his SILLY THEORY. How can you
miss this, Joe?

ALWARD
In summary, the  listing of names in Matthew IS a genealogy, and
it IS
important, but not for the reason you thought Matthew thought it
was.   Right?

RevGaud
Wrong! And it doesn't matter what reason Matthew uses, it doesn't
matter because the genealogy is said to be Jesus' (v1 "The book
of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of
Abraham.") but we know that it isn't so because Joseph, on whom
this genealogy is based, is not Jesus' father. So all of Helms'
assertions (read: dreams) are based on Jesus being Messiah and
they fall because this genealogy cannot be used to establish that
Jesus is Messiah which is the reason Matthew includes it, Helm's
wild speculations notwithstanding. In point of fact, none of the
two genealogies can be applied to Jesus because they're both
based on Joseph and he wasn't Jesus' father. This is simple to
understand and I really don't see how you can miss this. You've
been suckered in by Helms' very vivid imagination. You've fallen
for yet another lame how-it-could-have-been scenario. This is
just another far-fetched defense set up to "save the day" so the
NT can have some meaning and Jesus' butt, as Messiah, can be
salvaged. And it's lame attempt at that.


Reverend G. R. Gaudreau
<grgaud@bigfoot.com>
<http://campus.fortunecity.com/defiant/666/>

• Previous message: A useless genealogy
• Next message: A useless genealogy
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]