A useless genealogy

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

<snip all that writing>
Joe Alward:
1.  Helms knows, as well as we both do, that Matthew's genealogy
can't be
that of Jesus.  So far we agree.

RevGaud
The why does Matthew call it the generations (genesis) of Jesus
the Christ, naming him as the son of David, if he isn't trying to
establish him as Messiah?

ALWARD
2.  Matthew said that he was giving Jesus' genealogy; Helms, you,
and I agree
about that, too.

RevGaud
Indeed, and he was doing it to tie Jesus to David, which he
cannot because jesus is not related to david through Joseph. As
far as I know, most, if not all, Fundamnetalists, claim that this
genealogy is avlid and ties Jesus to David.

ALWARD
3.  Helms said that "Matthew" recognized that his genealogy was
not that of
Jesus, since Matthew stated that Jesus was not Joseph's son.

4.  If Matthew knew that the genealogy was not that of Jesus,
then why did he
give it?  The answer to this was given before:  It was more
important to him
to be able to show that there were three groups of two weeks each
of
generations, each beginning with an important event:

 "So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen
generations;
and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen
 generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ
are
fourteen generations." (Matthew 1:17 )

RevGaud
This event cannot be tied to Jesus since he is not the son of
David, as Matthew specifically states in v.1.

ALWARD
Now, you rightly object that Jesus was not "generated" from this
group, and,
of course, we all agree and we can all fault Matthew for that;
the Bible is
in error in this regard, no doubt about it.  But, you said that
the Matthew
genealogy is useless, and I say it is not:  the genealogy, even
though it is
not Jesus', still shows a prophetic pattern, a three x two week
chain of
generations from Abraham to Jesus' adoptive father. This pattern
exists even
though the last link in the chain wasn't Jesus' father.  Jesus
nevertheless
has an important connection to Joseph by virtue of the fact that
Joseph was
the husband of Jesus' mother, even if he wasn't Jesus' father.
It's that
connection which completes the pattern; that connection is weak,
I agree, but
it's there nonetheless and that's why the geneaology is not
useless.

RevGaud
Sorry, but I disagree. The wording of the genealogy leaves no
room for this kind of interpretation, especially since matthew
skipped over some generations to get his this supposed three x
two week scheme. I'd like to see Helms give evidence of this
so-called combo of weeks as it relates to Jesus and the so-called
prophetic accomplishment. I think the whoile thing is just a
blatant attempt at trying to justify the genealogy.

Either Matthew bungled it or he did it on purpose (lied) to try
and make the link  to Jesus by some so-called prophetic
accomplishment based on this combo of weeks. In any event, it
still doesn't connect Jesus to it and it's still useless because
the object is to connect Jesus to this so-called event, which I
believe is a delusion under which Helms labours. There is no
14+14+14 combo of weeks because names were left out to achieve
it.


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 ]