Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 2,126 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 404,036
Pageviews Today: 642,978Threads Today: 223Posts Today: 3,234
08:01 AM


Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
REPLY TO THREAD
Subject There is no Biblical evidence that Christ is of the seed of King David. In fact, the Bible proves He is not.
User Name
 
 
Font color:  Font:








In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.
Original Message Christians insist that Christ MUST be of the seed of David. Since it must be conceded that Joseph is not the father of Jesus, the only way to establish that Christ is of the seed of David is to prove that His mother Mary is a descendant of David. However, the Bible offers no evidence of this. The Bible gives only two genealogies for Christ. The first is found in Matthew, and the second in Luke. Here are both genealogies purportedly tracing Christ to King David (edited for brevity):

Matthew 1:6-16:

“And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias; And Solomon begat Roboam.....And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

Luke 3:23-31

“And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli....which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David”

As anyone can see, these verses tell nothing of Mary's ancestors. Absolutely nothing. This would the first time in all the history of the world that a woman's lineage is given without mentioning the woman. What makes this whole thing funny is that when you compare the genealogies given in Matthew and Luke you will find several contradictions:

First, Mathew claims that the father of Joseph (Mary's husband) is Jacob, while Luke claims Joseph's father was Heli. Matthew 1:16 says: “And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.” However, Luke 3:23 says: “ And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.”

Second, Matthew traces Joseph's linage through David's son Solomon (Matthew 1:6), whereas Luke traces it through David's son Nathan (Luke 3:31). Of course, both passages cannot be true since that would be biologically impossible. It reminds me of that old song, “I'm My Own Grandpa.”

Third, both Matthew and Luke clearly trace the ancestry of Joseph. If the same ancestry applies to Mary, then Mary, the mother of Jesus, was intimately involved with her own brother or half-brother. Anyone who has read the Old Testament knows this is a no-no.

The only specific Biblical reference to Mary's genealogy is found in Luke 1:36, which says that Mary and Elisabeth were cousins, and Luke 1:5 which says that Elisabeth was of the daughter of Aaron (of the house of Levi, not Judah). Since one's ancestry is traced through male descendants, and not female, Luke shows that Mary would of the tribe of Levi just as her cousin Elisabeth was, and not of the tribe of Judah as David was. The Qur'an states clearly that Mary was in fact of the daughters of Aaron, from the tribe of Levi:

“And she came to her people with him, carrying him [Jesus] with her. They said: O Marium [Mary]! surely you have done a strange thing. O sister of Haroun [Aaron]! your father was not a bad man, nor, was your mother an unchaste woman.” See the Qur'an, Sura 19, Ayat 27, 28 (explanatory insertions my own).

There is another another major problem with claiming that Matthew traces Mary's ancestry back to King David. In Matthew 1:12, the given lineage from King David to Joseph (and supposedly to Mary) includes Jechonias. Now the Old Testament prohibits any seed of Jechonia (a.k.a. Jechonias and Coniah) from ascending to the throne of David:

“Is this man Coniah a despised broken idol? is he a vessel wherein is no pleasure? wherefore are they cast out, he and his seed, and are cast into a land which they know not? O earth, earth, earth, hear the word of the LORD. Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah” (Jeremiah 22:28-30).

Of course, there is also an additional problem with Luke's account of Christ's ancestry. Luke traces Mary's genealogy to King David through David's son Nathan; however, the Old Testament says that the Messiah would be the seed of David's other son Solomon (1 Chronicles 28:5; 1 Chronicles 29:1 and 1 Chronicles 29:24). So even of the lineage given in Luke applied to Mary (which it does not), her son is not qualified to sit on the throne of David.

In conclusion, there is nothing - ABSOLUTELY NOTHING - in the Bible which traces Mary's lineage to King David. But if I'm wrong, answer this one question for me: What is the name of Mary's father? Or try this one: Where in the Bible does it specifically state that Mary was of the house of David? If you have found such a reference, I will confess to the world that you are more knowledgeable about the Bible than I am. All you have to do is cite the verse which supports your claim.

The best that any Christian can do is to make an illogical claim that Mary had to be of the lineage of David because she was Christ's mother and Christ had to be of the lineage of David. That nonsense doesn't work for me or anyone else with at least the minimal cognitive abilities of the average 12-year old.

There is no Biblical evidence that Christ is of the seed of King David. In fact, if anything, the Bible proves He is not.
Pictures (click to insert)
5ahidingiamwithranttomatowtf
bsflagIdol1hfbumpyodayeahsure
banana2burnitafros226rockonredface
pigchefabductwhateverpeacecool2tounge
 | Next Page >>





GLP