The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Colleen Ev, That latin friend, Deacon Eric, Pastor Freed, Sebastian
5,837 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
1 members (1 invisible), 58 guests, and 23 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
by Veronica.H, April 24
Byzantine Catholic Outreach of Iowa
Exterior of Holy Angels Byzantine Catholic Parish
Church of St Cyril of Turau & All Patron Saints of Belarus
Byzantine Nebraska
Byzantine Nebraska
by orthodoxsinner2, December 11
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,155
Posts414,847
Members5,837
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#131990 11/27/03 05:53 PM
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,251
Likes: 16
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,251
Likes: 16
Dear Scripture Scholars all!

Happy Thanksgiving!

How is our Lord descended from King David - through His Mother or St Joseph by adoption, or how?

Your beadsman,

Alex

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,217
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,217
Jesus was a legal descendant of King David through St Joseph. Is this a trick question ?

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,251
Likes: 16
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,251
Likes: 16
Dear Lawrence,

No - it is a question designed to fill in yet another gap in my lack of knowledge.

If there was a trick to it, I would send you a treat as a reward!

Alex

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 438
D
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 438
Dear Alex;

It depends on if you are reading Matthew or Luke. In Matthew the Davidic lineage is through Joseph. In Luke, however, the angel Gabriel comes and delivers the Davidic message in the house of David, but the message is independent of Joseph. It is given to Mary directly and the child, the Davidic promise, is the Son of God Himself.

John, deacon

(I love theological questions!)

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,217
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,217
Alex

I think that Jesus royal lineage i,e as a legal descendant of David, was alot more significant to the people of 1st century Judea, then it is to us today. I'am not saying that it isn't significant to us today, because obviously it fullfills Old Testament prophecies, but I don't think the first thing I would of asked about Jesus, would be "how far back can his ancestry be traced ?

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 615
Likes: 5
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 615
Likes: 5
Dear Alex,

I think in one of the apocryphal writings, 'tis the Protoevangelion i think, that contains the story of how St Joseph came to be the spouse of the Mother of God. There it asserts that since Mary was of the House of David, and the Messiah was to come to from that House, then she had to have a spouse also from that House.

In Christ,
Adam

Joined: May 2002
Posts: 50
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 50
Dear Alex,

During my Protestant days, I attended Bible School.
In discussing the Davidic lineage of Christ they pointed out that the two genealogies served two purposes. The one in Luke established his literal descent from David, but from a different line than the recognized royal line. The genealogy in Matthew through the line of Joseph established his right of the royal line, though through adaption.

It was pointed out that in the Old Testament, it was prophesied in Jer. 22:24-30 that the line of Jeconiah (Coniah) was cursed and no one from that line would ever prosper on the throne. Joseph gave Jesus the legal right to the throne, but the physical descent came through a different line of David.

I hope this is helpful.

Bail � Dhia ort,

Terry

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,217
L
Member
Offline
Member
L
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,217
Petrus

The genealogy in the Gospel of St Luke also is through St Joseph, except in the 3rd chapter, the father of St Joseph is given as Heli, while St Matthew names Jacob. No problem there as two names were not uncommon. St Luke 2:4 also mentions St Joseph as being of the house of David.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 438
D
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 438
I think Alex was bored when he opened this topic.

Mary was also likely of Davidic heritage. According to Numbers 36:6-12, an only daughter had to marry into the family so as to secure her right to inheritance.

Furthermore, I don't think Luke (or Matthew for that matter), was interested in or attempted to provide an accurate lineage. The purpose was to establish a more universal theme. In the case of Luke, Christ's lineage, although legally through the Abrahamic line (akin to Matthew), traces itself back to Adam and to God. Therefore, Christ is the Messiah of Jews and Gentiles (this is the particular Lucan theme). His lineage, like Matthew's, was meant to support the fulfillment of multiple prophecies. The listing of the genealogy was like biblical "footnotes" meant to support his universal theme.

I await further clarification from cantor Joe. I just can't believe he would pass up a topic as juicy as this one.

John

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,301
R
Member
Offline
Member
R
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,301
Quote
Originally posted by Orthodox Catholic:

How is our Lord descended from King David - through His Mother or St Joseph by adoption, or how?
Alex
http://www.thegenesisletters.com/Letters/GeneologiesMatthewLuke.htm
(please excuse the typos)


Matthew (trace of the Sons of David)
The genealogy of Jesus given by Matthew, from David to Joseph, is a listing of the royal Davidic bloodline. Those who were specifically selected as the First Prince of the house of David, the 'First Son' among all the genetic sons of David. This first son was recognized as the divinely and providentially chosen successor to the throne. The First Prince was THE Son among all other sons. This Son of David was often the first born in time - but not necessarily so for it would have been the son that was most like the original pattern (meaning the son who was most like the mind and spirit of the father (King) himself. The King himself appointed the Son of David in one of two ways... either directly or through the appointment of the next Queen Mother (who would become Queen when her son asended the throne).

Luke (geneology of Mary decended from Nathan)
The genealogy traced by Luke is a genealogy done in the manner of a family kept records, through Mary Jesus� mother, because Joseph did not genetically contribute, it is the only true genetic genealogy of Jesus possible. It is traced backwards from Jesus through Heli the father of Mary, back to David through his son Nathan. Because it is a simple and natural blood line, it also is not necessarily a listing of first-born sons only and it occasionally winds its way through daughters who are not named directly but rather by the daughter's father's name, for example, it does not name Mary directly, it rather names her by her father Heli (the Jewish custom).

------
Jesus was the legal son of Joseph. Joesph was an appointed Son of David and upon his death appointed Jesus as sucessor to the title Son of David making Jesus the only qualified male for the throne and title King of Israel.

Mary was the only living qualified Queen Mother of Israel and attained that title when the legal authority (Pilate) declared by legal decree that Jesus was the King of Israel (Pilate did it to spite Herod and to send Herod the message that it was within Pilates power and authority to have Herod killed and a new King appointed. Pilate had not considered the possibility of resurrection of Jesus perpetuating that decree. It was a legal decree meant to last only a few hours and then disappear into history with the death of Jesus).


-ray


-ray
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 438
D
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 438
I will further confound the problem while trying to add clarification to the above post.

You may ask how Heli is Mary's father. Well, it is thought that: Heli=Eli=Joachim. Joseph appears in the Lukan genealogy as being tacked on, due to Jesus' legal adoption by him. (This is only one theory.)

However, a further problem arises. Luke's genealogy shows a lineage through David's son, Nathan instead of through Solomon (Matthew shows Solomon who was the kingly heir to the throne.) Therefore, in Luke's genealogy, the Davidic lineage is not the same as the human lineage of kings. For Luke, the Davidic lineage fulfills the Davidic promise by superceding the human realm.

John

With apologies to Ray. I did not mean to usurp your argument. I just thought these two points needed clarification. I agree with you.

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,251
Likes: 16
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,251
Likes: 16
Dear Lawrence and Doctor John,

Well, I did want to discuss the issue.

In university, I was involved in campus outreach.

We had a table in the hall-way and distributed Catholic literature.

This very questions was the number one question asked of us by Jewish students.

Father Tannam, our Chaplain, normally handled those queries.

But since there was so much attention given to that particular subject in my experience, I thought I would ask the question.

Alex

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,251
Likes: 16
Member
OP Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 26,251
Likes: 16
Dear Rayk,

How utterly fascinating!

Lawrence et al. - did you know all that? smile

Alex

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 438
D
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 438
I should also mention that another component to the Marian/Davidic connection is through her cousin Elizabeth and her husband Zachariah. Recall, that he was a temple priest with lineage to Aaron the brother of Moses. The implication is that as Mary was related to Elizabeth, they both were also likely members of the same priestly tribe.

John

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 438
D
Member
Offline
Member
D
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 438
Interestingly, the Koran also supports the Davidic lineage of Mary.

Even more fascinating, it supports her ever-Virginity and her Immaculate Conception.

John

Page 1 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  Father Deacon Ed, theophan 

Link Copied to Clipboard
The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2022 (Forum 1998-2022). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5