The Genealogy of Jesus Christ - Luke
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 авг 2014
- When studying the Scriptures, genealogies can often be overlooked, mistakenly seen as an unimportant list of names. But as we consider the genealogy of Christ found in Luke 3, we find that the lineage of Mary, Jesus' mother, shows us four important things about Christ and solves one of the biggest problems of the Old Testament.
This teaching is from our series 42 Luke - 2014 with Skip Heitzig from Calvary Albuquerque.
O. Praise you Lord;💗Mary🙅♂️This solves so many problems for me..The Genealogy of Mary so Important,IFelt the Holy spirit Touched my Heart After the Teaching❤🙅♂️🙏Thank you for the Teaching things got a brighter today Amen.🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
Hallelujah praise the lord a great spiritual msg thanks so much for share may God use u more for his glory amen
O praise you Lord;;💓 Mary 🤱This solves so many problems for me.. The Genealogy of mary So important, I felt the Holy Spirit touched my heart after the teaching💓🤱🌟 thank you for the teaching... Things are a little brighter today..🌞🙋♂️
Thank you so much Father God for Your perfect Salvation plan through the solved genealogy that Jesus could fulfill all the prophecies in order to take away the sins of the world, and I am redeemed and saved. Thanks Pastor for the clear explanation and knowledge to help me have a different insight of God's grace and love for us. It shows me no obstacles can hinder His Salvation for us. Praise our Lord.
the royal line must come through Solomon
What a wonderful explanation, it has truly answered my questions and my spirit says Amen.
Great! What a great message and real teaching. A gem.
Praise our Lord in Heaven for his goodness kindness righteousness faith in us and his love for us. Glory be to God...
This was very helpful and awesome, thank you
Fabulous!!!
Excellent
Excellent.
Good stuff...thanks
Awesome!!!!👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
This is a good message but there are a few issues left unresolved. First, note that Matthew explicitly says in Matt 1:17 that there are fourteen generations from the exile to Babylon and Jesus, but if you add the male names in his list you only get thirteen! Couldn't Matthew count? Hold that thought for a minute.
The Greek used in Luke 3:23 makes it hard to sustain that Joseph was the adopted son of Heli. The grammar for Joseph and Heli is exactly the same as all the other generations back to Adam so that would mean Joseph was the actual son of Heli. And the description of Jesus as the "supposed son" of Joseph confirms that this Joseph is Mary's husband. So that strongly suggests that Luke is giving the genealogy of Jesus through Joseph who was Mary's husband.
On the other hand, most English translations of Matthew 1 lists Jacob as the father of Joseph who is the "husband of Mary". But the Greek word (andra) in Matthew 1 translated husband literally means "man". Joseph is the "man" of Mary. Could this Joseph be Mary's father? Since this is a genealogy it would be inappropriate for Matthew to use a Greek word such as "egennēsen" (to begat) for a daughter like he does for the other male generations. And Joseph was a common name so it is certainly possible that Mary's father was named Joseph and that could lead to confusion for us. If this is true then Matthew's genealogy reads ...Jacob ...Joseph...Mary ...Jesus which explains the missing 14th generation. I guess maybe Matthew could count. This would mean that Matthew is giving the genealogy through Mary's direct bloodline back to Solomon and Luke is giving the genealogy of Jesus through Joseph, Jesus' stepfather. Something to consider.
But what about the curse of Jeconiah, how could he be listed in Mary's direct bloodline? Matthew's list includes Jeconiah as the son of Josiah. But the Jeconiah that was cursed in Jeremiah 30:22 was the grandson of Josiah through Jehoiakim. There is good evidence that Jeconiah was another name for Johanan, the firstborn son of Josiah (all Josiah's sons had multiple names). So that would mean that the Jeconiah listed in Matthew's genealogy is Josiah's son, not his grandson who was cursed in Jeremiah 30:22.
None of this challenges or changes the fact of Jesus's rightful place on the throne of David. It is just another way of understanding the genealogies and address some of the common difficulties that are debated.
It's Mary's geneology, because Jesus is not the son of Joseph, but is the "seed of the woman" and the begotten Son of God.
@@redraven1410 Bullshit!
Should I continue to listen to this? What will he say about Jesus?
This is an interesting perspective on Luke's genealogy, but there is a major hiccup in his presentation. At 17:56, Skip turns to the genitive article "tou", and claims that tou is not used with Joseph (legal father of Jesus). The suggestion is that Joseph son-in-law of Heli is given in the text. This is not the case. In both the Greek texts Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex Vaticanus, "tou" is exclusively used from Joseph back to Adam. That is, in Luke 3 "Joseph tou Heli" (verse 23) to "Seth tou Adam" (verse 38). This use of "tou" includes the blood father-son relationships that are found in Matthew (eg. "Isaac tou Abraham" Luke 3 v 34; "David tou Jesse" Luke 3 vv 31-32).
I remember in Greek it was said "o tou" with the determinative article preceding the preposition whose underlined and implicit word is "uiòs" which means son. Do you agree? Because Greeks were Jewish Greek, originated by tribes and a patriarchal society their grammar provided a specific syntagma to indicate the father-son blood relationship. But in the case of St Joseph, he was the father of God...I don't know if the Mosaic law provided a specific exception for the prophetized father of the incarnated God.
It also would have a limited meanigfulnless given that Incarnation is an unique and irrepetible event. Moreover, being recognized as God by His parents, Jesus Himself gave the orders needy to be observed for His kingship in that the education of His relatives was entirely inspired by the permanent presence of the Holy Spirit God among them. Even bodiless, the Holy Spirit God was the legal father of Jesus whose work made possible His Incarnation. In this sense, the Nicene Creed is something of incomplete or not truthful because Christ is a unique person with a twofold nature, but we the human child was also grew up HIS DIVINE NATURE which is His body. No human can grew up God, except someone whose body is directly inhabitated by the real presence of God, called Trinitarian Inhabitation.
I modestly suppose the Blessed Virgin Mary, without any stain of sin, favoured His divine child become a divine man, while St Joseph favoured the developement of the last king of Israel. I would be blaspheme to reduce the Holy Family of Nazareth to the Temple of Jesus Christ God: Jesus needed two human educators who protected him, but also educated Him.
The immutable divine nature of Jesus Christ God needed two humans with a unique Holy Spirit to translate that immutable nature from a child to a man. St Mary and St Joseph replicated on Earth the Triune heavenly kingship of God, being one flesh by effect of a unique common Holy Spirit God, the same who makes a unique Gid the two human-divine fleshes of God Father and of God the Son.
So the problem is that one word -- tou -- is used throughout Luke 3:23-38 to trace from Joseph to Adam. Tou might have dual meanings, but the original texts give no indication as to when tou means blood-genetic son, son-in-law, or another kind of social or figurative son. Indeed, Luke 3:38, has "Adam tou God", which adds to the uncertainty regarding the usage of "tou."
The 2 lists in Matthew & Luke do not contradict as many people think. They are of 2 different people; Joseph & Mary. The genealogical list in Matthew, from David to Jacob-Heli (spanning about 1000 years), contains 27 generations at 40 years each, so as to comply with the royal generational standard of 40 years. Luke, on the other hand, gives 40 generations at a more comprehensible 25 years each. Hence, Luke places Jesus in the 20th generation from Zerubbabel, whereas Matthew places him in the11th generation. SUMMARY: Matthew--27 generations of 40 years...from Solomon. Zerubbabel's father's line. Luke--40 generations of 25 years...from Nathan. Zerubbabel's mother's line. Both Solomon and Nathan are sons of David, both converge at Zerubbabel then diverge. Zerubbabel had 2 sons, Abiud & Rhesa. Matthew goes from Abiud--Mary's' line. Luke goes from Rhesa---Joseph's line. Joseph and Mary were also related. Joseph was Mary's great-aunt Gadat's son. Mary's mother was Hannah. Her father was Joachim (Yoakhir). He was the Elias Patriarch. Joseph's mother was Gadat. His father was Heli, the Jacob Patriarch. His title was 'Jacob', so he would be called Jacob-Heli. Joachim's mother was Sabartia (Sabhrath). His father was Matthat the Zadok. Heli's father was Matthan (descended from Mattathias (Tobias) the temple governor. Now we will discuss 'Virgin birth. There were 4 ranks of women: Mother, Virgin, Widow, Wife. Mother & Virgin were the 2 highest & Widow & Wife were the 2 lowest. Women were required to be physical virgins at their marriage. There was a group of men called the Seven Demon Priests (Judas Sicariotes was the 7th Demon Priest). The role of these priests were to guard the celibacy of the royal girls. When a woman was married, she was reduced to the rank of 'Wife'. When she was 6 months pregnant, she was promted to the rank of 'Mother'. When her children were grown, she was reduced agqin to the rank of 'Wife'. When her husband died , she was promoted to the rank of 'Widow'. In Mary's case, she became pregnant after the betrothal ceremony in June 8BC. (The month when sexual relations were allowed was December) Because of that, she stayed at the rank of 'Virgin'; so 'a Virgin conceived'. (After Jesus was born, she was promoted to the rank of 'Mother', & stayed at that rank till all her children were grown). Hence, the 'Virgin' birth. (Joseph died in 23AD. Mary was then promoted to the rank of 'Widow' that year.) Mary was found pregnant by the 'Holy Spirit' (pneuma hagion), a title of Joseph in the celibate state, during his betrothal period. If Joseph followed the stricter rule of procreation of dynastic marriage, he would break off the betrothal,, leaving the child to be brought up as an orphan by the Essenes. He was advised by the 'Angel of 5he Lord', Simon the Essene (Simeon) the Abiathar-Gabriel priest to take the intermediate way and marry Mary, but to treat the child as the son of Mary, not his son. Drawing on a contemporary understanding of a verse in Isaia, the child would be given at birth the name 'Immanuel'. Joseph went through with a wedding ceremony combining both weddings of rhe Essenes. (The first one was the beginning of the 3 year trial period, & sex would be allowed in December. The 2d one was the binding one, done when the woman was 3 months pregnant.) Since there was a rule that there must be no intercouse during pregnancy, 'he knew her not'. I hope this clears up the usual misunderstanding of all of this.
the royal line must come through Solomon
according to Eusebius in Church History. Sextus Africanus interviews descendants of Joseph. Joseph had 2 actual fathers. Jacob, who begat Joseph, is the biological father. Jacob and Heli were uterine brothers. Same mother different fathers. Their mother Estha got widowed young and was married to their respective fathers. Heli died childless. So, Jacob had to produce a son for his brother so that the lineage of Heli will not perish thru a levirate marriage. Heli was therefore Joseph's legal father for inheritance purposes in Bethlehem.
Luke 1:56 simply says that Elizabeth (Mary's Cousin) and Zacharias were both direct descendants of Aaron. Mary stayed with this priestly family for 3 months and ate the food solely dedicated for priests. Elizabeth, Zacharias nor Mary being all devout priests would not have allowed Mary to eat this food. Unless Mary was allowed to eat priestly food since she grew up in the same family tree as Elizabeth. Jesus was therefore biologically from the priestly line of Aaron. Now we can understand what the writer of Hebrews was talking about in Chapters 7 to 9 regarding the Royal Priesthood of Mechisedeck and Jesus.
So was he Jesus or not? I hate it when people cut off in mid sentence gee willikers batman! Now we'll never know.
He says our geneologies are so very precious to us...not if you are spiritually minded...geneology passions are carnal.
Sounds like a failed attempt at trying to defend Biblical contradictions (yet again). Clearly Luke's account is a genealogy through Joseph. How do I know? He stated so therein. Similarly, it is also clear that Matthew's account is that of Joseph's. Obviously Luke and Matthew are not in agreement on the genealogies and so they each stated their own versions. Sadly they are both wrong anyway.
1. There are 14 generations between Abraham and David and that is as far as Matthew's claim goes. Matthew missed out so many names just to make the theory of 14 work !!!
2. Luke's account includes an error between Adam and Abraham where he inserted an extra generation between Arphaxad and Shelah. This contradicts the OT accounts.
3. If both Luke's and Matthew's account are correct, and one is through Mary's while the other is through Joseph's lineage (as claimed) then it will be impossible for Joseph and Mary to exist within the same generation !!!
Beware of false teachings folks!!!!
ANOTHER PHENOMENAL LESSON, HOWEVER I HUMBLY SUGGEST THAT YOU COULD MORE SENSITIVE WITH ANALOGIES USED WITH BLACKNESS AND WHITENESS.
Heli was not the father of Mary. Mary and Zacharias's wife Elisabeth were cousins. They were of the daughters of Aaron (the Levi )no Bloodline to David. ( Heli was not a priest. ) It's just another name for Jacob. (even if it was true the curse would be on her also) if you want to know I will show you Jesus's GENEALOGICAL record. It is simple. Shen = Shalom.
This man doesn’t know what he is talking about
Psalms 132:11
YAHOWAH hath sworn in truth unto David;
he will not turn from it;
Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne.
Mary IS directly from the “fruit of David’s body” through Nathan!!!