New Testament Geneologies...

[Linus]

Not wanting to hijack another thread, but still wanting to discus this tpoic, I decded to start this thread. In the thread about Jesus getting married, Michel posted the following:

...this is why I have never read the Bible; frankly, I find little use in reading this:-


Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

1:3 And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram; Defenders Notes >>​

1:4 And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon;​

1:5 And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;​

1:6 And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias;​

1:7 And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa;​

1:8 And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias; Defenders Notes >>​

1:9 And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias;​

1:10 And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias;

I don't mean to pick on you, brother Michel, but I myself can find at least one reason as to why the author would include this information. It may or may not be of a particularly uplifting or edifying nature, but there is a reason nonetheless. Afterall, I don't think it would be there if it weren't important. At any rate, the reason, I believe is, that according to the Old Testament, the Messaiah would be a descendant of David. This geneology shows that. Therefore, and especially when writing to a Jewish audience to whom this information would be quite important, it aids in proving Jesus' "Messaiah-hood."

What are some other reasons you can think of for this information being included in the Bible?

 

[nutshell]

That seems to be the main reason. Of course, LDS belief is that genealogy is important.

 

[PetShopBoy88]

Not wanting to hijack another thread, but still wanting to discus this tpoic, I decded to start this thread. In the thread about Jesus getting married, Michel posted the following:



I don't mean to pick on you, brother Michel, but I myself can find at least one reason as to why the author would include this information. It may or may not be of a particularly uplifting or edifying nature, but there is a reason nonetheless. Afterall, I don't think it would be there if it weren't important. At any rate, the reason, I believe is, that according to the Old Testament, the Messaiah would be a descendant of David. This geneology shows that. Therefore, and especially when writing to a Jewish audience to whom this information would be quite important, it aids in proving Jesus' "Messaiah-hood."

What are some other reasons you can think of for this information being included in the Bible?

Depends which book of the Bible it was in. Most of the time, it was to prove that the people actually were jewish. Like with Christ, to show that Jesus descended from David like the prophecy claimed he would.

 

[michel]

Not wanting to hijack another thread, but still wanting to discus this tpoic, I decded to start this thread. In the thread about Jesus getting married, Michel posted the following:



I don't mean to pick on you, brother Michel, but I myself can find at least one reason as to why the author would include this information. It may or may not be of a particularly uplifting or edifying nature, but there is a reason nonetheless. Afterall, I don't think it would be there if it weren't important. At any rate, the reason, I believe is, that according to the Old Testament, the Messaiah would be a descendant of David. This geneology shows that. Therefore, and especially when writing to a Jewish audience to whom this information would be quite important, it aids in proving Jesus' "Messaiah-hood."

What are some other reasons you can think of for this information being included in the Bible?

I understand what you are saying, and you make a valid point.

On the other hand, you are inferring that this part of the bible being a 'proof' of Jesus's "Messiah-hood"; now, I know I am not learned, and have a very short attention span (which I didn't mention because I didn't want to use that as an excuse), but, to be frank, do I need proof of Jesus' "Messiah-hood" ?

I thought the whole point of Faith was Faith................BTW, thank you for bringing that up Linus.

 

[PetShopBoy88]

I understand what you are saying, and you make a valid point.

On the other hand, you are inferring that this part of the bible being a 'proof' of Jesus's "Messiah-hood"; now, I know I am not learned, and have a very short attention span (which I didn't mention because I didn't want to use that as an excuse), but, to be frank, do I need proof of Jesus' "Messiah-hood" ?

It wasn't written for YOU. It was written for the Jews of the time, who WOULD need that sort of proof, or who would find that type of geneology very convincing.

 

[michel]

It wasn't written for YOU. It was written for the Jews of the time, who WOULD need that sort of proof, or who would find that type of geneology very convincing.

Fair enough; in which case the obvious question would be "What parts of the Bible ought I to read, because they are pertinent to my faith ?"

 

[PetShopBoy88]

Fair enough; in which case the obvious question would be "What parts of the Bible ought I to read, because they are pertinent to my faith ?"

That depends what "your faith" is.

 

[michel]

That depends what "your faith" is.

Loosely (because it has to be) I guess I am a non-denominational Christian.

 

[PetShopBoy88]

Loosely (because it has to be) I guess I am a non-denominational Christian.

Your salvation is really your own personal business. If you feel you have a "good enough" relationship with God and Christ without reading certain parts of the Bible, so be it, and best of luck. I find I need to read all the Bible to have a close relationship, but I cannot tell you what you need to read.

 

[michel]

Your salvation is really your own personal business. If you feel you have a "good enough" relationship with God and Christ without reading certain parts of the Bible, so be it, and best of luck. I find I need to read all the Bible to have a close relationship, but I cannot tell you what you need to read.

Fair comment. Thanks.

 

[Linus]

do I need proof of Jesus' "Messiah-hood" ?

You personally nay not, but someone else might. 2 Samuel chapter 7 contains the promise God makes to David that his descendant will establish an eternal kingdom. So, you may have complete faith that Jesus is the Christ, but the fact remains that his geneology needs to be established so that no doubt can be cast in that respect.

I thought the whole point of Faith was Faith

It is. But that doesn't mean that some things can't or shouldn't be proven.

Fair enough; in which case the obvious question would be "What parts of the Bible ought I to read, because they are pertinent to my faith ?"

My belief is that all parts have some measure of importance to our faith. Otherwize, it seems like they wouldn't be in the Bible in the first place. In some cases, you might have to do some searching, but such is the case with spiritual matters. You have to search for God and try to find Him. You can't expect Him to reveal it all to you. That's what the Bible is for, if you ask me...

 

[dawny0826]

Fair enough; in which case the obvious question would be "What parts of the Bible ought I to read, because they are pertinent to my faith ?"

MIchel, it's my opinion that the entire Bible is important. The Old Testament and the New Testament make the complete "whole".

But, I can totally understand why parts of the Old Testament may seem irrelevant. I've been slowly yet surely making my way through the Old Testament. I have an awesome Study Bible where even if I'm studying in the Old Testament, I'm also given relative NT text and a mini-lesson. So...it keeps it interesting.

There's much within the OT which is snooze worthy but I'm happy that I've decided to read through it because I'm learning more about the nature of God. Moses is almost to Canaan! LOL! I've just started Deut.

My suggestion, if you're thinking about getting into the Bible is to start in the NT. Start with the gospels. And then move out from there.

 

[dawny0826]

Linus, my apologies for responding kind of off topic. Frubals to you for my error.

 

[Linus]

Linus, my apologies for responding kind of off topic. Frubals to you for my error.

No problem. Sometimes I enjoy a little tangent here and there.