The nature of Christ

[Matt Black]

According to Biblical revelation, Jesus cannot have had Joseph's gamete, as Matt 1:25 says he had no intercourse with Mary until Jesus was born; all of His human nature must have come from Mary's gamete. Physically/ genetically of course this is impossible, "but with God all things are possible."

That's my take on it.

 

[BD17]

But He was still as human as you or I. He may not have had Joseph's gamete, but He had Mary's.

[reply to BD17's post @ 1006. Re your 1011 post: both lineages refer to Joseph's ancestry; Mary's is not mentioned]

So Joseph had two fathers? Read the lineage Matt they are different. Why because one is Joseph's(Matthew) and the other is MAry's(Luke)

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Matt: That's my take on it.

HP: Today, maybe, but I do not think it will remain your take for long. Keep thinking. Think outside the box. :thumbs:

 

[Matt Black]

Two lineages:

Luke 3:23b "[Jesus was] the son, it was supposed of Joseph, the son of Heli" - Joseph, not Mary

Matt 1:16 "Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary" - again, Joseph's lineage, not Mary's

Both are Joseph's lineage - read them again. (So which one was Joseph's father?)

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Matt: Both are Joseph's lineage - read them again. (So which one was Joseph's father?)

HP: Why does it have to be an 'either or?' Does the possibility not exist that they both could in fact be referring to one in the same?

 

[Matt Black]

How do you mean? Are you saying for example that Heli and Jacob are the same man?

 

[Matt Black]

HP: Today, maybe, but I do not think it will remain your take for long. Keep thinking. Think outside the box. :thumbs:

Explain

 

[BD17]

Two lineages:

Luke 3:23b "[Jesus was] the son, it was supposed of Joseph, the son of Heli" - Joseph, not Mary

Matt 1:16 "Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary" - again, Joseph's lineage, not Mary's

Both are Joseph's lineage - read them again. (So which one was Joseph's father?)

Jacob was Joseph's father.


Matthew's list of the forefathers of Jesus showed that Christ was the son of Abraham, in whom all the families of the earth are blessed, and heir to the throne of David; but Luke shows that Jesus was the Seed of the woman that should break the serpent's head, and traces the line up to Adam, beginning with Eli, or Heli, the father, not of Joseph, but of Mary.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Lu 3:23 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,

HP: The Word of God clearly states that Jesus was the son of Joseph, the son of Heli, ‘as was supposed,’ or ‘just as they thought.’

 

[BD17]

The Curse of Jehoiakim
An unusual curse in Jeremiah 36:1-32 gives new insight into the virgin birth of Jesus.

The Curse
Jehoiakim was a king of Israel. He angered God by burning a scroll that Jeremiah the prophet wrote. God cursed Jehoiakim by indicating that none of his children would sit on the throne of David (Jeremiah 36:29-31). And although Jehoiakim had children, scripture shows that none of them ever reigned as King David had.

The Problem
Joseph, the father of Jesus, was one of Jehoiakim's descendants (through Jeconiah). Joseph's offspring could not claim David's throne because of the curse. Jesus laid claim to the throne of David (Luke 1:32, Acts 2:30, Hebrews 12:2). If Jesus had been born of Joseph, the curse would have been contradicted.
Also, God had promised David that one of his physical descendants would reign on the throne of his kingdom forever (2 Samuel 7:12-13). As explained above, Joseph was excluded from being the genetic father of the future king of Israel.
It was impossible to fulfill the requirements of both curse and promise by natural means. One man had to be both heir to and offspring of David, without being the genetic descendant of Jehoiakim. This problem required a divine solution.

The Solution
God created a solution through the miracle of the virgin birth. Although Joseph was one of Jehoiakim's offspring (through Solomon), Mary was not. She was a descendant of Nathan, one of David's other sons (Luke 3:31). God's promise to David was fulfilled because Mary was the biological parent of Jesus.
The virgin birth also addressed the curse God had pronounced upon Jehoiakim. Kingship was an inherited right. By Joseph, Jesus inherited a legal claim to the throne of David. However, he was exempt from the curse of Jehoiakim because Joseph was not his genetic father.
So the miracle of the virgin birth accomplished God's will in two ways. First, it granted Jesus a legal claim to the throne of David. And second, it maintained the integrity of the curse God had pronounced upon Jehoiakim. Indeed, Jesus was not one of Jehoiakim's offspring.

 

[BD17]

So now explain how Heli and Jacob are the same person. They are not. In Luke 1:32 Mary is told... He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, implying blood relation which would have to be through Mary.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

BD17:

So now explain how Heli and Jacob are the same person. They are not. In Luke 1:32 Mary is told... He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, implying blood relation which would have to be through Mary.​

HP: HP is not the only name others know me by.

Lu 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

BD17: And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, implying blood relation which would have to be through Mary.

HP: Now that is a quantum leap in logic. Would you mind showing us what demands that to be true when both genealogies given to us tell us it is through Joseph His father as opposed to Mary His mother, and the verse in question refers directly to lineage of Joseph? In between or underneath which words is that penumbral presupposition mentioned?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

BD 17: “Joseph, the father of Jesus, was one of Jehoiakim's descendants (through Jeconiah).”

HP:Sorry BD17. I cannot believe I missed this post. It is indeed interesting.
Can you tell where or how this is established? Thanks.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

BD17: So now explain how Heli and Jacob are the same person. They are not.

HP: When this question was first asked I had not done the research or sought the help from commentators as to the possibilities. Off the cuff I suggested that they might be the same person but called by different names. BD 17 appears to be right and I mistaken on this point, for it appears that they were indeed different men. Just the same they were evidently BOTH fathers of Joseph. Albert Barnes explains it this way. Joseph was the legal son and heir of Heli, though the real son of Jacob. The interesting part is that both Heli and Jacob were BOTH decedents of David, so it matters not which one the lineage of Christ is shown to succeed from, they both point back to King David as Scripture states. Both Jacob and Heli are believed to have the same mother, Estha, of whom was born Jacob. Matthan, Jacobs father, died. Mattat, being of the same tribe married the widow of Matthan, to which Heli was born. Heli died without children. His His brother Jacob married his widow and begat Joseph, which made Joseph the legal son of Heli. Joseph could rightfully be called the son of either Jacob or Heli.

It is not true that either of the lineages given, either in Matt or in Luke, are that of Mary’s as some incorrectly try to assume. Scripture is clear. Both are the ancestry of Jesus’s father, Joseph, not Mary. If Mary was a descendant of David, it is not clear that that was the case by Scripture. It might have been true, but as I read, it is not provable by Scripture. The lineage of Joseph coming from the lineage of David is indeed provable by solid evidence, even from both of his fathers.

 

[J. Jump]

HP then you must be relying on just a mere mortal as your savior. That's sad. I've never heard something so ludicrous that Joseph had two earthly fathers. Scripture does not support that in any way shape or form.

It is an impossibility for Jesus to be the seed of Joseph. If that is the case then God is a liar becuase that would directly violate a number of Scriptures. One of which says that Jesus would be the seed of the woman not the seed of man. The other that Joseph and Mary had not had sex before they were married. God can not lie and therefore your claim that those are both is fathers is impossible.

Again why do people insist on taking something so simple and making a mountain out of it.

You don't get an all God and all man Being when two humans procreate...you get just another human being.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

JJ: then you must be relying on just a mere mortal as your savior. That's sad. I've never heard something so ludicrous that Joseph had two earthly fathers. Scripture does not support that in any way shape or form.

HP: Oh please JJ. I had never heard it either, but I had never read those genealogies that closely before. I knew where they started and knew where they ended, but in the middle I simply had never looked into. When Scripture implicitly states that both are Joseph’s genealogies, and yet state different names for Joseph’s father, you tell us why the names Heli and Jacob are both used. The notion that it must be Mary’s genealogy is simply not supported by the clear indication that they are BOTH Joseph’s.

Scripture also states Jesus was God as well. No, I cannot explain the Incarnation to you, but one thing I will not do is to twist what it does state about the genealogies, i.e., both being Joseph’s, to cover for the false and unsupported notion of Augustinian original sin.

JJ:It is an impossibility for Jesus to be the seed of Joseph. If that is the case then God is a liar becuase that would directly violate a number of Scriptures. One of which says that Jesus would be the seed of the woman not the seed of man.

HP: Are you the seed of a women? Are you the seed of a man as well? If you are a human, it takes both in case you did not know. Why am I sitting here explaining that to you at your age? Why would it be unusual for God to say the seed of a women? Does that necessitate that God would not use the seed of a man as well? I think not. By the way, what is the reference you are speaking about? Let's look at it together.

Jesus had an earthly father and an earthly mother. The fathers name was Joseph and the mothers name was Mary according to Scripture. No, Joseph did not have intercourse with Mary before the conception of Jesus, for Mary was a virgin, and Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit. God says that nothing is impossible with Him, and this is no impossibility either. Why do you limit The Infinite God of the Universe in such a way? Just to think. Are you limiting Almighty God to cover for a false notion of Augustine? It sure appears to be so.

JJ. Again why do people insist on taking something so simple and making a mountain out of it.

HP: Why do some have to deny the plain Word of God in support for their Augustinian falsehoods?

JJ: You don't get an all God and all man Being when two humans procreate...you get just another human being.

HP: You get whatever God says you get, however and whenever God decides to do it. If God’s Word says it, we need to just believe it.

There is what I believe to be a plausible explanation as to how this in fact can and most likely did happen, preserving the Word of God in it’s testimony of the virgin birth and the testimony of Scripture stating the father of Jesus was indeed Joseph. Now if you want to limit God, and say that He CANNOT take a completely human body, formed with the egg and sperm of man,(both His own creation for just that purpose of the creation of human flesh) and incarnate Himself within that human form, I say you deny that Jesus was a man. There are two truths to contend with. Jesus was totally man, yet totally God. If you deny either one you either deny the true humanity or the Diety of the Incarnate Christ, the man Christ Jesus, God manifest in human flesh.

 

[BD17]

HP: Oh please JJ. I had never heard it either, but I had never read those genealogies that closely before. I knew where they started and knew where they ended, but in the middle I simply had never looked into. When Scripture implicitly states that both are Joseph’s genealogies, and yet state different names for Joseph’s father, you tell us why the names Heli and Jacob are both used. The notion that it must be Mary’s genealogy is simply not supported by the clear indication that they are BOTH Joseph’s.

Scripture also states Jesus was God as well. No, I cannot explain the Incarnation to you, but one thing I will not do is to twist what it does state about the genealogies, i.e., both being Joseph’s, to cover for the false and unsupported notion of Augustinian original sin.



HP: Are you the seed of a women? Are you the seed of a man as well? If you are a human, it takes both in case you did not know. Why am I sitting here explaining that to you at your age? Why would it be unusual for God to say the seed of a women? Does that necessitate that God would not use the seed of a man as well? I think not. By the way, what is the reference you are speaking about? Let's look at it together.

Jesus had an earthly father and an earthly mother. The fathers name was Joseph and the mothers name was Mary according to Scripture. No, Joseph did not have intercourse with Mary before the conception of Jesus, for Mary was a virgin, and Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit. God says that nothing is impossible with Him, and this is no impossibility either. Why do you limit The Infinite God of the Universe in such a way? Just to think. Are you limiting Almighty God to cover for a false notion of Augustine? It sure appears to be so.

JJ. Again why do people insist on taking something so simple and making a mountain out of it.

HP: Why do some have to deny the plain Word of God in support for their Augustinian falsehoods?

JJ: You don't get an all God and all man Being when two humans procreate...you get just another human being.

HP: You get whatever God says you get, however and whenever God decides to do it. If God’s Word says it, we need to just believe it.

There is what I believe to be a plausible explanation as to how this in fact can and most likely did happen, preserving the Word of God in it’s testimony of the virgin birth and the testimony of Scripture stating the father of Jesus was indeed Joseph. Now if you want to limit God, and say that He CANNOT take a completely human body, formed with the egg and sperm of man,(both His own creation for just that purpose of the creation of human flesh) and incarnate Himself within that human form, I say you deny that Jesus was a man. There are two truths to contend with. Jesus was totally man, yet totally God. If you deny either one you either deny the true humanity or the Diety of the Incarnate Christ, the man Christ Jesus, God manifest in human flesh.

They cannot be the same Joseph descended through Solomons line and mary through Nathan, if you want to get technical Mary and Joseph were probably cousins.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

BD 17: “Joseph, the father of Jesus, was one of Jehoiakim's descendants (through Jeconiah).”

HP: Did you possibly overlook the question I asked you concerning this statement? What is your source of information for this statement?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

BD17: They cannot be the same Joseph descended through Solomons line and mary through Nathan, if you want to get technical Mary and Joseph were probably cousins.

HP: They sure can be the same Joseph. Joseph’s father Jacob desended from Jaccob through Mattan back to Solomon. Joseph’s father Heli, of which Joseph was a legal heir, descended from Mattat which descended from Nathan.

Before you get to technical, you first have to find proof that Mary’s lineage is ever recorded in Scripture. When you find it, show us.

 

[J. Jump]

notion that it must be Mary’s genealogy is simply not supported by the clear indication that they are BOTH Joseph’s.

That is not what Scripture says. That is the meaning that you assign to Scripture.

Text clearly shows that Matthew says his genealogy speaks to that of Joseph, but let's let at Luke's.

When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Eli,

Our key phrase to understand this passage "as was supposed." These people supposed he was the son of Joseph by genealogy. But that was a wrong assumption.

And Luke clarifies His actual genealogy is not through Joseph - his earthly father in the sense that Joseph is the man that raised Him - but actually through Mary His actual biological earthly parent.

Jesus has no biological ties to Joseph other than the fact that they both descended from David.

In order for Jesus to be Joseph's biological Son he would have to have had sex with Mary. And that didn't happen. We are told how Mary got pregnant in that the Holy Spirit came upon her. Never any mention that the Holy Spirit took sperm out of Joseph and then inserted it into Mary when He came upon her.

Are you the seed of a women?

No I am not according to the way the Bible looks at things. I am the seed of my father.

Why do some have to deny the plain Word of God in support for their Augustinian falsehoods?

I am not denying Scripture, just your twist on it, which by the way corrupts other teachings of Scripture which was clearly pointed out to you.

You get whatever God says you get

And God has told us that you get another plain ole human being, not the Savior!

By the way, what is the reference you are speaking about?

You can find the seed of the woman reference in Genesis 3. Adam was right there why didn't God say that it was going to be a seed of the man and the woman? Because it can't. The sin nature is passed down through the man. I don't know why it is that way, but that's the way God said it, so as you say we must just believe it.

By the way here is another reason Joseph can not be the biological father of Jesus. If he was then Jesus would have been born into sin and the same condemnation that all other human beings were born into and that is death spiritually. If that is the case then Jesus would have had to have experienced grace through faith in order that His Spirit would have been made alive. We have no indication that that ever took place.

Why? Because He was not in need of salvation by grace through faith. Why? Because He didn't have an earthly father in the biological sense and therefore did not possess the condemnation that has passed down to all mankind through Adam.

It really is very simple.

Here is an article that you might want to check out regarding this subject:
http://www.biblical-thinking.org/cgi-bin/article.pl?243