Follow the BLOGS to explore the possibilities...

The Veiled Royal Genealogy Fact

Anyone who reads the Matthew and Luke Gospel genealogies of Jesus of Nazareth can see they are listed differently – one works backward, the other forward and they are not identical. Thus the controversy that begins with King David and the interim generations down to the birth of Jesus leading detractors to say the lineage inconsistency proves the inaccuracy of the Gospels.[1]

Luke traces the lineage of Jesus back to David through his son Nathan, not Solomon, although like Matthew, he ascribes the lineage to Joseph.[2] Many experts believe Luke’s lineage to be that of Mary assumed by Joseph under Judaic Law covering her inheritance rights as a Jewish female only-child.[3]

Matthew and Luke genealogies have three points in common – they both trace to David; they have a common ancestor in Zerubbabel, son of Shealtiel; and they meet again with Joseph’s betrothal to Mary.[4] In the end, both Gospels display genealogies in the House of David.[5]

Perhaps the biggest piece of evidence that demonstrates the royal lineage of Jesus is one veiled fact, one revealed through a rational approach. The archenemies of the Gospel’s message that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah were in the best and unique position to disprove his royal lineage in the House of David … but they didn’t.

Jewish sages unanimously agree the prophecies define the undisputed requirement for the Messiah is that he must be born in the lineage of King David. If the High Priest Caiaphas and the Jewish Council had simply demonstrated that Jesus of Nazareth did not have royal legal rights to the House of David, it would have ended any speculation that Jesus is the Messiah – end of story. Both Gospel lineages would have been disproven.

Could the High Priest and the Jewish Council have easily proved, were it true, that Jesus was not the Messiah based on his lineage? They were at ground zero, center stage with full control of the Temple and its complete Jewish genealogical records dating back millennia.

All Jewish genealogies including those of Joseph and Mary were readily available in the Temple until it was destroyed by Rome in 70 AD, seven decades after the birth of Jesus.[6] Luke records that Mary, Joseph and baby Jesus were clearly known by the Temple when, in compliance with the Law for a first born male, they paid a redemption price for Jesus to a Temple priest and as well as Mary’s own Temple purification sacrifice ritual.[7] Neither event would have been allowed if the family had not been vetted by Temple officials.

The archenemies of the Gospel’s message that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah were in the best and unique position to disprove his royal lineage in the House of David … but they didn’t.

Utmost religious importance was placed on Jewish genealogy for the specific purpose of ensuring the purity of the lineage of the priesthood.[8] Jewish historian Josephus challenged anyone who questioned his own heritage to check the public records.[9] As a former Priest and Pharisee insider, he referred to the Jewish genealogical records tracing his family ancestry back 2000 years – the era of Jesus back to the time of Abraham.[10]

To become the wife of a Priest, according to Josephus, a Jewish woman such as Mary was subjected to the scrutiny of her “genealogy from the ancient tables.”[11] Proof was required she was a Hebrew and Josephus points to the gravity of this requirement.[12] After the release of the Jews from Babylonian captivity, 565 priests were disqualified from the priesthood “having married wives whose genealogies they could not produce.” [13]

Hebrew genealogical records were not just limited to the land of Israel. Josephus stated they were tracked for all Jews living “at Egypt and at Babylon, or in any other place of the rest of the habitable earth,” recorded by the priests and prophets who lived there “with the utmost accuracy.”[14]

There can be no doubt that the lineage of Jesus in the House of David was known or could have been easily accessed by the Jewish Council in the Temple genealogical archives. A truism in the world of investigations is that when information is being intentionally withheld, it strongly suggests the information is not wished to be revealed.[17]

What is the likelihood the archenemies of Jesus, the keepers of all Jewish genealogical records and experts in Messiah prophecies, would have taken full advantage of the opportunity to disqualify Jesus as being the Messiah if they could have only exposed that the lineage of Jesus of Nazareth was not of the royal House of David?

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

REFERENCES:

[1] Lippard, Jim. The Secular Web. 2004. “The Fabulous Prophecies of the Messiah.”  https://infidels.org/library/modern/jim_lippard/fabulous-prophecies.html> “Contradictions Part 6: Jesus’s Genealogy.” Finding Truth. 2011. <https://findingtruth.info/2011/03/11/contradictions-part-6-jesuss-genealogy>
[2] “Historical Commentary:  The Birth of Jesus.” Producer John Heyman.  Film, Event 3. HistoricJesus.com. <http://www.historicjesus.com/3/history.htmlNet.bible.org. Luke 3:23-38 footnotes 69 – 82.  Life Application Bible – New International Version (NIV).  “The Birth of Jesus” (Luke 2:1-20) History and Commentary.” Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Wheaton Illinois, and Zondervan Publishing House. 1991, 1790.  Ryrie Study Bible.  Ed. Ryrie Charles C.  Trans. New American Standard. 1978. Matthew 1:1 Luke 3:23 Footnotes.
[3] Edersheim, Alfred. The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. 1883. Book II, Chapter 4. <http://philologos.org/__eb-lat/default.htm>  Maas, Anthony. “Genealogy of Christ.” Catholic Encyclopedia. 2009. Volume 61909.  <http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06410a.htmClarke’s Commentary on the Bible. Luke 3:23.  BibleHub.com.  n.d.  <http://biblehub.com/commentaries/clarke/luke/3.htm>  Gloag, Paton J.  Introduction to the Synoptic Gospels. Edinburgh:  T & T Clark.  1895. “Introduction to the Synoptic Gospels.” Online Books Page. Pages ix, 39. <http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/008728595>
[4] Matthew 1:1-16; Luke 3:23-38.  Dolphin, Lambert.  “The Genealogy from Adam to Jesus Christ” Idolphin.org. 2011. <http://ldolphin.org/2adams.html>
[5] Edersheim.  The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah. Book II, Chapter 4.
[6] I Chronicles 1:24 – 2:10; II Chronicles 2:1-10; Ruth 4:18-21; Matthew 1:5; Luke 3:32. “Genealogy.” Jewish Encyclopedia. 2011. <http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/6577-genealogy>  “Siege of Jerusalem.” Encyclopædia Britannica. 2018. <https://www.britannica.com/event/Siege-of-Jerusalem-70>
[7] Luke 2. “First-born, Redemption of.” Jewish Encyclopedia. 2011. <http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/6138-first-born-redemption-of>  Edersheim, Alfred. Book II, Chapter 7. <https://philologos.org/__eb-lat/book207.htm>
[8] Josephus, Flavius. Antiquities of the Jews. Book III, Chapter XII.2.  The Complete Works of Josephus. 1850. <http://books.google.com/books?id=e0dAAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false>  Josephus, Flavius. Against Apion. Book 1, #6-7. The Complete Works of Josephus. 1850. <http://books.google.com/books?id=e0dAAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false>  “Genealogy.” Jewish Encyclopedia.
[9] Josephus. The Life of Flavius Josephus. #1 and footnote t.
[10] Nehemiah 12:23.
[11] Josephus. Against Apion. Book 1, #7.
[12] Josephus. Against Apion. Book 1, #7.
[13] Ezra 2:61-62; Neh 7:63-64. Josephus.  Antiquity of the Jews.  Book XI, Chapter III.10.
[14] Josephus. Against Apion. Book 1, #6-7.
[15] Furst Rachel. “The Mishneh Torah – Maimonides’ halakhic magnum opus.” 2018. MyJewishLearning.com.  <https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-mishneh-torah>
[16] Maimonides, Moses.  aka Rambam.  Mishneh Torah.  Ed. Yechezkal Shimon Gutfreund,  “The Law Concerning Moshiach.” Footnote #5. Sichos In English. n.d. <http://www.kesser.org/moshiach/rambam.html#SIE>   Rich, Tracey R. “Mashiach: The Messiah.” Judaism101. 2011. <http://www.jewfaq.org/mashiach.htm>
[17] “Deception in Research Guidance.” University of Wisconsin-Madison|KnowledgeBase. 2016. <https://kb.wisc.edu/page.php?id=68286>  Sapir, Avinoam. LSI Laboratory for Scientific Interrogation, Inc. n.d. <http://www.lsiscan.com/index.htm>  “SCAN – Scientific Content Analysis (Statement Analysis).” Advanced Polygraph. 2011. <http://www.advancedpolygraph.com.au/scan.htm> Lesce, Tony. “SCAN:  Deception Detection by Scientific Content Analysis.” LSI Laboratory for Scientific Interrogations, Inc. 1990. <http://www.lsiscan.com/id37.htm>  Gordon, Nathan J.; Fleisher, William L. Effective Interviewing and Interrogation Techniques. p12.  2011. <https://books.google.com/books?id=JuMzKpFu93IC&pg=PA86&lpg=PA86&dq=interrogation+if+they+didn%27t+answer+the+question,+they+just+did&source=bl&ots=V4cf3Z1kjl&sig=NeRLKyFKMRr66SWtUQxbLrByKrY&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi_2Z3phb_aAhVBgK0KHWMQDOA4FBDoAQgtMAE#v=onepage&q=concealing%20information&f=false>  Napier, Michael R. Behavior, Truth and Deception. 2017. “Nonresponsive Subject.” p56. <https://books.google.com/books?id=eEUrDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT95&lpg=PT95&dq=Sapir+if+they+didn%27t+answer+the+question&source=bl&ots=95gjQFQYg9&sig=gUOEC7Aiq-yFgqUEA4VClHyzNhA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjspeHFkr_aAhVwjK0KHab-DF0Q6AEIRjAC#v=onepage&q=nonresponsive&f=false>

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes:

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>