Mary's Genealogy

Pointless Posts, Raves n Rants, Obscure Opinions

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
WebersHome
Sage
Posts: 919
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 4 times

Mary's Genealogy

Post #1

Post by WebersHome »

.
Eve wasn't made directly from the soil the way that Adam was. She was made of human material taken from Adam's body. In effect then, Eve was Adam's offspring, i.e. his first child.

Hence, from then on, even if all of Eve's children had been 100% virgin-conceived, they would've still been biologically related to Adam seeing as how every part of her body was made from Adam's body.

So then, unless somebody can prove beyond a shadow of sensible doubt that no part of Mary's body was in any way biologically related to Eve's body, then we have to concede that Mary's son Jesus was biologically related to Eve too, and thus biologically related to Adam.
_

User avatar
Miles
Guru
Posts: 1371
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
Has thanked: 27 times
Been thanked: 78 times

Re: Mary's Genealogy

Post #2

Post by Miles »

WebersHome wrote: Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:43 pm .
Eve wasn't made directly from the soil the way that Adam was. She was made of human material taken from Adam's body. In effect then, Eve was Adam's offspring, i.e. his first child.

So how should we regard Adam then? As far as I know father/daughter incest, having sexual intercourse with one's own child in this case---producing at least Cain, Abel and Seth---is not condoned by any society.



.

User avatar
WebersHome
Sage
Posts: 919
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Mary's Genealogy

Post #3

Post by WebersHome »

.
Miles wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 12:31 amSo how should we regard Adam then? As far as I know father/daughter incest, having sexual intercourse with one's own child in this case---producing at least Cain, Abel and Seth---is not condoned by any society.

Biblical law isn't retroactive (Deut 5:2-4, Rom 4:15, Rom 5:13, and Gal 3:17) and none regulating incest were enacted till many, many years after Adam's day in the covenant that Moses' people agreed with upon with God in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.
_

User avatar
WebersHome
Sage
Posts: 919
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Mary's Genealogy

Post #4

Post by WebersHome »

.
It's sometimes suggested that Mary was a surrogate mother. In other words; baby Jesus was implanted in her womb as an embryo.

But the angel predicted that he would be the result of conception that was to take place in Mary's body. Well; in order for Mary's body to conceive a baby, her own ovum would have to be involved.


Luke 1:31 . .Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name him Jesus.

Luke 2:21 . . When eight days were completed for his circumcision, he was named Jesus, the name given him by the angel before he was conceived in the womb.
_

User avatar
Miles
Guru
Posts: 1371
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
Has thanked: 27 times
Been thanked: 78 times

Re: Mary's Genealogy

Post #5

Post by Miles »

WebersHome wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 11:49 am .
Miles wrote: Wed Sep 23, 2020 12:31 amSo how should we regard Adam then? As far as I know father/daughter incest, having sexual intercourse with one's own child in this case---producing at least Cain, Abel and Seth---is not condoned by any society.

Biblical law isn't retroactive (Deut 5:2-4, Rom 4:15, Rom 5:13, and Gal 3:17) and none regulating incest were enacted till many, many years after Adam's day in the covenant that Moses' people agreed with upon with God in the books of Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.
_
Not talking about any regulation such as law, but simply how Adam, as an incestuous father, should be regarded today. Assuming you don't condone fathers having sexual intercourse with their daughters today, ask yourself why. Then using this principle why shouldn't you apply it to Adam? Just because there wasn't any law against it---heck, there wasn't any law of any kind back then---doesn't change the nature of the act. Fathers having sexual intercourse with their daughters back in October of 4004 BC, (the date of the A&E story as determined by Ussher and Lightfoot,*) is no different than fathers having sexual intercourse with their daughters today.
* source


.

User avatar
WebersHome
Sage
Posts: 919
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Mary's Genealogy

Post #6

Post by WebersHome »

.
Heb 7:14 . . It is clear that our Lord arose from Judah, and in regard to that tribe, etc.

Throughout the Bible, it is normally the biological father's side of the family that determines a child's tribal identity, but in Jesus' case there was no biological father. So tribal determination defaulted to his biological mother's side.

Mary's situation was unusual but not unbiblical. Inheritance via women became an expedient back in Num 27:1-8.

Jesus' mom is sometimes alleged to be a member of Levi's tribe due to her association with Elizabeth (Luke 1:5 and Luke 1:36). However, Levi and Judah were brothers, i.e. both men were Leah's sons (Gen 29:34-35). So then Mary and Elizabeth were cousins due to their association with the same grandma rather than with the same tribe.
_

User avatar
WebersHome
Sage
Posts: 919
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:10 am
Location: Oregon
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Mary's Genealogy

Post #7

Post by WebersHome »

.
This information is handy for proving that David was Mary's biological grandfather.


Rom 1:3 . . [God's] son Jesus Christ our Lord was made of the seed of David according to the flesh

The Greek word translated "seed" in that passage is sperma (sper' mah) which is a bit ambiguous because it can refer to biological progeny and/or spiritual progeny.

I think it's pretty safe to assume that the passage below is speaking of spiritual progeny.

"If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." (Gal 3:29)

However; Rom 1:3 is definitely speaking of biological progeny because David's seed is according to the flesh, i.e. his body.

Also:


Acts 2:30 . .Therefore [David] being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

Greek words for "according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ" are not in the manuscripts. The KJV's editors took the liberty to pencil them into their English translation.

However, Greek words for "fruit of his loins" are in the manuscript. Those are reinforced by the wording of the oath at 2Sam 7:12 where again David's seed is clearly implied to be physical rather than spiritual.

See also Psalm 132:11 where it's said: The Lord has sworn to David, a truth from which He will not turn back: "Of the fruit of your body I will set upon your throne."
_

Post Reply