Hi Saint4God:
The issue of the two genealogies in Matthew and Luke (which do not match) has been a thorn in the side of thinking Christians for centuries (i.e. from
the time Christians were allowed to read the text of Matthew and Luke for themselves, say after 1500)
Matthew tries to bend the truth so that he can come up with three GEMMATRIAL sets of 14 generations (the number 14 is the ASSIGNED GEMMATRIA for the
house of David: DVD in Hebrew which is DALED (worth 4 points), VAV (worth 6 points) and DALED (another 4 points) which adds up to 14 the magical
number for DAVID the "royal line of the house of Judah"...
In order to acheive these fake sets of 14, he has to leave off some very inconvenient clan-cheifs/kings of Judah between BC 690 and BC 640 if you
compare the list in I Chronicles 3:9 to 15
1 David
2 Solomon
3 Rehoboam
4 Abijah
5 Asa
6 Jehoshaphat
7 Jehoram
8 Ahaziah
9 Joash
10 Amaziah
11 Uzziah
12 Jotham
13 Ahaz
14 Hezekiah
15 Manasseh
16 Amon
17 Josiah
(1 Chronicles 3:9-15)
Now is Matthew’s fake list;
quote:
1 David
2 Solomon
3 Rehoboam
4 Abijah
5 Asa
6 Jehoshaphat
7 Jehoram
…………(missing Ahaziah)
…………(missing Joash)
…………(missing Amaziah)
8 Uzziah
9 Jotham
10 Ahaz
11 Hezekiah
12 Manasseh
13 Amon
14 Josiah
Jeconiah…at the time of the exile to Babylon
or as Matthew claims "Thus there were fourteen generations in all….from David to the exile to Babylon.. (Matthew 1:1-17) "
A slight fudging of the numbers is going on here: what makes you think you can believe anything else in his gospel "historically": this is the
MIDRASHIC way 1st century Jews handled scriptures, as did those who wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls.
NOTICE: The post exilic book of Chronicles shows that from David until the Babylonian Exile are seventeen generations, not fourteen.
The three names in the 1 Chronicles genealogy seem to have been deliberately snipped out to fit the imagined or hoped-for prophecy pattern.
A little lie here, a little lie there....and soon the whole gospel is called into Question....at least in terms of "historical accuracy."
NO WONDER THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH FOR MORE THAN 1000 YEARS FORBADE NON CLERGY TO READ AND COMPARE THE TEXTS OF THE GOSPELS AND TANAKH !!!!
Apologists sometimes argue that Matthew did what apologists mistakenly and hopefully think was “common” in those days—omitting descendents who were
“unimportant.”
However, all three of the missing men in Matthew's fake list of 14 were kings, and all three were in the line of descendency to the "Messiah"—if
you can believe Matthew.
Midrashic tendencies in Matthew's gospel makes the writer play a little fast and loose with facts. He even has Iesous riding into Jerusalem ON TWO
ANIMALS to fulfil a mistranslation in his version prophecy (Zechariah 9:9-12) (Matthew's translation is from a late Aramaic Targum: Lowly, riding on
a DONKEY... AND THE FOAL OF A DONKEY)
Experience teaches that Christian "apologists" (those who try to excuse or cover up all the lies and deceptions in the Bible) try to seize every
opportunity to obfuscate when they find they’re unable to harmonize a Bible difficulty, and the more complicated the skeptic’s argument is, the more
hiding places there are for the "fundamentalist Bible believing Christian".
The question of the day is:
Why did Matthew and Luke both go to so much trouble to trace Iesous lineage back to David (like a good Messiah) with their "boring-begats" through
JOSEPH if Mary was supposed to have been "physically" impregnated by [the "holy spirit" of] "God"...and not her betrothed Joseph?
Looks like the final editors of the book in the 2nd or even in the 3rd century had to make what material was in "Matthew" and "Luke" fit the
prevailing Roman Catholic belief in a Virginal Conception----the texts simply make no sense as they stand (e.g. "as was supposed" the father of
Iesous etc.)
The Church also had other people in the early 2nd century loudly complaining about this (the phrase"..and pay no attention to all these endless
Genealogies" is placed into the mouth of "Paul" in the Epistles to Timothy (whoever actually wrote those, it still meant that contradictory
genealogies were floating around trying to "prove" Iesous' descent through David in order to make him a viable candidate for the "Messiah").
No matter which way you slice it, the two contradictory Genealogies (Matthew v. Luke) do not help Iesous' case either for a clean Daviddic
lineage----nor do they support a case for any kind of a Virgin Birth---both ideas of which the Church tried to foist on believers in the 2nd century
AD----and since that time, they have spent a great deal of time NOT talking about it....unto this day
(and how many Christians do you know these days that have the guts to face this problem head on?)
[edit on 27-10-2004 by Amadeus]


