Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

This question came to me during the Christmas Eve sermon. Thought it mignt be interesting to ask it here.

 

If Jesus was not the biological son of Joseph, as many believe, how is it possible to make the claim that he is a descendant of David, and thereby heir to David's legacy/throne?

Posted

And then there's always the "adoption" factor.. I think that this was an important element as that was a patriarchal culture.

Posted

I don't look at the geneologies as factual or harmonizable (if that is a word). According to biblical scholars, the two geneologies were created independently to say something symbolically about Jesus. Matthew's geneology goes back to Abraham, thus indicating him being the fulfillment of the covenant. Luke's goes back to Adam, identifying Jesus as the fulfilment of what it is to be human.

 

Jesus' legitimacy flows from his incarnation of the divine. Those who encountered him and "believed" sensed that they had somehow touched God through him.

 

The big question the gospel writers seemed to face is how to deal with the experience of the divine through the person and work of Jesus, the Jew (who seems to fail as a messiah, and even worse is not even a very good Jew), in light of his religious identification, tradition, and context. Hence, different (though similar) answers to the question "Who is Jesus?"

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

terms of service