Johnny Skeptic

And how do you intend to reasonably prove that Mary or Joseph were descended from David?

JoeWallack

JW:
Reasons why "Matthew" intended a Complete Genealogy:


1) "Matthew" used "Begat" which is never used in a Greek Genealogy known to Skip Generations:

JW:
But it is The Word used "in a Greek genealogy in Matthew 1-8 that skips generations!" per your Confession. Considering though that I have Text, Lexicon, Authority & Common Sense on my side here I Am not surprised that your Apology would be reduced to one sentence directly Contradicted by the Heart of this discussion and as you have previously Confessed.

Jesus Lee, I presented BDAG:

The definition of γεννάω from BDAG:

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...78#post3094678

and

Do you know what a Lexicon is? Go through the LXX and look for "begat". I'm quite familiar with the Apologist game of continuing to ask more detailed questions until you get to one that can't be answered or is at least difficult to answer and than posture that because of this question all related discussion is irrelevant. Homily don't play that game.

JW:
I think we'll Save this Confession.

JW:
You agree that "Father of" is normally used when Generations are Skipped and "Begat" is not so the Conclusion must be that "father of" is the proper choice for Skipped Generations. So the Evidence you accept does not support your Conclusion. But that's what Apologetics is all about.


2) "Matthew" Explicitly says there were 14 Generations 3 times.

JW:
I likewise will leave it at that. Must not have been much of a response.


3) "Matthew" describes the Generations as "All" (still waiting for you to look up the Greek word).

JW:
So according to you "ALL" here means "ALL" but does not mean "ALL". That's fine. Can you repeat that Lee?


4) Brown, who wrote The Book so to speak sez "Matthew" did not intentionally skip.


5) No Early Church Father (you know, the guys who selected "Matthew" in the first place and who you believe are a direct link to you know who) claimed skipped Generations.

JW:
http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-03/anf0...#P9609_2636820 (Tertullian)

"307 With a nature issuing from such fountal sources, and an order gradually descending to the birth of Christ, what else have we here described than the very flesh of Abraham and of David conveying itself down, step after step, to the very virgin, and at last introducing Christ,"

http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-06/anf06-48.htm (Africanus)

"For if the generations are different, and trace down no genuine seed to Joseph, and if all has been stated only with the view of establishing the position of Him who was to be born-to confirm the truth, namely, that He who was to be would be king and priest, there being at the same tune no proof given, but the dignity of the words being brought down to a feeble hymn,-it is evident that no praise accrues to God from that, since it is a falsehood, but rather judgment returns on him who asserts it, because he vaunts an unreality as though it were reality."

http://ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-02/anf0...#P5237_1583017 (Clement of A)

"Flavius Josephus the Jew, who composed the history of the Jews, computing the periods, says that from Moses to David were five hundred and eighty-five years; from David to the second year of Vespasian, a thousand one hundred and seventy-nine; then from that to the tenth year of Antoninus, seventy-seven. So that from Moses to the tenth year of Antoninus there are, in all, two thousand one hundred and thirty-three years.

Of others, counting from Inachus and Moses to the death of Commodus, some say there were three thousand one hundred and forty-two years; and others, two thousand eight hundred and thirty-one years.

And in the Gospel according to Matthew, the genealogy which begins with Abraham is continued down to Mary the mother of the Lord. "For," it is said,298 "from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David to the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon till Christ are likewise other fourteen generations,"-three mystic intervals completed in six weeks.299"

JW:
Are you incapable of addressing evidence that goes against your Assertions unless someone else Forces you to?


6) The book of the generation of Jesus Christ" at the Beginning of the Genealogy Implies that this is intended to be a Complete Genealogy.

JW:
""official" doesn't imply "exhaustive," either, it does tend to imply "careful," though.". "Careful" also Implies "Complete".

JW:
Sure sounds like the author intended to give a Complete Genealogy for The Line (which is what we are talking about):

(ASV)
"Genesis 5:1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;

Genesis 5:2 male and female created he them, and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.

Genesis 5:3 And Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begat [a son] in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:

Genesis 5:4 and the days of Adam after he begat Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters.

Genesis 5:5 And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.

Genesis 5:6 And Seth lived a hundred and five years, and begat Enosh:

Genesis 5:7 and Seth lived after he begat Enosh eight hundred and seven years, and begat sons and daughters:

Genesis 5:8 and all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died.

Genesis 5:9 And Enosh lived ninety years, and begat Kenan.

Genesis 5:10 and Enosh lived after he begat Kenan eight hundred and fifteen years, and begat sons and daughters:

Genesis 5:11 and all the days of Enosh were nine hundred and five years: and he died.

Genesis 5:12 And Kenan lived seventy years, and begat Mahalalel:

Genesis 5:13 and Kenan lived after he begat Mahalalel eight hundred and forty years, and begat sons and daughters:

Genesis 5:14 and all the days of Kenan were nine hundred and ten years: and he died.

Genesis 5:15 And Mahalalel lived sixty and five years, and begat Jared:

Genesis 5:16 And Mahalalel lived after he begat Jared eight hundred and thirty years, and begat sons and daughters:

Genesis 5:17 and all the days of Mahalalel were eight hundred ninety and five years: and he died.

Genesis 5:18 And Jared lived a hundred sixty and two years, and begat Enoch:

Genesis 5:19 and Jared lived after he begat Enoch eight hundred years, and begat sons and daughters:

Genesis 5:20 And all the days of Jared were nine hundred sixty and two years: and he died.

Genesis 5:21 And Enoch lived sixty and five years, and begat Methuselah:

Genesis 5:22 and Enoch walked with God after he begat Methuselah three hundred years, and begat sons and daughters:

Genesis 5:23 and all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years:

Genesis 5:24 and Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.

Genesis 5:25 And Methuselah lived a hundred eighty and seven years, and begat Lamech:

Genesis 5:26 and Methuselah lived after he begat Lamech seven hundred eighty and two years, and begat sons and daughters.

Genesis 5:27 And all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty and nine years: and he died.

Genesis 5:28 And Lamech lived a hundred eighty and two years, and begat a son:

Genesis 5:29 and he called his name Noah, saying, This same shall comfort us in our work and in the toil of our hands, [which cometh] because of the ground which Jehovah hath cursed.

Genesis 5:30 And Lamech lived after he begat Noah five hundred ninety and five years, and begat sons and daughters:"


7) Jesus' complete Genealogy isn't listed anywhere else so why abbreviate? Wouldn't a Believer Reader prefer a Complete list?

JW:
Wouldn't a Complete list be better than an Incomplete list. Why not list the 4 Names Skipped from the Jewish Bible?


8) Many Individual Errors can be demonstrated in "Matthew's" Genealogy such as:

"Matthew" has 4 generations (Hezron, Ram, Amminadab and Nahshon) in his Genealogy for a time period that according to the Jewish Bible was well over 430 years.

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Matthew_1:3

the use of "Aram" at 1:4.

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Matthew_1:4

making it Likely that "Matthew" either had an Intentional disregard for accuracy or at least was Negligent in scholarship.

JW:
Again, I Am quite familiar with the Apologistic technique of claiming that Possible Related errors are unrelated and therefore irrelevant. Homily don't play that game. If there are other documented Related Errors or at least Problems it makes it More Likely that the potential error in question is a Real error. Lee, can you add the probability of adding 1 + 1+ 1?


9) There are many General reasons to Doubt Accuracy in "Matthew's" Genealogies -

- 1) "Matthew" primarily consists of Impossible claims so making an Inaccurate genealogy would be relatively unimportant to the Author.

- 2) Christianity "discouraged" Critical Commentary until relatively recently.

- 3) Lack of supposed X-Hand/Foot Witness Testimony for Genealogies compared to main narrative describing people who knew Jesus Christ once he was Jesus Christ. "From Moses unto Moses there Arose None unto Moses. From Jesus unto Christ, there arose none."

- 4) Lack of coordination between the Remarkable claimed circumstances of The Genealogy/Infancy and the Un-remarkable description of Jesus' origin/origins in the rest of The Gospel.

- 5) "Jesus Christ" as a name is only used by "Matthew" in the Genealogy/Infancy. Using "Jesus Christ" as a name is generally thought of as a Later development in Christianity. So its use in the Genealogy suggests that the Genealogy is from a later Christianity than the rest of the Gospel.



Joseph

"You've Been Wikied!" - JoeWallack

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

lee_merrill

Hi everyone,

I can only evaluate evidence, just as you or anyone else must do, and I conclude it is most probable that he did, but that would be another topic!

Yes, that is what I believe, it is used in a genealogy that skips generations.

And I responded to your post, your job (should you choose to accept it), would be to refute my response.

And in my response, I mentioned Hebrews 11:12, which BDAG also apparently includes in the normal meaning, and which skips generations. I'm getting a little weary of answering the same questions again and again...

No, I don't agree with that, and the words are actually the same, and only translated differently, unless you are thinking of different verses than the ones I am thinking of.

Well, I hold it means "all the generations of interest," those he considered to be candidates for his list.

And I responded to this quote, you have not yet responded to what I said. I also said the other quotes did not seem pertinent, and they still do not seem pertinent.

Why did you not quote all the church fathers said about genealogies, then? Because not all of what they said was pertinent to the point at hand. And no, "careful" does not imply "complete," if the list you set out to make was not intended to be exhaustive.

The NIV has a book called the "Complete Concordance," which is not an exhaustive one, for example, and yet I would say it is the result of careful work.

Well, why are not all the sons and daughters in each instance listed, then? "More sons and daughters" is not very complete.

Erm, because the author knew which names were important to list, and what he said addressed the purpose at hand? Which need not have been to satisfy any given person's curiosity.

Did I mention that I'm getting a bit tired of repeating myself?

Well, I did give a response, however, I do not want to open new topics unless it's necessary, and I don't see how this other question is a necessary one to resolve here.

I responded to these points.

Why are you simply repeating the questions?

Regards,
Lee

Johnny Skeptic

You did not answer my question. I said "And how do you intend to reasonably prove that Mary or Joseph were descended from David?" Since you can't reasonably establish Mary's or Joseph's genealogy back to David, then obviously you can't reasonbly establish Jesus' genealogy either.

lee_merrill

But my answer is really that this is another topic, Johnny, and so if you would like to discuss this, you may start another thread, my time is limited, and I can't even try to discuss every question every person might raise here, not that my contributions are so essential, either...

Regards,
Lee

Johnny Skeptic

It is most certainly not another topic. Even if all that we had was Mary's genealogy, you would not be able to reliably trace her genealogy back to David. In addition, even if Mary's and Joseph's genealogies could be perfectly harmoninzed, you still could not trace Jesus back to David. At best, all that you can claim is that there is not a reasonably provable contradiction, but even if there isn't a reasonably provable contradiction, you have not reasonably proven a fulfilled prophecy, and prophecy has long been your chief interest at the Theology Web and here at the Secular Web.

JoeWallack

JW:
Now let's give Lee another "DiffiCulty" to deal with in "Matthew's" Genealogy:

All ASV -

Matthew 1:5

"and Salmon begat Boaz of Rahab; and Boaz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse"

From The Pages Of "True Detective"

JW:
The only Rachab mentioned in the Tanakh was the Rachab of the Conquest who lived close to two centuries before Boaz. Trying to estimate the time lapse is an inexact exercise because the "Conquest" was probably not a historical event and the Jewish Bible generally doesn't give ages for the fathers when the sons were born here. The older you assume the Fathers were at the birth of the sons, the closer you get. Raymond Brown, probably the top Catholic Bible scholar of our time wrote: "the famous Rahab lived at the time of the conquest, nearly two centuries before Boaz' time." The International Critical Commentary is probably the top Protestant commentary of our time and wrote: "OT chronology separates Rahab and Salman by almost two- hundred years." Close to two hundred years would also be in line with the estimate of top Jewish Bible scholars. Interestingly, the Talmud says that Rachab married Joshua (ahem).

Every significant Church Father who commented on Matthew 1:5 (including Jerome and Luther) assumed that Matthew was referring to the Rachab of the Conquest. In Raymond Brown's classic, "The Birth Of The Messiah", he writes on Page 60, "it is virtually certain that Matthew means the Rahab of the conquest."

The women of "Matthew's" genealogy all seem to have notorius backgrounds. Was this the author's way of dealing with Mary's reputation before the Catholics had their way with her?

Keep in mind that as we demonstrate Errors or even just "difficulties" in "Matthew's" supposed genealogy statistically it becomes somewhat more likely that an individual potential error is an actual error.

For those who want to hang with this Homily Boy on gnarly Generation waves, I recommend purchasing "The Birth Of The Messiah" which I'll give the link to in the Neutral section.

Rather than simply rely on Appeal to Authority for the time lapse let's look at Judges for an estimate of the time period after the Conquest of Jericho and before Samuel was born (ASV):

Judges 3:

8 "Therefore the anger of Jehovah was kindled against Israel, and he sold them into the hand of Cushan-rishathaim king of Mesopotamia: and the children of Israel served Cushan-rishathaim eight years.
9 And when the children of Israel cried unto Jehovah, Jehovah raised up a saviour to the children of Israel, who saved them, even Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother.
10 And the Spirit of Jehovah came upon him, and he judged Israel; and he went out to war, and Jehovah delivered Cushan-rishathaim king of Mesopotamia into his hand: and his hand prevailed against Cushan-rishathaim.
11 And the land had rest forty years. And Othniel the son of Kenaz died.
12 And the children of Israel again did that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah: and Jehovah strengthened Eglon the king of Moab against Israel, because they had done that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah.
13 And he gathered unto him the children of Ammon and Amalek; and he went and smote Israel, and they possessed the city of palm-trees.
14 And the children of Israel served Eglon the king of Moab eighteen years.

Judges 5:

31 So let all thine enemies perish, O Jehovah: But let them that love him be as the sun when he goeth forth in his might. And the land had rest forty years.

Judges 6:

1 And the children of Israel did that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah: and Jehovah delivered them into the hand of Midian seven years.

Judges 8:

28 So Midian was subdued before the children of Israel, and they lifted up their heads no more. And the land had rest forty years in the days of Gideon.

Judges 10:

1 And after Abimelech there arose to save Israel Tola the son of Puah, the son of Dodo, a man of Issachar; and he dwelt in Shamir in the hill-country of Ephraim.
2 And he judged Israel twenty and three years, and died, and was buried in Shamir.
3 And after him arose Jair, the Gileadite; and he judged Israel twenty and two years.

Judges 12:

7 And Jephthah judged Israel six years. Then died Jephthah the Gileadite, and was buried in one of the cities of Gilead.
8 And after him Ibzan of Beth-lehem judged Israel.
9 And he had thirty sons; and thirty daughters he sent abroad, and thirty daughters he brought in from abroad for his sons. And he judged Israel seven years.
10 And Ibzan died, and was buried at Beth-lehem.
11 And after him Elon the Zebulunite judged Israel; and he judged Israel ten years.
12 And Elon the Zebulunite died, and was buried in Aijalon in the land of Zebulun.
13 And after him Abdon the son of Hillel the Pirathonite judged Israel.
14 And he had forty sons and thirty sons' sons, that rode on threescore and ten ass colts: and he judged Israel eight years.

Judges 13:

1 And the children of Israel again did that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah; and Jehovah delivered them into the hand of the Philistines forty years.

Judges 15:

16 And Samson said, With the jawbone of an ass, heaps upon heaps, With the jawbone of an ass have I smitten a thousand men.
17 And it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking, that he cast away the jawbone out of his hand; and that place was called Ramath-lehi.
18 And he was sore athirst, and called on Jehovah, and said, Thou hast given this great deliverance by the hand of thy servant; and now shall I die for thirst, and fall into the hand of the uncircumcised.
19 But God clave the hollow place that is in Lehi, and there came water thereout; and when he had drunk, his spirit came again, and he revived: wherefore the name thereof was called En-hakkore, which is in Lehi, unto this day.
20 And he judged Israel in the days of the Philistines twenty years."


JW:
I left out other verses that imply an even longer time period. Adding up the years above I get 289 years.

Now let's show the relevant genealogy:

1 Chronicles (ASV)

10 And Ram begat Amminadab, and Amminadab begat Nahshon, prince of the children of Judah;

11 and Nahshon begat Salma, and Salma begat Boaz,

12 and Boaz begat Obed, and Obed begat Jesse;

13 and Jesse begat his first-born Eliab, and Abinadab the second, and Shimea the third,

14 Nethanel the fourth, Raddai the fifth,

15 Ozem the sixth, David the seventh;

JW:

By Generation:

Nashon, Salma, Boaz, Obed, Jesse, David.

According to Narrative Nashon was contemporary to Joshua:

Numbers 10: (ASV)

14: "And in the first place the standard of the camp of the children of Judah set forward according to their hosts: and over his host was Nahshon the son of Amminadab."

Thus Nashon was also either contemporary to Rachab of Jericho or probably at most, one generation from being contemporary.

Samuel of course was contemporary to David:

1 Samuel 16: (ASV)

13: "So Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the presence of his brothers, and from that day on the Spirit of the LORD came upon David in power."

Now according to "Matthew", Rahab was Boaz' mother. Samuel anointed David and presumably was approximately of the same generation as Jesse and therefore was born approximately the generation of Obed. So in a minimum of 289 years for "Matthew's" genealogy to work, Rahab married Salma, had Boaz, Boaz married Ruth and had Obed, and Obed lived a generation.

Let's try to work out the Numbers to maximize the possible time period:

1) Rahab marries Salma when she was twenty.

2) Rahab has Boaz when she was forty. 20 year lapse.

3) Boaz marries Ruth when he was sixty and she was twenty. 80 year lapse.

4) Ruth has Obed when she was forty. 100 year lapse.

5) Obed is forty. 140 year lapse.

This leaves us a minimum of 149 years short of the supposed time period of 289 years based on Judges which not surprisingly is close to what our experts estimated above.

Now let's look at the five women that "Matthew" mentions in the genealogy: (ASV)

"and Judah begat Perez and Zerah of Tamar; and Perez begat Hezron; and Hezron begat Ram

"and Salmon begat Boaz of Rahab; and Boaz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse"

"and Jesse begat David the king. And David begat Solomon of her [that had been the wife] of Uriah"

"and Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ."

1) Tamar

2) Rahab

3) Ruth

4) Bathsheba

5) Mary

What did these five women have in common? They were all drunk, they didn't know what they were doing. Besides that they all made contributions to the genealogy via strange/bizarre/macabre circumstances. From the pages of "True Detective":

1) Tamar's story - "I had sex with my father-in-law by pretending to be a prostitute in exchange for inheritance."

Genesis 38 (ASV)

13 "And it was told Tamar, saying, Behold, thy father-in-law goeth up to Timnah to shear his sheep. 14 And she put off from her the garments of her widowhood, and covered herself with her veil, and wrapped herself, and sat in the gate of Enaim, which is by the way to Timnah; for she saw that Shelah was grown up, and she was not given unto him to wife. 15 When Judah saw her, he thought her to be a harlot; for she had covered her face. 16 And he turned unto her by the way, and said, Come, I pray thee, let me come in unto thee: for he knew not that she was his daughter-in-law. And she said, What wilt thou give me, that thou mayest come in unto me? 17 And he said, I will send thee a kid of the goats from the flock. And she said, Wilt thou give me a pledge, till thou send it? 18 And he said, What pledge shall I give thee? And she said, Thy signet and thy cord, and thy staff that is in thy hand. And he gave them to her, and came in unto her, and she conceived by him. 19 And she arose, and went away, and put off her veil from her, and put on the garments of her widowhood. 20 And Judah sent the kid of the goats by the hand of his friend the Adullamite, to receive the pledge from the woman's hand: but he found her not. 21 Then he asked the men of her place, saying, Where is the prostitute, that was at Enaim by the wayside? And they said, There hath been no prostitute here. 22 And he returned to Judah, and said, I have not found her; and also the men of the place said, There hath been no prostitute here. 23 And Judah said, Let her take it to her, lest we be put to shame: behold, I sent this kid, and thou hast not found her. 24 And it came to pass about three months after, that it was told Judah, saying, Tamar thy daughter-in-law hath played the harlot; and moreover, behold, she is with child by whoredom. And Judah said, Bring her forth, and let her be burnt. 25 When she was brought forth, she sent to her father-in-law, saying, By the man, whose these are, am I with child: and she said, Discern, I pray thee, whose are these, the signet, and the cords, and the staff. 26 And Judah acknowledged them, and said, She is more righteous than I; forasmuch as I gave her not to Shelah my son. And he knew her again no more. 27 And it came to pass in the time of her travail, that, behold, twins were in her womb. 28 And it came to pass, when she travailed, that one put out a hand: and the midwife took and bound upon his hand a scarlet thread, saying, This came out first. 29 And it came to pass, as he drew back his hand, that, behold, his brother came out: and she said, Wherefore hast thou made a breach for thyself? Therefore his name was called Perez."


2) Rahab's story - "I pretended that I was just doing my job as a prostitute so that furreigners could kill everyone I know except for my family."

Joshua 2: (ASV)

1 "And Joshua the son of Nun sent out of Shittim two men as spies secretly, saying, Go, view the land, and Jericho. And they went and came into the house of a harlot whose name was Rahab, and lay there. 2 And it was told the king of Jericho, saying, Behold, there came men in hither to-night of the children of Israel to search out the land. 3 And the king of Jericho sent unto Rahab, saying, Bring forth the men that are come to thee, that are entered into thy house; for they are come to search out all the land. 4 And the woman took the two men, and hid them; and she said, Yea, the men came unto me, but I knew not whence they were"


3) Ruth's story - "Just because I exchanged sex for food doesn't make me a prostitute."

Ruth 3: (ASV)

7 "When Boaz had finished eating and drinking and was in good spirits, he went over to lie down at the far end of the grain pile. Ruth approached quietly, uncovered his feet and lay down. 8 In the middle of the night something startled the man, and he turned and discovered a woman lying at his feet. 9 "Who are you?" he asked. "I am your servant Ruth," she said. "Spread the corner of your garment over me, since you are a kinsman-redeemer." 10 "The LORD bless you, my daughter," he replied. "This kindness is greater than that which you showed earlier: You have not run after the younger men, whether rich or poor. 11 And now, my daughter, don't be afraid. I will do for you all you ask. All my fellow townsmen know that you are a woman of noble character. 12 Although it is true that I am near of kin, there is a kinsman-redeemer nearer than I. 13 Stay here for the night, and in the morning if he wants to redeem, good; let him redeem. But if he is not willing, as surely as the LORD lives I will do it. Lie here until morning." 14 So she lay at his feet until morning, but got up before anyone could be recognized; and he said, "Don't let it be known that a woman came to the threshing floor."


4) Bathsheba's story - "The King and role model for the Messiah murdered my husband and made me his sex slave and I liked it. Does that make me a prostitute?"

2 Samuel 11: (ASV)

14 "In the morning David wrote a letter to Joab and sent it with Uriah. 15 In it he wrote, "Put Uriah in the front line where the fighting is fiercest. Then withdraw from him so he will be struck down and die." 16 So while Joab had the city under siege, he put Uriah at a place where he knew the strongest defenders were. 17 When the men of the city came out and fought against Joab, some of the men in David's army fell; moreover, Uriah the Hittite died. 18 Joab sent David a full account of the battle. 19 He instructed the messenger: "When you have finished giving the king this account of the battle, 20 the king's anger may flare up, and he may ask you, 'Why did you get so close to the city to fight? Didn't you know they would shoot arrows from the wall? 21 Who killed Abimelech son of Jerub-Besheth [b] ? Didn't a woman throw an upper millstone on him from the wall, so that he died in Thebez? Why did you get so close to the wall?' If he asks you this, then say to him, 'Also, your servant Uriah the Hittite is dead.' " 22 The messenger set out, and when he arrived he told David everything Joab had sent him to say. 23 The messenger said to David, "The men overpowered us and came out against us in the open, but we drove them back to the entrance to the city gate. 24 Then the archers shot arrows at your servants from the wall, and some of the king's men died. Moreover, your servant Uriah the Hittite is dead." 25 David told the messenger, "Say this to Joab: 'Don't let this upset you; the sword devours one as well as another. Press the attack against the city and destroy it.' Say this to encourage Joab." 26 When Uriah's wife heard that her husband was dead, she mourned for him. 27 After the time of mourning was over, David had her brought to his house, and she became his wife and bore him a son. But the thing David had done displeased the LORD."


JW:
(In Church Lady voice). Isn't that special. Think it couldn't get any more strange/bizarre/macabreer? Wrong!

5) Mary's story - "I had relations with a deity I was not married to."

So it seems likely that "Matthew" did intend to have the Rachab of the Conquest in his genealogy because all five women contributed under mysterious circumstances.

Now let's add the commentary of the Church Fathers:

Jerome (the "Judaizer"):

Jerome's Commentary on "Matthew" doesn't seem to be available online. Too Ambrose and too Latin I guess (A good project for Mr. Pearse?). On to a Secondary Source (SC Carlson, look out!):

Brown's "The Birth Of The Messiah", Page 71:

"The first proposal, already espoused by Jerome (In Matt. 9; PL 26:22), is that the four OT women were regarded as sinners,"

Interesting here that Jerome who, unlike most Fathers, actually had contact with "The Jews", gives an explanation for the significance of the women that's in line with Jewish explanations.


JOHN CHRYSOSTOM

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/200101.htm

"And along with these things, this is also worth inquiry, wherefore it can be, that, when tracing the genealogy through the men, he hath mentioned women also; and why since he determined upon doing this, he yet did not mention them all, but passing over the more eminent, such as Sarah, Rebecca, and as many as are like them, he hath brought forward only them that are famed for some bad thing; as, for instance, if any was a harlot, or an adulteress, or a mother by an unlawful marriage, if any was a stranger or barbarian. For he hath made mention of the wife of Uriah, and of Thamar, and of Rahab, and of Ruth, of whom one was of a strange race, another an harlot, another was defiled by her near kinsman, and with him not in the form of marriage, but by a stolen intercourse, when she had put on herself the mask of an harlot; and touching the wife of Uriah no one is ignorant, by reason of the notoriety of the crime. And yet the evangelist hath passed by all the rest, and inserted in the genealogy these alone. Whereas, if women were to be mentioned, all ought to be so; if not all but some, then those famed in the way of virtue, not for evil deeds."


Epraim

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3703.htm

"HYMN VII.

The Son of the Maker is like unto His Father as Maker! He made Himself a pure body, He clothed Himself with it, and came forth and clothed our weakness with glory, which in His mercy He brought from the Father.

From Melchizedek, the High Priest, a hyssop came to Thee, a throne and crown from the house of David, a race and family from Abraham.

Be thou unto me a Haven, for Thine own sake, O great Sea. Lo! the Psalms of David Thy Father, and the words also of the Prophets, came forth unto me, as it were ships.

David Thy father, in the hundred and tenth Psalm, twined together two numbers as it were crowns to Thee, and came[to Thee], O Conqueror! With these shalt Thou be crowned, and unto the throne shalt Thou ascend and sit.

A great crown is the number that is twined in the hundred, wherein is crowned Thy Godhead! A little crown is that of the number ten, which crowns the Head of Thy Manhood, O Victorious One!

For Thy sake women sought after men. Tamar desired him that was widowed, and Ruth loved a man that was old, yea, that Rahab, that led men captive, was captivated by Thee.

Tamar went forth, and in the darkness(5) stole the Light, and in uncleanness stole the Holy One, and by uncovering her nakedness she went in and stole Thee, O glorious One, that bringest the pure out of the impure.

Satan saw her and trembled, and hasted to trouble her. He brought the judgment to her mind, and she feared not; stoning and the sword, and she trembled not. He that teacheth adultery hindered adultery, because he was a hinderer of Thee.

For holy was the adultery of Tamar, for Thy sake. Thee it was she thirsted after, O pure Fountain. Judah defrauded her of drinking Thee. The thirsty womb stole a dew-draught of Thee from the spring thereof.

She was a widow for Thy sake. Thee did she long for, she hasted and was also an harlot for Thy sake. Thee did she vehemently desire, and was sanctified in that it was Thee she loved.

May Tamar rejoice that her Lord hath come and hath made her name known for the son of her adultery! Surely the name she gave him(6) was calling unto Thee to come to her.

For Thee honorable women shamed themselves, Thou that givest chastity to all! Thee she stole away in the midst of the ways, who pavest the way into the kingdom! Because it was life that she stole, the sword was not able to put her to death.

Ruth lay down by a man in the threshingfloor for Thy sake; her love made her bold for Thy sake, O Thou that teachest all penitents boldness. Her ears refused[to listen to] any voices for the sake of Thy voice.

The live coal that glowed went up into the bed, of Boaz, lay down there, saw the High Priest, in whose loins was hidden a fire for his incense!(7) She hasted and was a heifer to Boaz, that should bring forth Thee, the fatted Calf.

She went gleaning for her love of Thee; she gathered straw. Thou didst quickly pay her the reward of her lowliness; and instead of ears of corn, the Root of Kings, and instead of straws, the Sheaf of Life, didst Thou make to spring from her."


JW:
Here we see the later Christian interpretation of the women with emphasis moved from their sinful nature to supposed purpose of accomplishing Jesus.

"Matthew" may have also had incentive to use Rahab in the supposed geneaology of Jesus because according to the Talmud Rahab was the mother of a line of Jewish Prophets:

Secondary source (http://judaism.about.com/gi/dynamic/...as%2Fpages.htm)

"Rachav Her conversion, and marriage to Yehoshua: Megillah 14b Her descendants, who were Kohanim: Megillah 14b Her descendants, who were Prophets: Megillah 14b Rachav was one of the 4 most beautiful women in the world: Megillah 15a Chuldah the Prophetess, Yirmiyah, Baruch and Neryah, Sharya, Chilkiyah, and Chanamel as descendants of hers: Megillah 14b How the mention of Rachav's name was enough to gain the attention of men who knew of her: Megillah 15a"


JW:
Regarding the simple potential defense that "Matthew" was not referring to the Rachab of Jericho let's look at the related spellings of "Rachab":

Joshua 2:1

http://www.zhubert.com/bible?book=Jo...pter=2&verse=1

"καὶ ἀπ�*στειλεν Ἰησοῦς υἱὸς Î?αυη á¼?κ Σαττιν δÏ?ο νεανίσκους κατασκοπεῦσαι λ�*γων ἀνάβητε καὶ ἴδετε τὴν γῆν καὶ τὴν ΙεÏ?ιχω καὶ ποÏ?ευθ�*ντες εἰσήλθοσαν οἱ δÏ?ο νεανίσκοι εἰς ΙεÏ?ιχω καὶ εἰσήλθοσαν εἰς οἰκίαν γυναικὸς πόÏ?νης á¾— ὄνομα Ρααβ καὶ κατ�*λυσαν á¼?κεῖ"

"Ρααβ", 4th word from the end, is "Raab".

Matthew 1:5

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...5;&version=69;

"σαλμων δε εγεννησεν τον βοοζ εκ της Ï?αχαβ βοοζ δε εγεννησεν τον ωβηδ εκ της Ï?ουθ ωβηδ δε εγεννησεν τον ιεσσαι"

"Ï?αχαβ", 8th word, is "Rachab".

So apparently "Matthew" used a different spelling from the LXX. "Matthew's" use of a different name (or at least a different spelling) for Rachab from what the LXX had is support that "Matthew" intended a different person as "Matthew" tends to agree with the LXX. However, here "Ρααβ", "Raab", would seem to be a Greek spelling error for "Rachab", and the Rachab of the Conquest presumably would have been much better known to "Matthew" than say "Ram", so "Matthew" may very well have intended the same person as the "Raab" of the LXX but corrected the spelling himself.


So in Summary, the Evidence that "Matthew's" apparent claim that Rachab of the Conquest was the mother of Boaz at 1:5 is an Error, ranked by weight of evidence is:

1) An analysis of the time lapse between Jericho and Boaz through examination of the text of "Judges" indicates it would have been impossible for Rachab of the Conquest to be the mother of Boaz assuming normal life spans and birth ages.

2) The consensus of modern Bible scholarship is that the time gap between the Conquest and the time of Boaz would make it impossible.

3) There is no other known "Rachab" from the Jewish Bible.

4) The four women mentioned in "Matthew's" geneaology not named "Rachab" all gave birth under unusual circumstances making it likely that "Matthew" intended to include Rachab of the Conquest for the same reason.

5) According to the Talmud there was a legend that Rachab gave birth to a line of Prophets which "Matthew" may have been familiar with.

6) Every significant Church Father who commented assumed it was Rachab of The Conquest.


The evidence that "Matthew's" apparent claim that Rachab of the Conquest was the mother of Boaz 1:5 is not an Error, ranked by weight of evidence is:

1) "Matthew" may simply have been referring to a different Rachab.

2) "Matthew's" spelling of "Rachab" is apparently different than his presumed usual source for names, the LXX, which has "Raab".


In my opinion, the weight of the Evidence above is that "Matthew" did Intend to identify Rachab of the Conquest here and the apparent Impossible time gap demonstrated above would make this use an Error.

Lee, do you Believe there are Errors in the KJV?



Joseph

"Looks are vastly under-rated" - Kuschke

http://www.errancywiki.com/index.php/Main_Page

diana

Happy to be of help.

Should anyone find flaws in my charts, etc, I'd appreciate any necessary corrections.

d

lee_merrill

Well, let's not start lots of new topics here! All this is actually another topic, and I want to stick to the point at hand.

But yes, I do believe the prophecy was fulfilled, and Jesus (we may reasonably conclude) was descended from David, I do believe another Rahab is meant, and I do believe there are errors in the KJV. I even believe I have some errors in the set of all my beliefs!

Regards,
Lee

Gullwind

Lee Merrill wrote:

Only the names of the people in direct line of descent are relevant. If Jesus was supposed to be descended from Enoch, then all the other sons and daughters that Jared begat are not in direct line of descent, and therefore would not need to be included. If the writer tried to include every single descendant of every single line of descent, the bible would be hundreds of times larger than it is.

So, a complete line of descent of Jesus would in no way need to include all the "other sons and daughters."