Google Ads

Google Ads

Bible Wheel Book

Google Ads

+ Reply to Thread
Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456789 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 86

Thread: Benjamin's Cup

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    2,465
    Quote Originally Posted by Charisma View Post
    Hi dux,

    No argument from me on the significance of Mary's descent from David. What interests me most is that Joseph adopted Jesus, although He had a real Father in heaven, and that legally, adoption was just as if Joseph had been his real father. Adoption did not diminish His claim.

    Now I see that He was doubly the son of David, and being the Word made Flesh, was vastly more than triply qualified, being 'a man after God's own heart'.

    Numbers 27:1 Then came the daughters of Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of Joseph: and these [are] the names of his daughters; Mahlah, Noah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Tirzah. 2 And they stood before Moses, and before Eleazar the priest, and before the princes and all the congregation, [by] the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying, 3 Our father died in the wilderness, and he was not in the company of them that gathered themselves together against the LORD in the company of Korah; but died in his own sin, and had no sons. 4 Why should the name of our father be done away from among his family, because he hath no son? Give unto us [therefore] a possession among the brethren of our father. {done...: Heb. diminished} 5 And Moses brought their cause before the LORD. 6 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 7 The daughters of Zelophehad speak right: thou shalt surely give them a possession of an inheritance among their father's brethren; and thou shalt cause the inheritance of their father to pass unto them. 8 And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a man die, and have no son, then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter.
    Hello Charisma and all

    Thanks Charisma for bringing this story to my attention. I expect Rose will reading this; if not, you might like to use this in one of Rose's threads where she is knocking the Bible for being biassed towards men and not promoting women's rights. Your quoted story is a great example of Women's Rights exercised. Rose accuses God for letting Moses write bill of divorcements for men and not including women. Here we have a beautiful exampleof where women take the initiative and make a request and through Moses, God grants it. This really knocks against Rose's claim that God is biassed against women.

    On the subject of the farthership of Jesus. From the perspective of the Jews at that time, Jesus would have been regarded as the son of Joseph. Jesus was a plain boy growing up in a family and to all appearances, Joseph would have been regarded as his natural father and could be seen to be instructing and providing for his son. Unless told differently, why would anyone of that day think differently? It was not till Jesus was aged 30 he bagan his ministry. Up to that time, he was regarded as the Carpenter's Son.
    Joseph accepted Mary as his wife, knowing that she had not had sexual relations with another man. Joseph would have accepted responsibility for bringing up Mary's son (the Son of God). Jesus had to be brought up naturally, because naturally, he was a infant made of flesh and blood and had the same needs as any other baby/child.

    It must have come as a shock when Jesus asked; "who is my mother?" Just as Mary was accepted as his mother and it was accepted that Joseph was the natural father, when Jesus asks this question, Jesus is paving the way for him to reveal himself as the Son of God. I doubt that Mary would have gone about boasting her son was the Son of God. Had Mary done this, she would have been open to ridicule and blasphemy and Joseph would also have suffered. It was up to Jesus to reveal that he was the Son of God/ Son of Man. Now the people could ridicule him and think he was delusional; not his parents. I know by this time, Jesus had revealed himself as being different, and that wwould have been obvious by the miracles he did.

    Jesus is taking away the barriers of our relationship with one another. We can all be called brethren in Christ. Even though the word brethren is masculine (sorry Rose) it is obvious that women are included in this term. Mary was a woman, she had been blessed by God, and Jesus was not biassed against women. In Christ, we are all the same. We can all be the Children of God or the Sons of God, whatever our sex. On the cross, Jesus had compassion for his mother, he had not forgotten her or denied her as a result of asking this question; who is my mother? The people were being taught an important lesson and we get the lesson as well. I expect this was another message Mary would ponder in her heart.

    David
    Last edited by David M; 04-05-2012 at 06:00 AM.

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4,240
    Quote Originally Posted by David M View Post
    Originally Posted by Charisma

    Hi dux,

    No argument from me on the significance of Mary's descent from David. What interests me most is that Joseph adopted Jesus, although He had a real Father in heaven, and that legally, adoption was just as if Joseph had been his real father. Adoption did not diminish His claim.

    Now I see that He was doubly the son of David, and being the Word made Flesh, was vastly more than triply qualified, being 'a man after God's own heart'.

    Numbers 27:1 Then came the daughters of Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of Joseph: and these [are] the names of his daughters; Mahlah, Noah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Tirzah. 2 And they stood before Moses, and before Eleazar the priest, and before the princes and all the congregation, [by] the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying, 3 Our father died in the wilderness, and he was not in the company of them that gathered themselves together against the LORD in the company of Korah; but died in his own sin, and had no sons. 4 Why should the name of our father be done away from among his family, because he hath no son? Give unto us [therefore] a possession among the brethren of our father. {done...: Heb. diminished} 5 And Moses brought their cause before the LORD. 6 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 7 The daughters of Zelophehad speak right: thou shalt surely give them a possession of an inheritance among their father's brethren; and thou shalt cause the inheritance of their father to pass unto them. 8 And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a man die, and have no son, then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter.

    Hello Charisma and all

    Thanks Charisma for bringing this story to my attention. I expect Rose will reading this; if not, you might like to use this in one of Rose's threads where she is knocking the Bible for being biased towards men and not promoting women's rights. Your quoted story is a great example of Women's Rights exercised. Rose accuses God for letting Moses write bill of divorcements for men and not including women. Here we have a beautiful example of where women take the initiative and make a request and through Moses, God grants it. This really knocks against Rose's claim that God is biased against women.
    Hello David,

    How sad it is that you feel the need to "knock" me for my true statements of male-bias in the Bible and the denial of women's rights. The Bible does indeed declare that Yahweh allowed men to divorce their wives, and have a many wives as they chose, a right that was not given to women! I fail to see how my claim of male-bias in the Bible is diminished at all because of Neh. 27:1? In fact is strengthens my position, obviously before the daughters of Zelophehad came before Moses and demanded inheritance rights they had none! Only with their pleading before Moses did Yahweh decided to give them "limited" inheritance rights...that is to say "only" if there were no sons did the daughters get an inheritance.

    It appears David that you have shown yourself to be foolish in trying to disrespect me in my endeavor to accurately show the male-bias of the Bible.

    All the best,
    Rose
    Never trust anything you are afraid to question ~

    To know oneself is to know the universe...


    Live Fully...Love Extravagantly...For the sake of Goodness

    Be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves. Matt.10:16

    Come let us reason together...Isa.1:18
    ********************************
    My new Blog site: God and Butterfly

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Not from this world...from the other side
    Posts
    3,227
    Quote Originally Posted by Rose View Post
    Hello David,

    How sad it is that you feel the need to "knock" me for my true statements of male-bias in the Bible and the denial of women's rights. The Bible does indeed declare that Yahweh allowed men to divorce their wives, and have a many wives as they chose, a right that was not given to women! I fail to see how my claim of male-bias in the Bible is diminished at all because of Neh. 27:1? In fact is strengthens my position, obviously before the daughters of Zelophehad came before Moses and demanded inheritance rights they had none! Only with their pleading before Moses did Yahweh decided to give them "limited" inheritance rights...that is to say "only" if there were no sons did the daughters get an inheritance.

    It appears David that you have shown yourself to be foolish in trying to disrespect me in my endeavor to accurately show the male-bias of the Bible.

    All the best,
    Rose
    Wow, so you want women to be able to divorce their husbands and have as many husbands as they chose! That's equality! And the men end up paying for their maintenance, that is a scam!

    I wonder how polyandrous women can cope with so many husbands in bed unlike polygamous men! Wonder who was the father of the child?

    The reason why men in olden days were allowed multiple wives was because of the need to propagate. Infant mortality were high in olden days and men died young due to wars. If men in olden days were to have single wife, human would probably been extinct due to high male death and infant mortality. Wise God! and no wonder He instructed human to multiply and filled the earth in Genesis. Polygamy did not happened in Israel or proposed by the God of Israel, it was in existence in every human culture since time immemorial. Have you ever wonder why God made many men still capable of "performing" even in their eighties? And Funny, why did most women "closed shop" in thier fifties? Funny still, why didn't God provided two penises for men or two vaginas for women if multiply and fill the earth was God's goal for mankind? Remember, many organs come in twos...2 lungs, 2 nostrils, 2 eyes, 2 ears, 2 hands, 2 legs etc.

    God is wise!
    Last edited by CWH; 04-06-2012 at 02:30 AM.
    Ask and You shall receive,
    Seek and You shall find,
    Knock and the door will be open unto You.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    760

    Benjamin's Cup

    Hi David,

    No problem! Here's another one for you, demonstrating both the order and the authority God gives to men (males) who submit themselves to Him.

    Job 42:12 So the LORD blessed the latter end of Job more than his beginning: for he had fourteen thousand sheep, and six thousand camels, and a thousand yoke of oxen, and a thousand she asses. 13 He had also seven sons and three daughters. 14 And he called the name of the first, Jemima; and the name of the second, Kezia; and the name of the third, Kerenhappuch. 15 And in all the land were no women found [so] fair as the daughters of Job: and their father gave them inheritance among their brethren.






    Hi Rose,

    In another thread you said:
    I was a Christian for nearly 30 years and can honestly say that neither before, during, or after my Christian experience did I ever feel dead in trespasses and sins
    and this, as many of your statements, show that you have not yet understood God, His truthfulness, nor the unchangeable, eternally enduring character, nature and dynamic of His word.

    The fact is, that apart from a fresh relationship with God through faith in the life and death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, you are 'dead in trespasses and sins', and the fact that you don't 'feel' your deadness therein, only testifies against your blinkered view.


    So, are you going to do about that?



    Are you going to make any attempt to understand Him, or, are you going to carry on bandying about arguments which only demonstrate further your blindness to truth, and, to His lovingkindnesses and goodness to mankind in general, including - if not especially - to women?



    Doesn't it move you a mu_millimeter that the Church is to be His bride?







    If you took as much time to study the honour God has given women in scripture, as you do to misrepresenting Him to the world, there is a remote possibility that you'd see how very far from the intentions of His heart for women, your received (through feminism) view of Him, falls.




    Further, your general representation of males is unduly and unfairly inaccurate, (despite that they are also dead in trespasses and sins until entering a relationship with Jesus Christ by faith), such that a closer look at the shortcomings of women (in biblical terms) would be a welcome respite.











    16 That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man; 17 That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love, 18 May be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; 19 And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.

    Ephesians 3

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    760

    Benjamin's Cup

    Hi dux,

    I missed your reference to Isaiah 54:5

    For thy Maker [is] thine husband; the LORD of hosts [is] his name;
    and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel;
    The God of the whole earth shall he be called.




    And I'm not quite sure what you're implying? (Thinking about it?)


    In every way Mary took the female/feminine part as she lived out her womanhood through the extraordinary circumstance of having been called upon to bear Jesus.

    Being married to the official heir to the throne of David would have made her queen only if he had become king.

    What interests me is the parallel of Jesus being adopted into a human family - whose REAL Father was God - to be accounted as the Messiah according to prophesy; while we have to be adopted into God's family for fulfilment of all prophecies of our becoming accounted worthy of the forthcoming kingdom, THE King (of kings) of which, is the now risen Messiah. Both He and we have had both earthly and God as our fathers, the latter being of unending significance to us; the former having been and being, of unending significance to Him!


    Psalm 45

    My heart is inditing a good matter:
    I speak of the things which I have made touching the king:
    My tongue [is] the pen of a ready writer.

    Thou art fairer than the children of men:
    Grace is poured into thy lips:
    Therefore God hath blessed thee for ever.

    Gird thy sword upon [thy] thigh, O [most] mighty, with thy glory and thy majesty.

    And in thy majesty ride prosperously because of truth and meekness [and] righteousness;
    And thy right hand shall teach thee terrible things.

    Thine arrows [are] sharp in the heart of the king's enemies;
    The people fall under thee.

    Thy throne, O God, [is] for ever and ever:
    The sceptre of thy kingdom [is] a right sceptre.

    Thou lovest righteousness, and hatest wickedness:
    Therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
    All thy garments [smell] of myrrh, and aloes, [and] cassia, out of the ivory palaces, whereby they have made thee glad.

    Kings' daughters [were] among thy honourable women:
    Upon thy right hand did stand the queen in gold of Ophir.

    Hearken, O daughter, and consider, and incline thine ear;
    Forget also thine own people, and thy father's house;
    So shall the king greatly desire thy beauty:

    For he [is] thy Lord;
    And worship thou him.

    And the daughter of Tyre [shall be there] with a gift;
    The rich among the people shall intreat thy favour.

    The king's daughter [is] all glorious within:
    Her clothing [is] of wrought gold.
    She shall be brought unto the king in raiment of needlework:
    The virgins her companions that follow her shall be brought unto thee.
    With gladness and rejoicing shall they be brought:
    They shall enter into the king's palace.

    Instead of thy fathers shall be thy children, whom thou mayest make princes in all the earth.

    I will make thy name to be remembered in all generations:
    Therefore shall the people praise thee for ever and ever.
    16 That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man; 17 That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love, 18 May be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; 19 And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.

    Ephesians 3

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Daytona
    Posts
    1,757
    Hi Charisma,

    God is a HUSBAND, Isa54:5, is the plainest text IMO, but also "he's married" (to the "sisters" Israel and Judah). He's a "fountain of Living Water", Jer2; a Potter, Rock, etc. Many metaphors, as with Jesus, His SON. But since Jesus always referred to Him as Father, it seems to me we haven't noticed how 'husband' applies.

    My understanding is that Mary's earthly father was named Joseph, and he's the only Joseph found in the generations leading to Jesus. Her earthly husband and earthly father both named Joseph! (means: The Lord will add a son).

    I know, I know -- but the Greek 'aner' means a male... not nec. a husband. And even diff. in Aramaic, I'm told.

    The subjects of "The Name" and Toledoth (Generations) are such primary Bible themes, that the father-to-son progression was only interruped when it came to that Joseph who didn't have a son! So Matthew is the pedigree of Jesus (thru Mary) and Luke3 is pedigree of Mary's husband IAW Numb36.

    The "Queen" biz doesn't compute for me: maybe missed something. Mary's the Mother of the King of Kings!
    Dux allows: "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out the matter". Pr25:2

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    800
    Quote Originally Posted by duxrow View Post
    Hi Charisma,

    God is a HUSBAND, Isa54:5, is the plainest text IMO, but also "he's married" (to the "sisters" Israel and Judah). He's a "fountain of Living Water", Jer2; a Potter, Rock, etc. Many metaphors, as with Jesus, His SON. But since Jesus always referred to Him as Father, it seems to me we haven't noticed how 'husband' applies.

    My understanding is that Mary's earthly father was named Joseph, and he's the only Joseph found in the generations leading to Jesus. Her earthly husband and earthly father both named Joseph! (means: The Lord will add a son).

    I know, I know -- but the Greek 'aner' means a male... not nec. a husband. And even diff. in Aramaic, I'm told.

    The subjects of "The Name" and Toledoth (Generations) are such primary Bible themes, that the father-to-son progression was only interruped when it came to that Joseph who didn't have a son! So Matthew is the pedigree of Jesus (thru Mary) and Luke3 is pedigree of Mary's husband IAW Numb36.The "Queen" biz doesn't compute for me: maybe missed something. Mary's the Mother of the King of Kings!
    Hi all,

    Lu 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,
    Lu 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.

    Mt 1:2 Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;
    Mt 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
    Mt 1:17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.
    Mt 1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

    The way I look at it Luke's geneology shows the ancestral line of the son of man.
    It goes backwards in time to Adam.

    Matthew's geneology is different. It shows our Spiritual Progression as sons and fellow heirs with Christ.
    It goes forward in time and begins with Abraham. Our first steps on a journey in which we do not know where we are going (as was the case of Abraham when leaving Ur of the Chaldees) but beginning to follow the promises that are our guide to realizing the fullness of Christ in us the hope of glory.

    Ur of the Chaldees means "Light of the Magicians, which basically describes all the people we are surrounded by that tie us to this earth plane, cause and effect world that we are imprisoned by (spiritually) since we came into this world.
    In learning to live in this fallen world, we necessarily become caught in it.
    It is not until we begin to experience the same spiritual awakening that Abraham symbolises that we beging to learn the way out.
    It is the seed of Abraham which is Christ that leads us on this journey.
    It is the seed of Adam that trapped us in the first place.

    Mary is the good ground in which the seed (Christ) is planted.
    She illustrates the receptive mind that is ready to accept the seed.

    Gabriel comes to Elizabeth and announces the good things to come. (which is his job)

    Gabriel announces to Mary how this will happen.

    Lu 1:26 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,
    Lu 1:27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.
    Lu 1:28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
    Lu 1:29 And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be.
    Lu 1:30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
    Lu 1:31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
    Lu 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
    Lu 1:33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
    Lu 1:34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
    Lu 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God

    Now notice this is all future tense about the conception...
    Then Elizabeth comes to Mary and says;

    Lu 1:43 And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?
    Lu 1:44 For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.
    Lu 1:45 And blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord. (through Gabriel)

    Still future!!!

    Lu 1:46 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,
    Lu 1:47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.
    Lu 1:48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
    Lu 1:49 For he that is mighty hath done to me great things; and holy is his name.

    Past Tense!!!!

    Here we see Mary speaking in the Past Tense concerning the conception.
    There is nothing that "apparently" happened between Gabriel and Elizabeth telling Mary what would come to pass and Mary responding that it had come to pass.
    Elizabeth spoke the word of God through Prophecy and Mary Believed it.
    That was the conception.
    The seed (word of God) was planted in Mary's womb at that instant that she believed just as it is planted in our hearts when we believe.

    Just as Jesus said in the explanation of the Parable of the Sower.
    The seed is the word. The sower is the son of man (Elizabeth, in this case) And the good ground bringeth forth fruit.
    First the blade (two edged sword,..word of God)
    Then the ear (hearing)
    Then the full corn in the ear (Fruit)

    So wouldn't this also relate to the Seed of the Woman being that Elizabeth spoke the words?

    Bob
    Harry Potter,.. "Is this all happening in my head, or is it real?"
    Professor Dumbledor,.. "Of course it's all happening in your head. What makes you think that means it isn't real?"

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Daytona
    Posts
    1,757
    Hey Bob, Think you shoulda included this verse. Seems to me this is the way BELIEVERS begin to have Christ formed in them...?
    Lu:1:38: And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.

    As for the confusion between genealogies of Matthew and Luke -- you're taking what I think of as the "Scofield" position, which I didn't like from Day 1. Remember, there were nineteen generations before Abraham, and when you replace the 5 'skipped' names, it leaves us 19+14 and 19+14 instead of the three 14's.

    Noah's 'Ten' is followed by the Ten between Shem and Abram#20, and the Book of Ruth ends with Ten from Pharez to David -- those three periods of "Ten", IMO, are a PRECEPT for the 3x14 of Matthew.

    Mostly 'cause I object to having 'husband Joseph' in the pedigree of Jesus, is why I see that Joseph as Mary's FATHER. The word pedigrees is from Numb 1:18, and reminds me how the subject of father-to-son pedigrees has somehow been overshadowed by the "Kingly Reign" focus.
    Dux allows: "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out the matter". Pr25:2

  9. #59
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    800
    Quote Originally Posted by duxrow View Post
    Hey Bob, Think you shoulda included this verse. Seems to me this is the way BELIEVERS begin to have Christ formed in them...?
    Lu:1:38: And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.
    Point taken. It was her believing without question that was the Good Ground aspect that I was pointing out.

    Quote Originally Posted by duxrow View Post
    As for the confusion between genealogies of Matthew and Luke -- you're taking what I think of as the "Scofield" position, which I didn't like from Day 1.
    I don't know anything about Scofield. And there is no confusion. There is a lot going on here and I am only pointing out what I have found. There is a reason for all things in scripture and we don't all get the same details.
    Another thing about Matthew's geneology is that you have to add US if you want the third 14 to work out.
    If you look at the third grouping there are only 13. Which, by the way is Unity, Achad, One. So, to get all three principles in there, ie. the 42, the 13, and the three baptisms. Being fed, Unity with the Father and son and water, air and fire. Mem, Aleph, Shin.

    Quote Originally Posted by duxrow View Post
    Remember, there were nineteen generations before Abraham, and when you replace the 5 'skipped' names, it leaves us 19+14 and 19+14 instead of the three 14's.
    Three fourteens add to 42,..the months that we are fed in the wilderness as the woman in revelations.
    A time, times and half a time, 3 1/2 years. All very important Principles in our progression.
    I don't really care so much about the actual number of generations. This is about Regeneration.
    This is the circumcision (thropughout their generations) of the HEART.
    And the three baptisms.

    Quote Originally Posted by duxrow View Post
    Noah's 'Ten' is followed by the Ten between Shem and Abram#20, and the Book of Ruth ends with Ten from Pharez to David -- those three periods of "Ten", IMO, are a PRECEPT for the 3x14 of Matthew.
    Maybe, but then you are speaking of a different principle being illustrated. Three tens. Ten is one with God. Or that which returns to God. ie the remnant and tithe and us.


    Quote Originally Posted by duxrow View Post
    Mostly 'cause I object to having 'husband Joseph' in the pedigree of Jesus, is why I see that Joseph as Mary's FATHER. The word pedigrees is from Numb 1:18, and reminds me how the subject of father-to-son pedigrees has somehow been overshadowed by the "Kingly Reign" focus.
    [/QUOTE]

    But Joseph is not Mary's father.
    Joseph is a very specific level of awareness or awakening as demonstrated by God communicating to him through angels and dreams. He also never took credit for his prophecies or dream interpretations.
    That applies Both Josephs.
    And it applies to us if we experience that awareness that Joseph demonstrated.
    Also Joseph was very humble. Again both Josephs.
    Two main characters in the bible and between the two of them there are probably less than a dozen words spoken.

    Bob
    Harry Potter,.. "Is this all happening in my head, or is it real?"
    Professor Dumbledor,.. "Of course it's all happening in your head. What makes you think that means it isn't real?"

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Daytona
    Posts
    1,757
    Roger, Bob.. I still haven't figured out how you segment your replies merged into my post -- you'd think I'd have learned that by now.

    That final "14" works like this for me, and seems to lack a generation. Been a long time now, but think that was one of the reasons I faulted it.

    1. Salathiel
    2. Zorobabel
    3. Abiud
    4. Eliakim
    5. Azor
    6. Sadoc
    7. Achim
    8. Eliud
    9. Eleazar
    10. Matthan
    11. Jacob
    12. Joseph & Mary (same generation)
    13. Jesus

    Note that Salathiel/Zorobabel also appear in the Luke3 list !! (not the same father/son though)
    http://www.cswnet.com/~duxrow/webdoc5.htm
    Dux allows: "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out the matter". Pr25:2

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •