Google Ads

Google Ads

Bible Wheel Book

Google Ads

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Daytona
    Posts
    1,855

    Father-to-Son Generations..

    Not sure how to present this -- but I believe some of you have noticed the two (2) Enoch's and two (2) Lamech's;
    the first two in the line of Cain and the next two in the line of Seth.
    The Book of Jude calls attention to "Enoch, the 7th from Adam", departing from the usual Scripture practice of naming the guys father to identify him. hmm? But a clue of sorts, for those who like numbers..

    The first Enoch and Lamech would've perished in the Deluge, don't you agree?
    The second Enoch (7th generation) and Lamech (9th) generation both 'died' prior to Noah's Flood.

    Noah was 'perfect' in his generation(s), Gen 6:9. He was tenth and then another ten to Abraham, and then another ten to Boaz. The three tens a 'type' of the 3x14 in Matthew. See the last verse of Ruth for the ten generations from Pharez to David, but omitting (skipping) the names of Isaac, Jacob, and Judah.

    David was generation#33, and then another 33 to Jesus#66 when you note the FINAL FOUR in Matthew 1:16 is Jacob, Joseph, Mary, Jesus -- that SECOND JACOB is #63! Confirming IMO that the 66 Generations and 66 Books of the Bible are agreeing with Isaiah 66 and Lamentations 3:66.

    Because 7x9=63, and there are only two (2) 'Jacob father of Joseph' in the Bible!

    p.s. the name Jacob means supplanter 'take the place of' .. (ICING ON THE CAKE!)
    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

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Daytona
    Posts
    1,855
    Some may have noticed the two (2) Enoch's and two (2) Lamech's in the Genesis opening; the first two in the line of Cain and the next two in the line of Seth. The Book of Jude calls attention to "Enoch, the 7th from Adam", departing from the usual Scripture practice of naming the guys father to identify him. hmm? But a clue of sorts, for those who like numbers..

    The first Enoch and Lamech would've perished in the Deluge, don't you agree?
    The second Enoch (7th generation) and Lamech (9th) generation both 'died' prior to Noah's Flood.

    Noah was 'perfect' in his generation(s), Gen 6:9. He was tenth and then another ten to Abraham, and then another ten to Boaz. The three tens a 'type' of the 3x14 in Matthew. See the last verse of Ruth for the ten generations from Pharez to David, but omitting (skipping) the names of Isaac, Jacob, and Judah.

    David was generation#33, and then another 33 to Jesus#66 when you note the FINAL FOUR in Matthew 1:16 is Jacob, Joseph, Mary, Jesus -- that SECOND JACOB is #63! Confirming IMO that the 66 Generations and 66 Books of the Bible are agreeing with Isaiah 66 and Lamentations 3:66.

    Because 7x9=63, and there are only two (2) 'Jacob father of Joseph' in the Bible! Now 1Cor1:25 concerning the "foolishness of God" takes on added meaning.. you think?
    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

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Daytona
    Posts
    1,855
    The OT generations go father-to-son continuously, but there's no gender difference in the NT (Galatians 3:28), so the final four are Jacob to Joseph to Mary to Jesus!
    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

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,146
    Quote Originally Posted by duxrow View Post
    The OT generations go father-to-son continuously, but there's no gender difference in the NT (Galatians 3:28), so the final four are Jacob to Joseph to Mary to Jesus!
    That verse is talking only about equality of people in relation to the idea of being "in Christ." It says nothing about there being no "gender difference." This is obvious because the same verse also says there are no slaves, but history proves there have been plenty of Christians who were slaves. Their chains did not fall off merely because they were "in Christ" (unless you are talking about their "spiritual slavery" but that only proves my point that the Bible still recognizes gender amongst believers). E.g. women are not allowed to teach, talk in church, etc. The Bible clearly teaches sexism.

    And the genealogies are self-contradictory so we can't believe them anyway. You and I have discussed this in depth. Luke inserts an extra generation that ruins your pattern. You have to deny that Luke's genealogy is true if you want your pattern to stand.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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