Quote:
Originally Posted by zeek
On the contrary, according to both Matthew and Luke it is Joseph, not Mary, who is descended from David (Mary’s descent is not mentioned), and therefore it is as Joseph’s son that Jesus is of the royal line. Unless Joseph is legitimate in the role of Jesus’ father, even though he is not the biological father, then Jesus is illegitimate in the role of messianic Son of David. What then would be the basis for Paul to claim for Jesus in Roman 1: 3 "Concerning His Son, who came out of the seed of David according to the flesh"? So then, the answer to the question, Is this not Joseph’s son?, is legitimately yes.
|
No one answered my post, probably because they have no answer. According to Matthew and Luke, Mary conceived as a divinely impregnated virgin betrothed to Joseph, a descendant of David. If there was no biological relationship between Joseph and Jesus, how is Joseph's genealogy relevant to the claim that Jesus is the Davidic Messiah? Why are the genealogies of Joseph in Matthew and Luke not meaningless exercises? Several people here maintain that there are no real problems to the genealogies, virgin birth and Bethlehem place of birth stories only unbelievers quibbling over minor points. It seems they wish to hide their heads in the sand and ignore real problems that confront any reasonable person reading these stories.