Mary's Genealogy

Dant01

Active member
.
Hello;

Herein is a brief, four-part apologetic defending Mary's biological association with
Adam.

««« »»»

Eve wasn't made directly from the soil the way that Adam was. She was made of
human material taken from Adam's body. Eve, then, was the beginning of Adam's
progeny.

Hence, from then on, even if all of Eve's children had been 100% virgin-conceived,
they would've still been biologically related to Adam seeing as how every part of
her body was made from Adam's body.

So then, unless somebody can prove beyond a shadow of sensible doubt that no
part of Mary's body was in any way biologically related to Eve's body, then we have
to concede that Mary's son Jesus was biologically related to Eve too, and thus
biologically related to Adam.

««« »»»

It's sometimes suggested that Mary was a surrogate mother. In other words; baby
Jesus was implanted in her womb as an embryo.

But the angel predicted that Jesus would be the result of conception that was to
take place in Mary's body. Well; in order for Mary's body to conceive a baby, her
own ovum would have to be involved.

Luke 1:31 . .Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you
shall name him Jesus.

Luke 2:21 . . When eight days were completed for his circumcision, he was
named Jesus, the name given him by the angel before he was conceived in the
womb.

««« »»»

Heb 7:14 . . It is clear that our Lord arose from Judah, and in regard to that tribe,
etc.

Throughout the Bible, it is normally the biological father's side of the family that
determines a child's tribal identity, but in Jesus' case there was no biological father.
So tribal determination defaulted to his biological mother's side.

Mary's situation was unusual but not unbiblical. Inheritance via women became an
expedient back in Num 27:1-8.

Jesus' mom is sometimes alleged to be a member of Levi's tribe due to her
association with Elizabeth (Luke 1:5 and Luke 1:36). However, Levi and Judah were
brothers, i.e. both men were Leah's sons (Gen 29:34-35). So then Mary and
Elizabeth were cousins due to their association with the same grandma rather than
with the same tribe.

««« »»»

This information is handy for proving that David was Mary's biological grandfather.

Rom 1:3 . . [God's] son Jesus Christ our Lord was made of the seed of David
according to the flesh

The Greek word translated "seed" in that passage is sperma (sper' mah) which is a
bit ambiguous because it can refer to biological progeny and/or spiritual progeny.

I think it's pretty safe to assume that the passage below is speaking of spiritual progeny.

"If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the
promise." (Gal 3:29)

However; Rom 1:3 is definitely speaking of biological progeny because David's seed
is according to the flesh, i.e. his body.

Also:

Acts 2:30 . .Therefore [David] being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn
with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would
raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

Greek words for "according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ" are not in the
manuscripts. The KJV's editors took the liberty to pencil them into their English
translation.

However, Greek words for "fruit of his loins" are in the manuscript. Those are
reinforced by the wording of the oath at 2Sam 7:12 where again David's seed is
clearly implied to be physical rather than spiritual.

See also Psalm 132:11 where it's said: The Lord has sworn to David, a truth from
which He will not turn back: "Of the fruit of your body I will set upon your throne."
_


Alert, no violation
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Gary Mac

Well-known member
Why the point of stress on this (fallen body)?

the body here in this world is a result of the fall - a horrible situation which will end soon at the Change. That’s why christ came - making it legally possible for the sons to return Home and get out of this world.
The change has been made in all who has received from God that what Jesus received from Him, this human has fallen and Christ arose in it. You will never understand that concept as long as you look at is with a carnal mind instead of a spiritual mind.
 

Gary Mac

Well-known member
so you are defending the flesh body of this earth?

How is that spiritual?
No you are defending the flesh body. It is Spirit that is in the flesh man that you are missing. It is Spirit who changes the flesh man. In that the flech man in carnality has to die in order for the SPirit of God to manifest in that flesh man. This is what you are missing in the change of man.
 

The Pixie

Well-known member
Luke 1:31 . .Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name him Jesus.
Most likely scenario is Mary subsequently "knew" Joseph, and conceived the usual way. The only hint in Luke that is was a virgin birth is that she was a virgin before she conceived. All mothers were virgins at some point, and later conceived.

Throughout the Bible, it is normally the biological father's side of the family that determines a child's tribal identity, but in Jesus' case there was no biological father.
And it was the same for Jesus.

Rom 1:3 . . [God's] son Jesus Christ our Lord was made of the seed of David according to the flesh
Seed is semen, it implies a line of male descent. Jesus was the male-line descendant of David, i.e., via Joseph, just as is recorded in Luke (and Matthew, if via a different route).
 

Gary Mac

Well-known member
Most likely scenario is Mary subsequently "knew" Joseph, and conceived the usual way. The only hint in Luke that is was a virgin birth is that she was a virgin before she conceived. All mothers were virgins at some point, and later conceived.


And it was the same for Jesus.


Seed is semen, it implies a line of male descent. Jesus was the male-line descendant of David, i.e., via Joseph, just as is recorded in Luke (and Matthew, if via a different route).
The message missed about the virgin birth in religious circles, denominations, is all are virgin to Gods Spirit until His seed is ejaculated into you which is Spirit. In that Christ is born in you which simply means Gods anointing, you anointed of God by His Spirit. Even Jesus was not born with this seed very obvious in Matt 3:16, he didnt even know God or His Spirit until God came to him dropped His seed in that man and opened all of His heaven to him. The religious mind will deny this every time, the spiritual mind will identify with it.
 

Beloved Daughter

Super Member
.
Hello;

Herein is a brief, four-part apologetic defending Mary's biological association with
Adam.

««« »»»

Eve wasn't made directly from the soil the way that Adam was. She was made of
human material taken from Adam's body. Eve, then, was the beginning of Adam's
progeny.

Hence, from then on, even if all of Eve's children had been 100% virgin-conceived,
they would've still been biologically related to Adam seeing as how every part of
her body was made from Adam's body.

So then, unless somebody can prove beyond a shadow of sensible doubt that no
part of Mary's body was in any way biologically related to Eve's body, then we have
to concede that Mary's son Jesus was biologically related to Eve too, and thus
biologically related to Adam.

««« »»»

It's sometimes suggested that Mary was a surrogate mother. In other words; baby
Jesus was implanted in her womb as an embryo.

But the angel predicted that Jesus would be the result of conception that was to
take place in Mary's body. Well; in order for Mary's body to conceive a baby, her
own ovum would have to be involved.

Luke 1:31 . .Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you
shall name him Jesus.

Luke 2:21 . . When eight days were completed for his circumcision, he was
named Jesus, the name given him by the angel before he was conceived in the
womb.

««« »»»

Heb 7:14 . . It is clear that our Lord arose from Judah, and in regard to that tribe,
etc.

Throughout the Bible, it is normally the biological father's side of the family that
determines a child's tribal identity, but in Jesus' case there was no biological father.
So tribal determination defaulted to his biological mother's side.

Mary's situation was unusual but not unbiblical. Inheritance via women became an
expedient back in Num 27:1-8.

Jesus' mom is sometimes alleged to be a member of Levi's tribe due to her
association with Elizabeth (Luke 1:5 and Luke 1:36). However, Levi and Judah were
brothers, i.e. both men were Leah's sons (Gen 29:34-35). So then Mary and
Elizabeth were cousins due to their association with the same grandma rather than
with the same tribe.

««« »»»

This information is handy for proving that David was Mary's biological grandfather.

Rom 1:3 . . [God's] son Jesus Christ our Lord was made of the seed of David
according to the flesh

The Greek word translated "seed" in that passage is sperma (sper' mah) which is a
bit ambiguous because it can refer to biological progeny and/or spiritual progeny.

I think it's pretty safe to assume that the passage below is speaking of spiritual progeny.

"If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the
promise." (Gal 3:29)

However; Rom 1:3 is definitely speaking of biological progeny because David's seed
is according to the flesh, i.e. his body.

Also:

Acts 2:30 . .Therefore [David] being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn
with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would
raise up Christ to sit on his throne;

Greek words for "according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ" are not in the
manuscripts. The KJV's editors took the liberty to pencil them into their English
translation.

However, Greek words for "fruit of his loins" are in the manuscript. Those are
reinforced by the wording of the oath at 2Sam 7:12 where again David's seed is
clearly implied to be physical rather than spiritual.

See also Psalm 132:11 where it's said: The Lord has sworn to David, a truth from
which He will not turn back: "Of the fruit of your body I will set upon your throne."
_

I always add these kinds of post to the woulda, coulda, shoulda file. It simply speculation.
 

rod.ney

Well-known member
a rib in eden (context of ancient situation and scripture) is not a rib in the context of our current type of physical ape bodies in this current earth and cosmos. adam did not have a physical body of this type at all. we started to live in a material realm after eden fell...

adam was not of a material type realm or body, which is true of him even now.
FYI again, GOD point blank says in His INSPIRED scriptures that the first man ( Adam ) was formed from the dust of the ground ( Gen 2:7 ) and then formed the first woman ( Eve ) from one of Adam's ribs ( Gen.2:21-23 )! Your post contains no scriptures ( God's say so ) to back it up, like mine does! Thus it is just your say so and not GOD's say so! On resurrection day, all dead saved people's bodies that returned to dust in their graves will get reformed into their new Glorious Immortal flesh & bone body! Just like Jesus Glorious supernatural flesh & bone resurrection body! See John 2:19-22 in conjunction with Luke 24:39 and Philippians 3:21 for those facts!
 
Last edited:

nan

Well-known member
.
Hello;

Herein is a brief, four-part apologetic defending Mary's biological association with
Adam.

««« »»»

Eve wasn't made directly from the soil the way that Adam was. She was made of
human material taken from Adam's body. Eve, then, was the beginning of Adam's
progeny.

I'm curious to know your definition of the word 'progeny'.
Hence, from then on, even if all of Eve's children had been 100% virgin-conceived,
they would've still been biologically related to Adam seeing as how
every part of
her body was made from Adam's body.

Are you saying that Adam had a uterus?

 

nan

Well-known member
But the angel predicted that Jesus would be the result of conception that was to
take place in Mary's body. Well; in order for Mary's body to conceive a baby, her
own ovum would have to be involved.
And your point is ...
 

nan

Well-known member
Throughout the Bible, it is normally the biological father's side of the family that
determines a child's tribal identity, but in Jesus' case there was no biological father.
So tribal determination defaulted to his biological mother's side.

Mary's situation was unusual but not unbiblical. Inheritance via women became an
expedient back in Num 27:1-8.
You might want to read Numbers again. There is nothing which attests to your claim that inheritance defaults to the mother's side.
 

The Pixie

Well-known member
Throughout the Bible, it is normally the biological father's side of the family that determines a child's tribal identity, but in Jesus' case there was no biological father. So tribal determination defaulted to his biological mother's side.
Why do you say "biological father"? Would this not also be true in the case of adoption? I would have guessed so - in part based on what you said in your other post about Joseph. If Jesus was adopted by Joseph, then Jesus became part of Joseph's tribe (as did Mary when she married Joseph).
 

Bob Dobbalina

Active member
I've been on this forum for years. Spent a lot of time saying things...only to have it all dismissed or ignored. So perhaps I just don't like to go into a big answer unless someone actually is interested and responds.
Fair enough, thanks for the reply.
 

En Hakkore

Well-known member
Most likely scenario is Mary subsequently "knew" Joseph, and conceived the usual way. The only hint in Luke that is was a virgin birth is that she was a virgin before she conceived.

No, Luke is careful to articulate a virginal conception and defend it against critics. He mentions not once but twice that Mary is a virgin in his introduction to her (1:27). Mary's bewildered response to the angel's pronouncement in which she underscores her own virginity (1:34) leads to the angel's claim that the agent of her conception will be the Holy Spirit (1:35). As soon as the angel departs Mary leaves Nazareth with haste and travels to the hill country of Judea where she spends three months with Elizabeth, who is herself in seclusion, and afterward returns to her house (1:24,38b-40,56). Mary is kept out of the company of her betrothed Joseph and men generally in the narrative during which time the miraculous conception is implied to take place (1:42-43). When next we hear of her, Mary is still betrothed to Joseph yet pregnant and traveling with him to Bethlehem where she gives birth to her firstborn son (2:5-7).

Seed is semen, it implies a line of male descent. Jesus was the male-line descendant of David, i.e., via Joseph, just as is recorded in Luke...

Luke does trace Jesus' claim to the Davidic line and throne through Joseph (1:27,32;3:23), but this is based on Joseph being Mary's husband, not because he is the biological father of Jesus, which suggestion Luke rules out by introducing his genealogy with reference to Jesus as the supposed son of Joseph. Mary, for her part in Luke's narrative, is a relative of Elizabeth (1:36), who was a descendant of Aaron (1:5).

All of this is not to say that Luke's gospel is free from tension... the story of the twelve-year-old Jesus found in 2:41-50 is difficult to reconcile with the virginal conception and is almost certainly an earlier tradition that the author has worked secondarily into the narrative with an introduction (2:40), conclusion (2:51-52) and gloss (2:47). And of course the question of who the historical Jesus' parents were is another issue entirely...

Kind regards,
Jonathan
 
Top