Hezron; 7. Ram; 8. Aminadab; 9. Naasson; Salma; Boaz; Obed; Jesse; Solomon; 2. Rehoboam; 3. Abijah; 4. Asa; 5. Jehoshaphat; 6.
The 42nd Generation New Vision Fellowship podcast
Joram; 7. Uzziah; 8. Jotham; 9. Ahaz; Hezekiah; Manasseh; Ammon; Josiah; Salathiel; 3.
Zerubbabel; 4. Abiud; 5. Eliakim; 6. Azor; 7. Zadok; 8. Achim; 9. Eliud; Eleazar; Matthan; Jacob; Joseph; After all this, we are neither, with Olearius, Bengel, Fritzsche, de Wette who is followed by Strauss, 4th ed. Whether Mary also was descended from David, as Justin, Dial. Eusebium , i.
Jacobi 10, de nativ. Mariae , already teach, is a point upon which any evidence from the N.
- Lopera di Quirino De Giorgio (1937-1940). Architettura e classicismo nellItalia dellimpero: Architettura e classicismo nellItalia dellimpero (Storia ... delle città.Ricerche) (Italian Edition).
- Write a review.
- The 42nd Generation Jobs in Ghana.
- Wolf Winter.
- A Legalidade das Avaliações Psicológicas em Concursos Públicos (Portuguese Edition).
- Anglers Guide to Rocky Mountain National Park;
Nor can a conclusion be drawn to that effect, as is done by the Greek Fathers, from the Davidic descent of Joseph; for even if Mary had been an heiress, which, however, cannot at all be established comp. The Davidic descent of Mary would follow from passages such as those in Acts , Romans , 2 Timothy , comp.
- Result Filters?
- Durch Glauben zur Freiheit? Zu Charakter und Intention des Philemonbriefs (German Edition).
- Supplemental Content?
- Echo vergangener Tage (German Edition).
- The Multinational History of Strasbourg Astronomical Observatory: 330 (Astrophysics and Space Science Library).
Hebrews , if we were certain that the view of the supernatural generation of Jesus lay at the basis of these; Luke ; Luke ; Luke prove nothing, and Luke just as little in answer to Wieseler, Beitr. The Davidic descent of Jesus , however, is established as certain by the predictions of the prophets, which, in reference to so essential a mark of the Messiah, could not remain without fulfilment, as well as by the unanimous testimony of the N.
Romans ; 2 Timothy ; Hebrews ; John ; Revelation ; Revelation , and is also confirmed by Hegesippus in Eusebius iii.
To doubt this descent of Jesus, and to regard it rather as a hypothesis which, as an abstraction deduced from the conception of Messiah, had attached itself to the Messianic predicate Song of Solomon of David comp. Schleiermacher, Strauss, B. Bauer, Weiss, Schenkel, Holtzmann, Eichthal , is the more unhistorical, that Jesus Himself lays down that descent as a necessary condition of Messiahship; see on Matthew ff. Jesu , I. See pp. In another passage, p. Jacobi leaves the tribe of Mary undetermined, is incorrect, ch.
In Thilo, p. As the evangelist relates the divine generation of Jesus, he was therefore far removed from the need of constructing a genealogy of Joseph , and accordingly we must suppose that the genealogy was found and adopted by him Harduin, Paulus, Olshausen, and most moderns , but was not his own composition older view, de Wette, Delitzsch.
Such anti-Ebionitic alterations in the last link of the current genealogical registers of Jesus are not to be ascribed, first, to the evangelists themselves Strauss, Schenkel ; nor is the alteration in question which occurs in Matthew to be derived from a supposed redactor who dealt freely with a fundamental gospel document of a Judaistic kind Hilgenfeld. Matthew ; Matthew , or, had they made an alteration in Expositor's Greek Testament Matthew He speaks simply of what lies under the eye.
There they are, fourteen in each, count and satisfy yourself. But the counting turns out not to be so easy, and has given rise to great divergence of opinion. The division naturally suggested by the words of the text is: from Abraham to David, terminating first series, 14; from David, heading second series, to the captivity as limit, i.
So Bengel and De Wette.
If objection be taken to counting David twice, the brethren of Jeconiah, that is, his uncles, may be taken as representing the concluding term of series 2, and Jeconiah himself as the first member of series 3 Weiss-Meyer. The identical number in the three parts is of no importance in itself. It is a numerical symbol uniting three periods, and suggesting comparison in other respects, e.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges This division into three sets, each containing fourteen steps of descent, is an instance of a practice familiar to readers of Jewish antiquities. Bengel's Gnomen Matthew An important summing up ingens symperasma , the force of which we exhibit, by the following positions. St Matthew introduced this clause with the most deliberate design. The Messiah was really descended from David through Nathan: the genealogy, however, in Matthew, descends from David through Solomon to Joseph.
St Matthew makes three fourteens. We exhibit them in the following table: 1. St Matthew, therefore, lays down three periods. St Luke enumerates every step, ascending even to GOD. Yet, so far from counting the steps in each period, he does not divide his genealogy into periods at all: St Matthew, however, distinguishes three periods,—the first from Abraham to David, the second from David to the captivity, the third from the captivity to Christ; and in each of these periods, as we shall presently see, he mentions fourteen steps.
St Matthew reduces each period to fourteen generations. Matthew does not mention all the ancestors of Joseph who occur in the direct line, and yet he reduces those whom he does mention to a set number. Some seek here a division into sevens ; the Evangelist, however, does not mention sevens, but fourteens. Again, he does not bring these fourteens together into a sum total, for he does not say, that they amount in all to 40, 41, or nor is it our business to do so.
As in the reigns of the kings of Israel, the last year of the preceding is frequently reckoned as the first of the succeeding sovereign, so must we admit that St Matthew has acted on the same principle, since the fact itself leaves no doubt of the case. Thus David undoubtedly is both the last of the first fourteen, and the first of the second fourteen. He is reckoned in the first; for it would otherwise comprise only thirteen generations. He is reckoned in the second, because as the first begins inclusively from Abraham, and the third inclusively from Jechoniah, so must the second begin inclusively from David.
Jechoniah, however, is not reckoned in the same manner as the last of the second fourteen, because the fourteen generations, which commence with David, are counted not to Jechoniah, but to the Babylonian captivity. Vallesius p. In each case, his object was to prove that Jesus was truly called, and was, the Christ. He proceeds in a marked manner from the name Jesus to the surname Christ , in verses 16, 17, 18; and he marks the dissimilarity in the character of the periods, and the equality in the number of the generations.
That dissimilarity, and that equality, whether taken apart or together, tend to the one object of proving Jesus to be the Christ , as we shall immediately perceive. The three periods are dissimilar to each other. The first period, then, is that of the Patriarchs; the second, that of the Kings; the third, for the most part, of private individuals. The enumeration of the parts of a Whole.
This dissimilarity strikingly proves that Jesus is the Christ. The different heads under which St Matthew reduces the three periods, show, that the time at which Jesus was born, was the time appointed for the birth of the Christ, and that Jesus Himself was the Christ. The first and the second fourteen have an illustrious commencement; the third has one, as it were, blind and nameless. Hence is clearly deduced, and brilliantly shines forth, the end and goal of the third, and all the periods, namely, the CHRIST.