Quote:
|
Originally Posted by C-Mac
Yes only a male could be a king, but your not biblically accurate on that statement as far as the linage is concerned.
|
http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/j4j-2000/index.html
The Gospel of Luke provides a variant tradition concerning Jesus'
ancestry. In the literal Greek of its genealogical listing "Joseph of
the Heli" (Luke 3:23) is just another way of saying "Joseph son of
Heli."
Some Christian commentators have claimed that Luke gives Mary's
genealogy. Accordingly, it is proposed that Heli is the father-in-law
of Joseph, that is, Heli is the name of Mary's father. There is no
genealogical record, in either the Jewish Bible or the New Testament,
which refers to a man as the son of his father-in-law. There is no
verse in the New Testament that says Mary is the daughter of Heli.
To presume that Mary was of Davidic descent presents the problem that
Mary could not pass on what she did not possess: (1) Maternal
connection does not enter into consideration for succession to the
throne of David which is passed on only through a continuous male
line: "There shall not be cut off from David a man to sit upon the
throne of the house of Israel" (Jeremiah 33:17); (2) Biblically, the
right of lineal privilege, that is, kingship and priesthood, are
exclusively passed on through the male line. The incident regarding
the inheritance of the daughters of Zelophehad (Numbers, chapters 27
and 36) does not apply here since it concerns the transference of
physical property and not privileges of lineage.
Considering Luke's genealogical list, neither Joseph nor Mary could
claim an inheritance to the throne of David through Heli. Heli and
his progeny would be disqualified in regard to the Davidic kingship
if he were a descendant of Nathan. Of all the son's of David, God
chose Solomon to sit on the throne of Israel (1 Chronicles 29:1, 1
Kings 2:24).
Whether through Joseph or Mary, Jesus is disqualified from the
messianic office.