3X14 Generations

[duxrow]

3X14 Generations

:yo:Most everyone knows about the three groups of fourteen generations found in Matthew chapter one, but few have compared them to how three groups of Ten Generations lead to David in the OT. The first 'ten' are in Genesis 5, leading to Noah#10 -- the second 'ten' are in Gen 11:10-26 (also 1Chr 1:24-27), and the third 'ten' are found on the last page of Ruth. <dd>
But three generations are skipped-- Isaac, Jacob, and Judah don't lead off the 'ten' in Ruth; perhaps disguising how the name of Jacob is the only name that's repeated in all the 66 generations from Adam to Jesus.
The father/son of Jacob-Joseph in the O.T. leads to another father-son Jacob-Joseph in Matthew's genealogy, and there are forty names between the Jacobs! And get this: there are 33 generations from Adam to David, and another 33 from David to Jesus!

[Richard Amiel McGough]

3X14 Generations

:yo:Most everyone knows about the three groups of fourteen generations found in Matthew chapter one, but few have compared them to how three groups of Ten Generations lead to David in the OT. The first 'ten' are in Genesis 5, leading to Noah#10 -- the second 'ten' are in Gen 11:10-26 (also 1Chr 1:24-27), and the third 'ten' are found on the last page of Ruth. <dd>
But three generations are skipped-- Isaac, Jacob, and Judah don't lead off the 'ten' in Ruth; perhaps disguising how the name of Jacob is the only name that's repeated in all the 66 generations from Adam to Jesus.
The father/son of Jacob-Joseph in the O.T. leads to another father-son Jacob-Joseph in Matthew's genealogy, and there are forty names between the Jacobs! And get this: there are 33 generations from Adam to David, and another 33 from David to Jesus!
I probably asked this before, but what about the 77 generations from Adam to Jesus in Luke?

[Roberto]

I probably asked this before, but what about the 77 generations from Adam to Jesus in Luke?

http://www.abideinchrist.com/selah/dec23.html


The two lines run parallel from Abraham to David. The interesting thing is the historian Matthew gives the lineage of Jesus by way of Solomon the son of David, while Luke traces us to Jesus by way of Nathan another son of David. Therefore, these two genealogies are the lines of two brothers and their families. Luke gives us the genealogy of Mary, the mother of Jesus, and Matthew gives us the line of Joseph, the stepfather or adopted father of Jesus. Matthew and Luke both trace the evidence to the Messiah. One gives it through Solomon’s line which was the royal line and the other through Nathan’s which was the legal line.

You will recall, Nathan and Solomon were both the sons of David. Nathan was the older brother of Solomon, but when David died the younger brother took the throne. Nathan’s line ran on through the ages and ultimately produced the Virgin Mary. Solomon’s line ran down through the centuries and ultimately produced Joseph. Matthew is careful to inform us that Joseph was not the father of Jesus, but that he was the husband of Mary, to whom was born Jesus (1:16). And Luke uses a word for a son that includes what we should call a son-in-law.


The genealogy in Matthew is from Abraham which starts from the promise, and like the gospel tries to tell about the promised Messiah to the jews, Luke tells to man the genealogy from the first man.
And its cool that the 3 women in Matthews genealogy is all gentile women.

Here is something else thats cool, in Genesis chapter 38 which talks about Judah, the start of Davids lineage from Jacob, we find 5 hidden names of that lineage.
You should hear a sermon of Pastor Joseph Prince about how the story of Ruth and Boaz is a picture of Jesus buying us gentiles from the law, who actually has the right to own us.
His sermon is called Love Story of Ruth by Joseph Prince.
Check this out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQUwqKDgqn8

[duxrow]

Correction! Shouldn't have said 'neglected', but rather "skipped", because I believe Matthew did as the Holy Ghostwriter told him, and the skips in the three 'tens' of the OT are PRECEPTS for us to learn by. iaw Rom15:4

[Richard Amiel McGough]

http://www.abideinchrist.com/selah/dec23.html


The two lines run parallel from Abraham to David. The interesting thing is the historian Matthew gives the lineage of Jesus by way of Solomon the son of David, while Luke traces us to Jesus by way of Nathan another son of David. Therefore, these two genealogies are the lines of two brothers and their families. Luke gives us the genealogy of Mary, the mother of Jesus, and Matthew gives us the line of Joseph, the stepfather or adopted father of Jesus. Matthew and Luke both trace the evidence to the Messiah. One gives it through Solomon’s line which was the royal line and the other through Nathan’s which was the legal line.

You will recall, Nathan and Solomon were both the sons of David. Nathan was the older brother of Solomon, but when David died the younger brother took the throne. Nathan’s line ran on through the ages and ultimately produced the Virgin Mary. Solomon’s line ran down through the centuries and ultimately produced Joseph. Matthew is careful to inform us that Joseph was not the father of Jesus, but that he was the husband of Mary, to whom was born Jesus (1:16). And Luke uses a word for a son that includes what we should call a son-in-law.

The genealogy in Matthew is from Abraham which starts from the promise, and like the gospel tries to tell about the promised Messiah to the jews, Luke tells to man the genealogy from the first man.
And its cool that the 3 women in Matthews genealogy is all gentile women.

The quote you linked got it backwards - Luke was the "historian" not Matthew. Just a simple slip of the keyboard I'm sure.

But I find it very difficult to believe that the genealogies have any authenticity. They look entirely made up to me. It makes no sense to speak of Christ's stepfather's lineage since that wouldn't make Jesus the "son of David" in any authentic way, and nether does it make sense to speak of Mary's lineage. And for that matter, neither genealogy actually states its the genealogy of Mary - that's just an assumption invented in an effort to save the Bible from obvious contradiction. And it seems a little odd to assume that both Mary and Joseph were descended from King David. And besides, the two genealogies converge on David and Solomon and then diverge and then converge again on Shealtiel and Zerubbabel so they really look made up. It seems to me that the only reason anyone would think otherwise is if they began by assuming that there are no errors in Scripture. But I see no justification for that assumption and much evidence against it.



Here is something else thats cool, in Genesis chapter 38 which talks about Judah, the start of Davids lineage from Jacob, we find 5 hidden names of that lineage.
You should hear a sermon of Pastor Joseph Prince about how the story of Ruth and Boaz is a picture of Jesus buying us gentiles from the law, who actually has the right to own us.
His sermon is called Love Story of Ruth by Joseph Prince.
Check this out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQUwqKDgqn8
Yes, that is pretty "cool." I think the video was made from Chuck Missler's material found here (http://www.khouse.org/articles/2004/522/). Unfortunately, I can't confirm if the ELS codes are legit since I don't have software for that. The big question is which copy of the Torah was used since a single letter difference would break the pattern. And that's one reason I don't go much for ELS codes - they are very "fragile." That span large passages of text, and one stray letter destroys them. And they just have the "feeling" of being random. Using a computer to scan millions of possibilities to cherry pick a few obscure "hits" is not very convincing to me.

And even if it were true, it would only evoke a much bigger question - if the Holy Spirit was really involved in these microscopic details that required super-intelligence and divine power to put into the Bible, why did he neglect the "weightier" matters involving fundamental doctrines that have led to endless debates and divisions throughout the history of Christianity?

[duxrow]

And it seems a little odd to assume that both Mary and Joseph were descended from King David.

Shouldn't. Numbers 36 and 26 deal with how the women in family w/o sons must marry into her father's tribe. So the Luke genealogy is that of Mary's husband whom "they supposed" was the father of Jesus.
But we know who the real father was, don't we?

And, Mary's father was named Joseph -- we all prefer to think of God as a Father because Jesus emphasized that, but Isa54:5 says God is a "husband" as well. :yo:

[duxrow]

Most of us who have studied recognize the 3x14 and what it pertains to..
And we here on the BW site know about the 3X22 -- meaning the Triple Acrostic..

But the 3X10 generations leading to David haven't been discussed anywhere that I know of ??

Precepts from the physical in the OT, lead us into the figurative New. 10/4 ? :thumb: