My daily exploration of the Bible, taking it one chapter at a time. If I do it everyday, it'll take 1189 days.



Monday, June 04, 2007

Matthew 1

Immaculate genealogy

Summary:
Jesus came from the royal line of Judah, and there were fourteen generations from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile, and fourteen from exile to Jesus.

So Mary and Joseph were engaged, but Mary got pregnant by the Spirit, but Joseph was going to dump her quietly. An angel convinced Joseph otherwise, and told him to call the child Jesus, the Saviour, to fulfil Isaiah 7:14. So Joseph married Mary, but they didn't sleep together until Jesus was born.

Key verse:
21. She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.

My thoughts:
I used to think of the genealogies as the stereotype of boring Biblical text, but they are actually really interesting! Pretty much everyone in Jesus' line is famous. It's quite ridiculous. Matthew's account differs significantly from Luke's, but both contain David. Some consider that one is the lineage of Mary, and the other of Joseph.

By placing the genealogy at the beginning, Matthew (or the author) is setting his gospel up from a very Jewish standpoint, pointing first to Jesus' authority to be Messiah because he has royal blood. Jesus is called Christ and Messiah in the first chapter.

So Mary gets pregnant with no man. It's a miracle! Could she have been knocked up and just hidden it with some ridiculous story about immaculate conception? Of course she could've. It's hard to know why Joseph would believe her without divine intervention, but no-one can pretend that they can prove the immaculate conception objectively. That's why it's called faith.

Now, the angel's prophecy here definitely refers to Jesus!

New Testament! W00t!

3 Comments:

Anonymous Deane said...

Congratulations on reaching the New Testament. (Although, it suddenly strikes me that it's not so "new" any more, after 2000 years. The Old Testment was only a couple of hundred years older, after all. Perhaps the "Latest Testament" could be an alternative? But that could get problematic as well. What will the Mormons say? ... so complicated).

Pete:
no-one can pretend that they can prove the immaculate conception objectively

Deane:
Your terminology is wrong. But, it's widespread. Practically a plague. Of epidemic proportions.

The "immaculate conception" refers to Mary's birth, free from sin from the point of conception.

The "virginal conception" refers to Jesus' own conception.

"The Immaculate Conception of Mary is often confused with the virginal conception of Jesus."
- Richard P. McBrien, Catholicism, 1994: 1091.

1:49 pm

 
Blogger Huggies said...

NEW TESTAMENT!!! w00t W00T!!!!

6:24 pm

 
Blogger Pete W said...

I think you can call it the New Covenant, to distinguish it from the Old, rather than a true statement of age compared to say, a lifetime.

Interesting about my terminology. I will concede on that one! I admit I was just going with what everyone else says! Those crazy Catholics... they even have a theology of Mary's birth...

And yes... very many w00ts shall abound...

4:00 pm

 

Post a Comment

<< Home