Matthew chapter 1

[Radiant1]

Originally Posted by hotcoffee

There were a lot of Kings named Herod. The King Herod here was not a Jew. He was appointed by the Roman Senate. He is described as ruthless, murdered his wife, three sons, mother-in-law, brother-in-law, uncle and others.. not to mention all the little Jewish children..... He did, however, love to build things.... one of which was the temple in Jerusalem which was completed after he was long gone...

Herod's father was a Jewish convert; however, Herod didn't take to Judaism but rather Roman culture. It makes you wonder why he spent such lavish amounts building the Jewish temple instead of one dedicated to a Roman God. I suspect it has to do with the fact that he was so Romanized that he needed to curry favor with his subjects. If he built a temple to a Roman god, they would have revolted (which they did later anyway).

Originally Posted by hotcoffee

Astrologers... Astronomers more likely.... I like to think of them as the nerds.. By the way... I've never seen in the Bible where it says there were 3 of them... only that there were 3 gifts... guess that's where the 3 comes from.... another Hollywood fictional thing I guess.. One thing we agree on... they came from the east [Persia is east of Jerusalem]. They would have been wealthy as well, possessing such fine gifts.

In those days astrologers were what we call astronomers. They studied the skies but it's not like they wrote horoscopes or anything.

The text makes it clear that there was more than one magi. We can make an educated guess that there were three due to the gifts; however, the commentary I quoted does not state there were three but only uses the word magi in the plural.

Originally Posted by hotcoffee

Here's where we differ. To assume that "the star doesn't mean an astral phenomenon but the king himself".... just doesn't sit right with me.

We don't differ because you're misreading it. The star referring to a king is regarding Balaam in the book of Numbers. However, this most certainly can be a case of both/and as opposed to either/or, for Jesus was most assuredly a King. There was both a real star (or planetary conjunction if you will) and a real King.

Originally Posted by hotcoffee

Can you imagine what it would have been like to hear the mothers and fathers of those slaughtered babies sobbing in the quiet night air? What a horrible time that must have been. Herod was a horrible horrible horrible person.... he loved his station in life so much that he would slaughter innocent children to avoid loosing it to the real King of the Jews.

No, I can't. It's beyond my comprehension really. This does harken back to the first-born Egyptian males dying at Passover in the OT. I imagine the grief and mourning were similar.

Originally Posted by hotcoffee

So now we end with Jesus, Mary, and Joseph in Nazareth. a little town in the middle of nowhere....

My thumper says that in Jesus' day "Nazarene" was virtually a synonym for "despised". What a place for the Son of God to grow up.....

"Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?" Nathanael asked. "Come and see," said Philip. John 1:46 NIV (I'm not fond of the NIV translation, but since you use it I will as well for discussion purposes.)



Ok, so no controversy here. By all means please continue when you find the time.

[hotcoffee]

Originally Posted by Radiant1

Herod's father was a Jewish convert; however, Herod didn't take to Judaism but rather Roman culture. It makes you wonder why he spent such lavish amounts building the Jewish temple instead of one dedicated to a Roman God. I suspect it has to do with the fact that he was so Romanized that he needed to curry favor with his subjects. If he built a temple to a Roman god, they would have revolted (which they did later anyway).



In those days astrologers were what we call astronomers. They studied the skies but it's not like they wrote horoscopes or anything.

The text makes it clear that there was more than one magi. We can make an educated guess that there were three due to the gifts; however, the commentary I quoted does not state there were three but only uses the word magi in the plural.



We don't differ because you're misreading it. The star referring to a king is regarding Balaam in the book of Numbers. However, this most certainly can be a case of both/and as opposed to either/or, for Jesus was most assuredly a King. There was both a real star (or planetary conjunction if you will) and a real King.



No, I can't. It's beyond my comprehension really. This does harken back to the first-born Egyptian males dying at Passover in the OT. I imagine the grief and mourning were similar.



"Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?" Nathanael asked. "Come and see," said Philip. John 1:46 NIV (I'm not fond of the NIV translation, but since you use it I will as well for discussion purposes.)



Ok, so no controversy here. By all means please continue when you find the time.

I thought we were going to squabble over the star.... Glad we are so much on the same page.... this is fun

[hotcoffee]

So this is what I see in Matthew Chapter 1 & 2

Joseph was directly descended from Abraham through King David. He was engaged to a young girl named Mary.

Mary had never been with a man, but she went to Joseph and told him that she had become pregnant by the Holy Spirit.

Joseph loved Mary and didn't want to see her go through the horrible things that would happen if anyone found out.... so he decided to send her away quietly.

Then he had a dream. An angel of the Lord told him to go ahead and marry Mary because she was telling the truth. This angel also told Joseph to name the baby Immanuel [Jesus].

Joseph and Mary had faith and they did as they were told. Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea [David's city].

At the same time all this was going on there was a murderous viscious Roman appointed king named Herod. Herod lived big and liked it... he would murder anyone who got in his way.

There were also some people [Magi or astologers] who had discovered a new star in heaven.... They had heard that this star would appear someday when the new king of the jews was born... and they decided to go confirm this big event.

Horrid king Herod found out that the magi were asking about the "new King" and he asked them to come see him. When they told him who they were looking for and why, he lied to them and asked them to bring him back any news they learned.

The magi followed the star to Bethlehem of Judea and found Joseph, Mary, and the child Jesus. [No he was not laying in a manger... he would have been a child by then].... and they gave him gifts. Having been warned in a dream, they didn't go back to report to Herod. They went home by a different route.

When horrid king Herod realized that the magi and left him without information, he had to do something so he decided to kill all the children that were born to Jewish family for a period of years that would include the time the star had appeared.

Luckily.... [well actually it was planned by our all knowing God]... an Angel appeared to Mary and Joseph. The Angel told them to take Jesus and hide in Egypt. They left in the dead of night and they stayed in Egypt until the horrible king Herod died.

Then when they returned to Israel, they heard that Herod's son [ a real no goodnick in his own right] was in power. So rather than return to David's city of Bethlehem in Judea [Joseph's home town].... they went to Nazareth.... a real hole in the wall.... a place no one really wanted to live in... and there Mary and Joseph raised Jesus.

Hope you all agree with this modern rendition of the story so far.... and I hope to post Matthew 3 under another thread.... this is fun

[Radiant1]

Originally Posted by hotcoffee

I thought we were going to squabble over the star.... Glad we are so much on the same page.... this is fun

Since there was no "controversy" there was nothing to squabble over.

I'm thinking that Nazareth being a hole in the wall as you call it was an ideal place to raise the Son of God. Surely, it was safer from the evils (Herod et al) that wanted Him gone. Just lay low until His time has come, ya know?

[hotcoffee]

Originally Posted by Radiant1

Since there was no "controversy" there was nothing to squabble over.

I'm thinking that Nazareth being a hole in the wall as you call it was an ideal place to raise the Son of God. Surely, it was safer from the evils (Herod et al) that wanted Him gone. Just lay low until His time has come, ya know?

My thoughts exactly.... plus... if anyone had the right to use environmental factors as an excuse ... it would have been Jesus....

Conceived out of wedlock.... hunted by a murderer.... raised in a bad town....


He still didn't sin... awesome...

[migtig]

Originally Posted by hotcoffee

Matthew 1
12 After the exile to Babylon:

Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel,

Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,

Let me share something of interest on this lineage. Just of interest, so maybe we can understand others better.

This is one of the reasons that Jesus is not the Messiah of the Jews.

According to Rabbinical Law, the Messiah is born of two human parents, is able to trace his lineage through his father back to King David, through the line of King Solomon and NOT through the lines of Jehoiakim, Jeconiah, or Shealtiel, because this particular royal line was cursed.

[Radiant1]

Originally Posted by migtig

Let me share something of interest on this lineage. Just of interest, so maybe we can understand others better.

This is one of the reasons that Jesus is not the Messiah of the Jews.

According to Rabbinical Law, the Messiah is born of two human parents, is able to trace his lineage through his father back to King David, through the line of King Solomon and NOT through the lines of Jehoiakim, Jeconiah, or Shealtiel, because this particular royal line was cursed.

I'd have to point out that the Talmud was gathered in the 2nd to 5th centuries on 2nd century oral tradition, so I would suspect a bit of anti-Christian polemic. I'd like to see the references that were used from the Talmud (which I assume makes reference to the Torah?) if you could give them to me. It doesn't really matter in the end, Jews believe what Jews believe, but I'm curious for my own studies.

[migtig]

Originally Posted by Radiant1

I'd have to point out that the Talmud was gathered in the 2nd to 5th centuries on 2nd century oral tradition, so I would suspect a bit of anti-Christian polemic. I'd like to see the references that were used from the Talmud (which I assume makes reference to the Torah?) if you could give them to me. It doesn't really matter in the end, Jews believe what Jews believe, but I'm curious for my own studies.

It's in reference to the Bible/Torah/ OT
Jeremiah 22:24
"As surely as I live," declares the LORD, "even if you, Jehoiachin son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, were a signet ring on my right hand, I would still pull you off.
Jeremiah 22:30
This is what the LORD says: "Record this man as if childless, a man who will not prosper in his lifetime, for none of his offspring will prosper, none will sit on the throne of David or rule any more in Judah."

References - oh boy - you know I'm on meds Language barrier alert look for the references to "Mashiach" not "Messiah". And forgive me if I've pulled the wrong references out of the hat.

Sukah 52a-b

Zohar

Midrash Tehilim

Pesikta Rabaty

Pirkei Heichalot Rabaty

I believe most of this is available online. I know the library carries some of the texts.

[Radiant1]

Originally Posted by migtig

Jeremiah 22:24
"As surely as I live," declares the LORD, "even if you, Jehoiachin son of Jehoiakim king of Judah, were a signet ring on my right hand, I would still pull you off.
Jeremiah 22:30
This is what the LORD says: "Record this man as if childless, a man who will not prosper in his lifetime, for none of his offspring will prosper, none will sit on the throne of David or rule any more in Judah."

Thank you, this was what I was looking for.

Originally Posted by migtig

Sukah 52a-b

Zohar

Midrash Tehilim

Pesikta Rabaty

Pirkei Heichalot Rabaty

I believe most of this is available online. I know the library carries some of the texts.

I'll dig it up, thanks!

[hotcoffee]

Originally Posted by migtig

Let me share something of interest on this lineage. Just of interest, so maybe we can understand others better.

This is one of the reasons that Jesus is not the Messiah of the Jews.

According to Rabbinical Law, the Messiah is born of two human parents, is able to trace his lineage through his father back to King David, through the line of King Solomon and NOT through the lines of Jehoiakim, Jeconiah, or Shealtiel, because this particular royal line was cursed.

Matthew 1:17 Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah.

Your concern is addressed in verse 17. Matthew showes the exile in the line.

If Israel had been godly, if they had never strayed to the ways of the Moabites, worshiping idols, and other gods.... then there would never have had to be an exile to Babylon.

IMHO your argument does not show that Jesus is not the Messiah. It just doesn't hold water.

It seems that the two verses you have quoted may be a bit out of context too. As I read the 22nd Chapter of Jeremiah, I hear God telling Jeremiah to warn the kings of Judea who were gone astray that they had better straighten up their ways. "Thus says the Lord God" is used to give the warning creadence. They had the right to decide to do right.

You might want to think about the prophetic words of Jonah as he preached in Ninevah. 100,000 souls were at stake. In that case they repented and they were spared the rath of what Jonah was predicating. They heard the "Thus says the Lord God" and did something about it. [I just loved it when Jonah got mad after they were spared... it's like he was upset he had to go through all that and didn't get to see the destruction...]

Remember, [as we'll see in later books] there were a lot of people who's heart was hardened. Even here in the first chapter we are seeing that some jews had a hard time with the fact that someone from Nazareth could be the King of the Jews.

Good input... thanks....