Why was Jesus born in the line of David and Abraham besides fulfilling prophecy?

[sushilp3585]

Is it because David was the king of Isreal and Jesus was supposed to be a king as well and Abraham puts Jesus in the nation of Isreal? I heard this from a sermon by Dr. J Venon Mcgee and he is the only one that references this idea. I have not seen anyone else teach this yet. It does make sense but I do not know if this is biblical. Therefore, is this statement true? If anyone is curious and wants to listen, it is from Through the Bible Gospel of Matthew. I believe it is on YouTube as well.

Also, I am going to make another post called "How well do I know Jesus" and will ask my fellow brothers and sisters in Christ to post some questions to me and test how well I know Jesus so far. I have not read the whole Book of Matthew but I would like to know if I am learning about Jesus. At the moment, I just studied Matthew 10 verse 38 and would appreciate it.

 

[for_his_glory]

Mary's descent comes through David's son Nathan, Luke 3:31. To fulfill God's promise to establish David's throne forever, God honored Nathan by making him the ancestor of the promised King (Messiah) who would sit on David's throne throughout eternity, Luke 1:31-33. Mary having no brothers to inherit the throne the inheritance would come to her first son being Jesus.

This is why God found favor only in Mary as still being a virgin before she married. Joseph descent from David was broken in being heir to the throne of David as one of his ancestors named Jeconiah (Coniah) was so evil God cursed him and his descendants from ever sitting on the throne of David, Matthew 1:1-17; Jeremiah 22:24-30; 1 Chronicles 3:17. This doesn't mean that Joseph was evil, but means none of his children could ever sit on the throne of David.

 

[sushilp3585]

Mary's descent comes through David's son Nathan, Luke 3:31. To fulfill God's promise to establish David's throne forever, God honored Nathan by making him the ancestor of the promised King (Messiah) who would sit on David's throne throughout eternity, Luke 1:31-33. Mary having no brothers to inherit the throne the inheritance would come to her first son being Jesus.

This is why God found favor only in Mary as still being a virgin before she married. Joseph descent from David was broken in being heir to the throne of David as one of his ancestors named Jeconiah (Coniah) was so evil God cursed him and his descendants from ever sitting on the throne of David, Matthew 1:1-17; Jeremiah 22:24-30; 1 Chronicles 3:17. This doesn't mean that Joseph was evil, but means none of his children could ever sit on the throne of David.

That is true, however I was asking why was David and Abraham chosen? Much less in Matthew 1, why was David mentioned first and then Abraham mentioned second? Obviously Abraham came before David. Matthew 1:1: "This is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham". Is it because David was the king of Israel and that puts Jesus in the throne and Abraham puts him in the nation of Israel? Meaning that Jesus is meant to be king first (which is why it mentions King David first in the scripture), and then puts him in the nation of Israel through Abraham.

 

[for_his_glory]

That is true, however I was asking why was David and Abraham chosen? Much less in Matthew 1, why was David mentioned first and then Abraham mentioned second? Obviously Abraham came before David. Matthew 1:1: "This is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham". Is it because David was the king of Israel and that puts Jesus in the throne and Abraham puts him in the nation of Israel? Meaning that Jesus is meant to be king first (which is why it mentions King David first in the scripture), and then puts him in the nation of Israel through Abraham.

If you start with the ancestry beginning with Adam and his son Seth in Genesis 5 we read Seth was the Godly line that Jesus would be born through. I have done this and it takes some time to do, but you can trace Mary's full lineage.

As far as the son of David, the son of Abraham in the genealogy found in Matthew 1:1, if you go to Galatians 3:29 we/Jesus are from the seed of faith through Abraham by the promise of the covenant God made with Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3.

Ancestry is traced backwards beginning with you and your father, grandfather and so forth. I've traced my ancestry back to the fourteen hundreds from Germany and my fathers side.

 

[Golgotha]

That is true, however I was asking why was David and Abraham chosen? Much less in Matthew 1, why was David mentioned first and then Abraham mentioned second? Obviously Abraham came before David.

God foresaw and foreknew Abraham would believe in Him. His belief set the precedent for all others to be born of God.

Romans 4:1What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? 2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. 3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. 4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. 5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

John 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

As for David, there is a prophesy that links Christ as that Lord.

Matthew 22:41 While the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them, 42 Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of David. 43 He saith unto them, How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, 44 The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool? 45 If David then call him Lord, how is he his son? 46 And no man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions.

 

[sushilp3585]

Does that mean the statement of King David puts Jesus in the throne and Abraham puts Him in the nation of Israel false? I guess I am still not understanding.

 

[for_his_glory]

Does that mean the statement of King David puts Jesus in the throne and Abraham puts Him in the nation of Israel false? I guess I am still not understanding.

I hope this helps. Just take your time studying this.

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Isaiah 9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

Luke 1:30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
Luke 1:31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
Luke 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
Luke 1:33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

Rev 11:15 And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ; and he shall reign for ever and ever.

It's not until the seventh trumpet is sounded that the kingdoms (nations) of this world will become the kingdoms (nations) of God and Christ as He will reign now forever over the nations. Jesus has never literally sat on the throne of David in Jerusalem, but has always been at the right hand of God until all His enemies have become His footstool, Psalms 110:1-4; Isaiah 66:1; 1 Corinthians 15:24-28; Ephesians 1:22; Hebrews 2:8; 10:12, 13. This happens when Christ returns as King of kings and Lord of lords subduing His enemies and destroying the beast and false prophet and binding Satan for a time of prophetic 1000 years, Rev 19-20.

Rev 20:1-10 It's during the millennium reign of Christ here on earth that all things are subject to Christ as He destroys the enemy and cast Satan into the lake of fire.

2 Peter 3:8 is not speaking about the 1000 year reign of Christ as the context is about God's long suffering and patience from generation to generation as God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. There is emphases on the word "should" like that of should have, would have, could have, but many will be to late as Jesus will come on them as a thief in the night as at that time the door of Salvation will be closed forever as Christ destroys His enemies.

Rev 20:1-4 never mentions Christ literally reigning here on earth for a 1000 years. It says John only saw the future souls of those who were beheaded for not taking the mark of the beast, (not every soul that has ever died), live and reigned with Christ, but never mentions how long Christ's reign at that time is or where He is reigning from.

Jesus will never literally sit on the throne of David as this present earth and heaven will pass away then the New Jerusalem will be ushered down from heaven, Rev 21:1-3. Rev 20 shows nothing of Christ establishing a literal kingdom here on this present earth as Rev 11:15 only says at that time of the seventh trumpet the kingdoms (nations) of this world will become the kingdoms (nations) of our Lord and of His Christ. The meaning, then will all the enemies become the footstool of Christ as He makes all things subject unto Him.

Isaiah 13; Joel 3:9-17; Zechariah 14; Rev 19 speaks about the great battle against the enemies of God. When Christ returns with His army, being the host/angels from heaven who are the righteousness of God in heaven, He will then rule the nations with a rod of iron (power and great authority) destroying the enemy being the beast and false prophet casting them into the lake of fire then destroys all who have wondered after the beast and false prophet and have taken its mark. Then Satan will be bound for a time as Christ sends His angels out to the four corners of the earth as we who are of Christ own are then gathered up to Christ as we meet Him in the air and ever be with the Lord, 1 Corinthians 15:51-55; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.

The beast and false prophet and all the ungodly political leaders from every nation that follows after them will be destroyed by Christ who does all of this from the air, Rev 19:11-21. When Satan is loosed he will gather all those who oppose Christ to compass the camp of the saints that are gathered in the air being the breadth of the earth in measurement as we are not on this present earth after being caught up to Jesus in the air, but they are consumed by fire (whether it is literal fire or just symbolic of God's wrath against them yet they are destroyed) that God sends down to destroy them and Satan is cast into the lake of fire.

 

[Golgotha]

Rev 20:1-4 never mentions Christ literally reigning here on earth for a 1000 years. It says John only saw the future souls of those who were beheaded for not taking the mark of the beast, (not every soul that has ever died), live and reigned with Christ, but never mentions how long Christ's reign at that time is or where He is reigning from.

It does testify to His 1000 year reign because of how long Satan is in that pit for a thousand years as those resurrected after the great tribulation are reining with Christ for a thousand years while Saan is in the pit.

Revelation 20:1And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. 2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, 3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season. 4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. 7 And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison,

Then after Satan is released and defeated for the last time, Satan is cast into the lake of fire and then the Great White Throne Judgment.

8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog, and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. 9 And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. 10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. 11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.

Jesus will never literally sit on the throne of David as this present earth and heaven will pass away then the New Jerusalem will be ushered down from heaven, Rev 21:1-3. Rev 20 shows nothing of Christ establishing a literal kingdom here on this present earth as Rev 11:15 only says at that time of the seventh trumpet the kingdoms (nations) of this world will become the kingdoms (nations) of our Lord and of His Christ. The meaning, then will all the enemies become the footstool of Christ as He makes all things subject unto Him.

Maybe the misconception is that because of Satan's last rebellion, one thinks that ends His reign when there's supposed to be no end, but it doesn't. Jesus is still King of kings and in control and He defeated Satan for the final time as still reigning just as that new heaven and a new earth will still be there.

One may misapply Revelation 21 as if that new heaven and that new earth happens after the Great White Throne Judgment because one can see that Revelation is not in Chronological order when the event in Revelation 18:1-24 of the fall of Babylon happened in Revelation 14:8 in between the 1st angel and the 3rd angel setting up the hour of temptation that shall try all upon the earth ( Revelation 14:6-13 ) after the rapture event ( Revelation 14:1-5 ) which testifies whom was redeemed out of the land of the living on earth as 144,000 virgins men that speak no lie, that will serve as Jesus personal choir that follows Him around wherever He goes. They are not the only ones raptured, but just testifying out of all those that were raptured, what made up His personal choir.

Anyway, in establishing His reign on earth, I am certain that the new heaven and a new earth will happen then.

 

[for_his_glory]

That is where we differ as I see all things in the visions given to John in Revelation to be in chronological order in how these events will unfold.

Rev 19:11-21 we read that at this time after mystery Babylon is revealed and destroyed, chapter 17-18, that Jesus returns in the air to smite or in other words will strike the nations. He will rule them with a rod of iron, meaning He will trample these nations that followed after the beast and the false prophet (son of perdition) as He will cast the beast and false prophet alive into the lake of fire while still being in the air. This is all done by the brightness of His coming, 2 Thessalonians 2:7-12.

Upon the return of Christ, as all will see Him coming in the clouds, Rev 1:7, after the tribulations of those days, He will at that time send His angels out to the four corners of the earth to gather His Bride to him, Matthew 24:29-31. I know it says that Satan will be bound for a 1000 years, Rev 20, but what I can not understand is why it would take God a literal 1000 years from the time Satan is bound and then set loose for a time for the final battle of Armageddon before casting him into the lake of fire.

What would we be doing on earth for a literal 1000 years until Satan is loosed. Since Jesus returns on the last day after the 3 1/2 year reign of the son of perdition in my mind I see all things from that time up to the final judgement in Rev 20:11-15, happening very quickly and then this present earth and heaven will pass away and the New Jerusalem will be ushered down from heaven where we will be with the Lord forever, Rev 21.

IMO 1000 years is a figurative number, not a literal number. It is figurative like the numbering in Deuteronomy 7:9; 1Chronicles 16:15; Psalms 50:10; 90:4; 105:8 Ecc 6:6; 7:28; Daniel 5:1; 2Peter 3:8.

 

[D-D-W]

Mary's descent comes through David's son Nathan, Luke 3:31.

Incorrect. Mary was not of the Davidic family or even the tribe of Judah. She was a Levite, and possibly from the line of Aaron. Luke 1:5, 1:36. The term "near kinswoman" indicated a VERY CLOSE relationship; first cousin or even a sister. And Elizabeth was "of the daughters of Aaron." verse 5.

The fact that Joseph raised our Lord as his own son (adoption) meant he fully became of the line of David thru him. Even traditional rabbis acknowledge that kind of adoption was sufficient to place HIM on the throne.

 

[D-D-W]

Is it because David was the king of Israel and Jesus was supposed to be a king as well and Abraham puts Jesus in the nation of Israel? I heard this from a sermon by Dr. J Vernon Mcgee and he is the only one that references this idea. I have not seen anyone else teach this yet. It does make sense but I do not know if this is biblical. Therefore, is this statement true? If anyone is curious and wants to listen, it is from Through the Bible Gospel of Matthew.

Mcgee is/was a fairly good bible teacher. Plain, down to earth, no nonsense type of guy. I liked him. But I do not always agree with him.

And yes, his style of verse by verse took him into some areas that others shied away from. Including this.

God chose Abraham, just as He chose Noah. Tradition has it that Terah, Abe's father, was an idol maker. So why God chose him is an unknown. But God promised Abe that in his descendants all mankind would be blessed. So the Messiah had to be from Abraham. Later God said that king David was a "man after God's own heart," and promised him that a descendant of his would be on his throne forever. So now Messiah has to be a son of David.

Our Lord was placed in Israel/Judah because God chose that people and nationality to show His glory thru.

Deuteronomy 7:
6 For you are a holy people to the Lord your God; the Lord your God has chosen you to be a people for His own possession out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth. 7 “The Lord did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any of the peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples, 8 but because the Lord loved you and kept the oath which He swore to your forefathers, the Lord brought you out by a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.

 

[for_his_glory]

Incorrect. Mary was not of the Davidic family or even the tribe of Judah. She was a Levite, and possibly from the line of Aaron. Luke 1:5, 1:36. The term "near kinswoman" indicated a VERY CLOSE relationship; first cousin or even a sister. And Elizabeth was "of the daughters of Aaron." verse 5.

The fact that Joseph raised our Lord as his own son (adoption) meant he fully became of the line of David thru him. Even traditional rabbis acknowledge that kind of adoption was sufficient to place HIM on the throne.

I stand by what I said in post #2.

Incorrect. Mary was not of the Davidic family or even the tribe of Judah. She was a Levite, and possibly from the line of Aaron. Luke 1:5, 1:36. The term "near kinswoman" indicated a VERY CLOSE relationship; first cousin or even a sister. And Elizabeth was "of the daughters of Aaron." verse 5.

The fact that Joseph raised our Lord as his own son (adoption) meant he fully became of the line of David thru him. Even traditional rabbis acknowledge that kind of adoption was sufficient to place HIM on the throne.

This is the father of Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ, and father-in-law of Joseph. He is in the royal line of King David (Luke 3:23).

The KJV, NKJV, ESV, and NIV spell his name “Heli.” The NASB and some others spell it as “Eli.”

Mary, mother of Jesus ← Heli (Eli/Helix) ← Matthat ← Levi ← Melchi ← Janna (Jannai) ← Joseph ← Mattathiah (Mattathias) ← Amos ← Nahum ← Esli ← Naggai ← Maath ← Mattathiah (Mattathias) ← Semei (Semein) ← Joseph (Yosef/Josech) ← Judah (Juda, Joda) ← Joannas (Joanna) ← Rhesa ← Zerubbabel ← Shealtiel ← Neri ← Melchi ← Addi ← Cosam ← Elmodam ← Er ← Jose (Joshua, Jesus) ← Eliezer ← Jorim ← Matthat ← Levi ← Simeon ← Judah ← Joseph ← Jonan ← Eliakim ← Melea ← Menan (Menna) ← Mattathah ← Prince Nathan ← KING DAVID

ALSO SEE


Luke 3:23-38 Jesus lineage through Mary being His mother. Joseph was not His biological father.

Mary was of the tribe of Judah as Elizabeth lineage is through Aaron which made them cousins.


Mary’s father was Heli (Eli) who was a direct descendant of King David which gave Jesus the right to ascend the Jewish throne, both through Mary and through adoption by his foster father, Joseph.

Mary’s genealogy is supplied in Luke 3:23-38. Dr. Henry Morris explains how we know this genealogy is Mary’s:

“Joseph was clearly the son of Jacob (Matthew 1:16, so this verse [Luke 3:23—says “son of Heli”] should be understood to mean “son-in-law of Heli.” Thus, the genealogy of Christ in Luke is actually the genealogy of Mary, while Matthew gives that of Joseph. Actually, the word “son” is not in the original, so it would be legitimate to supply either “son” or “son-in-law” in this context. Since Matthew and Luke clearly record much common material, it is certain that neither one could unknowingly incorporate such a flagrant apparent mistake as the wrong genealogy in his record. As it is, however, the two genealogies show that both parents were descendants of David—Joseph through Solomon (Matthew 1:7-15), thus inheriting the legal right to the throne of David, and Mary through Nathan (Luke 3:23-31), her line thus carrying the seed of David, since Solomon’s line had been refused the throne because of Jechoniah’s sin” [Dr. Henry

Who is MARY, THE MOTHER OF JESUS? - WebBible Encyclopedia - ChristianAnswers.Net

christiananswers.net

 

[D-D-W]

I stand by what I said in post #2.

While I am sure you do, it is not correct.

This is the father of Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ, and father-in-law of Joseph. He is in the royal line of King David (Luke 3:23).

That is NOT what the text says.

Luke 3:23
When He began His ministry, Jesus Himself was about thirty years of age, being, as was supposed, the son of Joseph, the son of Eli, 24 the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melchi, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph,

It does not say "the son of Mary the son of Eli." The text says that Eli/Heli was Joseph's father. Mary is not mentioned.

Mary was of the tribe of Judah as Elizabeth lineage is through Aaron which made them cousins.

"Near kinswoman" is much closer than what being of 2 different tribes would allow.

In fact the word translated as "kinswoman" or "cousin" here is syngenēs which is also used in the LXX Leviticus 20 to describe the forbidden marriages to very close relatives.

Since Matthew and Luke clearly record much common material, it is certain that neither one could unknowingly incorporate such a flagrant apparent mistake as the wrong genealogy in his record.

Correct, but both genealogies were of Joseph. The text plainly says so. When an adoption occured in the ancient near east, the previous geneology was erased and a new one made. Hence, when Alexander the Great was adopted (as an adult) he legally was no longer the son of Menelaus, king of Macedonia.

What we have are 2 different genealogies, Matthew's being the LEGAL lineage and Luke giving the natural lineage of Joseph.

 

[Prycejosh1987]

I believe it was to be born of the family group of Levi, which are descendants of Jewish priests. Its said by some that to be a rabbi, a Jew would have to come from the family group of levi. Being born of Abraham is natural, all Jews are born of Abraham, all jews descend from him, Jacob/Israel is Abraham's grandson. Its also important because of the symbolism in the stories of Abraham and Jacob, God makes alot of promises to Jacob through his Father Issac and Abraham himself. All the nations shall be blessed through Abraham's offspring. For all nations to be blessed Jesus Christ would have to be God, and also Jesus would have to affect all peoples and nations by His teaching, and identity. Only God can impact all nations.

 

[sushilp3585]

Mcgee is/was a fairly good bible teacher. Plain, down to earth, no nonsense type of guy. I liked him. But I do not always agree with him.

And yes, his style of verse by verse took him into some areas that others shied away from. Including this.

God chose Abraham, just as He chose Noah. Tradition has it that Terah, Abe's father, was an idol maker. So why God chose him is an unknown. But God promised Abe that in his descendants all mankind would be blessed. So the Messiah had to be from Abraham. Later God said that king David was a "man after God's own heart," and promised him that a descendant of his would be on his throne forever. So now Messiah has to be a son of David.

Our Lord was placed in Israel/Judah because God chose that people and nationality to show His glory thru.

Deuteronomy 7:
6 For you are a holy people to the Lord your God; the Lord your God has chosen you to be a people for His own possession out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth. 7 “The Lord did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any of the peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples, 8 but because the Lord loved you and kept the oath which He swore to your forefathers, the Lord brought you out by a mighty hand and redeemed you from the house of slavery, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.

So in your opinion, it is fine with me listening to his teachings?

 

[D-D-W]

So in your opinion, it is fine with me listening to his teachings?

Yes. Just be aware that he does throw in Replacement Theology in his mix.

 

[sushilp3585]

Yes. Just be aware that he does throw in Replacement Theology in his mix.

I usually ask here even if there is no replacement theology thrown in the mix lol. As I have stated before, I am not the sharpest tool in the box.

 

[stovebolts]

Does that mean the statement of King David puts Jesus in the throne and Abraham puts Him in the nation of Israel false? I guess I am still not understanding.

You have to keep in mind that there are narratives and sub narratives in the Bible.
If we start with Abraham, he was related to Noah and chances are very good that these two men sat at the same table. Noah was a righteous man and Abraham was not only known for his hospitality, but his faith as well.
Because Abraham was a man of faith, God called him to move from his hometown to an area that would be considered ghetto and full of wickedness and he obeyed.

It is at this point God makes a covenant with Abraham that his offspring would be greater than the sands of the beach or starts of the sky.

Abraham has a son named Isaac and Isaac has a son named Jacob. Jacob was not such a man o faith and struggled with his faith, but he eventually overcame and was given a new name, and that name was Israel.

Keep in mind that Gid made a promise to Abraham, and God is fulfilling it through Isaac and then Jacob aka Israel.

In Jewish thought, genealogy can be viewed at different levels. On such level is called a house. The house of Jacob is called Israel and within Israel are all 12 tribes. Each tribe also is considered a house and contains all of its members within it. Regardless, they all roll up to the house of Israel which in turn rolls up to the house of Isaac and then Abraham which of course rolls up to the house of God.

Within the house of Israel, there is great diversity within the 12 lower houses. On house that stands apart is the house of Judah. This brings us to the first king of Israel, which was from the house of Benjamin. His name was Saul. Saul did not obey God, so God stripped Saul of his kingdom and anointed David as King. David was from the house of Judah.

While David was not without fault, he was considered a man after Gods own heart. When he sinned, he repented, unlike his predecessor Saul who hardened his heart. Because David Drew near to the Lord, god made a promise, also known as a covenant with David that the throne of Israel would always have a king from the house of Judah on it.

David had a son named Solomon and Solomon did wickedness and God torn the kingdom from him and the house of Israel split into two groups and later, were attacked and their land taken and they went into exile.

Israel repents and they are restored to the land.

Fast forward to Jesus and we see that he is called the son of David. This is because Jesus is from the house of David and there is prophesy of the Messiah who will restore Israel. In the time of Israel, they were occupied and under Roman rule and to add insult to injury, Harod who was the appointed King of Israel was not from the line of Judah and had no claim to the throne. Harod was a very wicked King.

Remember, God promised David that there would always be a king from the house of Judah on the throne. Jesus fit that bill.

There is much, much more that we could write, but this should give you a foundation to start to understand a bit. So keep this in mind, it all roles up to the promise God made to Abraham.