Is Scripture Corrupt?

[Ashua]

Hi, Mysteryman
Is this all that was causing the problem?

King David to the last King upon who's death usuhered in the era of captivity.

Once again, you miss the details in the sentence structure.

The king upon who's death refers to King Josiah, the father of Jechoniah.

As I said before, it goes Abraham-->David
David--->captivity
captivity--->Christ

The captivity is not a man like David. It is a transitional era. The captivity is not a man and therefore is broadly defined in the genealogy as an era which begins RIGHT after Josiah died and RIGHT at the beginning of his son's reign. The captivity cant be inbetween two people on the list. Its an era.

The King who's death ushered in the captivity because by his death, his son took over and just three months later everything went up in the air.

Josiah wasnt the one who ushered it in, but his death paved the way for his son who's sin ushered it in. Josiah never tasted the captivity, but Jechoniah was the first generation who did. This is why he is in the third set. He is the first generation of the captivity. Josiah is the outer fringe of the Babylonian captivity era; so he is the outer fringe of the second group outlined by Matthew. Does that make sense now?

 

[Mysteryman]

Hi, Mysteryman
Is this all that was causing the problem?

King David to the last King upon who's death usuhered in the era of captivity.

Once again, you miss the details in the sentence structure.

The king upon who's death refers to King Josiah, the father of Jechoniah.

As I said before, it goes Abraham-->David
David--->captivity
captivity--->Christ

The captivity is not a man like David. It is a transitional era. The captivity is not a man and therefore is broadly defined in the genealogy as an era which begins RIGHT after Josiah died and RIGHT at the beginning of his son's reign. The captivity cant be inbetween two people on the list. Its an era.

The King who's death ushered in the captivity because by his death, his son took over and just three months later everything went up in the air.

Josiah wasnt the one who ushered it in, but his death paved the way for his son who's sin ushered it in. Josiah never tasted the captivity, but Jechoniah was the first generation who did. This is why he is in the third set. He is the first generation of the captivity. Josiah is the outer fringe of the Babylonian captivity era; so he is the outer fringe of the second group outlined by Matthew. Does that make sense now?

Hi Ashua :

You said above and I quote from you statement :

Quote : "The king upon who's death refers to King Josiah, the father of Jechoniah."

First lets clear something up for all the readers who are keeping up with this thread.

The name Jeconiah is Jechonias in Matt. 1:11. The name Jeconiah comes from I Chronicles 3:16. However, the name Jeconiah is Jehoiachin in II Kings 24:6. You will come to this conclusion by doing a word/name study.

Josiah is not the father of Jeconiah/Jehoachin. Josiah is the grandfather of Jeconiah/Jehoiachin, not his father. Jehoiakim is the father of (Jeconiah/Jehoiachin).

Also, Jeconiah/Jehoiachin is -- Coniah in Jeremiah 22:24 and in verse 28, this Coniah is exactly the same person - Jeconiah/Jehoiachin/Coniah/Jechonias. Thats right, four different names rendered for the exact same person.

(see next post as well)
Bless - MM

 

[Mysteryman]

Continuing on from my previous post to Ashua ---

The Mystery (secret) of Matt. 1:11 is now going to be explained, so read carefully please.

In Matt. 1:11 Josias (Josiah) is not the father of Jechonias/Jeconiah/Jehoiachin/Coniah, he is the grandfather of Jechonias/Jeconiah/Jehoiachin/Coniah.

So why does Matt. 1:11 say - Josias begat Jechonias ? Knowing full well, that he is his grandfather and not his father !

The answer is in Jeremiah 22:30

Verse 30 - "Thus saith the Lord, Write ye this man childless, a Man that shall not prosper in his days : for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah"

Which Man is this verse talking about ?

In II Kings chapter 23 and in verses 29 and 30 the death of King Josiah occured. From that point on a KIng was appointed instead of being anointed as King. The son of Josiah (Jehoahaz/Johanan), after his father's death, was appointed by the people - II Kings 23:30. In II Kings 23:33 , Pharaoh-ne'-choh put him in bonds, so that he would not reign in Jerusalem.

Then in II Kings 23:34 this same Pharaoh "made" Eliakim the son of Josiah king instead of his father Josiah. In reading verse 34 you will notice that this same Pharaoh changed his name to - Jehoiakim, who is the father of Jehoiachin/Jechoniah/Jeconias/Coniah. Jehoiakim died, and Jehoiachin reigned in his stead. By the way, all of them did evil in the sight of God , Jehoahaz and Jehoiakim, as well as his son Jehoiachin.

In Jeremiah 22:30 , this "Man" was Josiah, who was to be considered - "childless", and this is why the generations/genealogy list in Matt. chapter one and in verse 11 jumps over the four sons of Josias/Josiah in verse 11. He was to be considered childless. This is why Josias/Josiah begat Jechonias/Jechoiachin/Jeconiah/Coniah, his grandson.

So Josias begat Jechonias about the time they were carried away to Babylon, and in verse 17 it is the word - "until" the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations. So --- Jechonias was one of the 14 generations in the second list from David until the carrying away into Babylon.

I pray this has been an educational blessing.

Bless , IN Christ - MM

 

[dadof10]

Mysteryman, I've been busy lately and don't have time to go through 5 or 6 unread pages. Did you answer this question? If not, could you please give it some attention when you have time, thanks.

I know for a fact, that I gave to this board, more than once, the fact that the word "aner" in Matt. 1:16 is not translated properly. The KJV translates it as the "husband" of Mary, and it should have been translated the "man" of Mary. This man of Mary, was her father, not her husband ! Then and only then do you arrive at 42 generations from Abraham unto Christ.

For instance, I told you that the word "aner" was translated improperly in Matt. 1:16. I informed you that the word was translated "husband" instead of "Man". Then I informed you that if the word "aner" was translated "husband", that this would leave us with only 41 generations from Abraham unto Christ. But if translated "man" , which means her father ( I didn't say it should be translated to the word Father, I said that the word "man" means her father), then and only then would there be 42 generations from Abraham unto Christ. Which then would include Mary as one of the generations.

When it came to deal with Mary and her father Joseph, Matthew could not use the word "begotten" as pertaining to Mary. So Matthew used the word "aner" , which should have been translated the "man" of Mary, which indicates his offspring which was not begotten, but nonetheless an offspring of this man Joseph.

Please note, the phrase is "man of Mary" not "husband of Mary" or "father of Mary".

You INTERPRET the phrase "man of Mary" as "father of Mary". Everyone else on the planet...OK the vast majority of those on the planet including every Greek scholar I could find, interprets the literal words "man of Mary" as "husband of Mary".

Could you please explain why only YOU are allowed to INTERPRET the phrase? Why when others interpret, including EVERY GREEK SCHOLAR I COULD FIND, they are somehow "corrupting" Scripture?