No society of the time cared anything about women in lineages. Any lineage that includes Mary is obvious fiction.
Davidic line - Wikipedia
Because Jews have historically believed that the Messiah will be a male-line descendant of David, the lineage of Jesus is sometimes cited as a reason why Jews do not believe that he was the Messiah. As the proposed son of God, he could not have been a male descendant of David because according to the genealogy of his earthly parents, Mary and Joseph, he did not have the proper lineage, because he would not have been a male descendant of Mary, and Joseph, who was a descendant of
Jeconiah, because Jeconiah's descendants are explicitly barred from ever ruling Israel by God.
[41]
Both sets of lineage are nonsense. Who kept track of all the births contemporaneously in the alleged lineages. Where and how were they contemporaneously recorded? Why were they contemporaneously recorded?
Nothing was recorded contemporaneously. The genealogies were written around 350BCE.
Books of the Chronicles | Old Testament
The uniformity of language, style, and ideas marks the work as the product of a single author, known as the Chronicler, who probably lived about 350–300 BC.
The genealogies in 1 Chronicles 1–9 also serve the Chronicler’s interests, for they are designed to show that the true Israel came to be realized in the kingdom of David. In the rest of his work the Chronicler also shows that he was interested in institutions that provided for the
continuity of the true Israel: the Temple of Jerusalem and the Davidic
dynasty. The historian thus uses even genealogies to serve an important function in the presentation of his people’s history.
If the Bible was indeed the word of a God, then one could expect to see prophecy. Since there are no actual prophecies in the Bible, it's very clear that all the words are merely those written by mortal men. You have been unable to show one single clear, unambiguous prophecy. Not one.
In other words, if one makes an arbitrary decision to change the meaning of words one can twist scripture to say what one wants it to say. Many apologists do just that.
The solstices were celebrated long before the Hebrews took one for themselves. This does not alter the fact that the early Christians did the same thing. If you think Cusack is wrong, you should consider why the Jews have Passover when they do...
The early Christians who wanted to convert the Pagans knew the Pagans didn't give a damn about Jewish traditions. They did care about the solstice. That is the reason they "
transformed" solstice celebrations into Easter celebrations.
Here is an extended explanation that takes account of Mary and Jeconiah. Note particularly points 5 and 7.
1. The genealogy given in Matthew is the genealogy of Joseph, the reputed father of Jesus, his father in the eyes of the law. The genealogy given in Luke is the genealogy of Mary, the mother of Jesus, and is the human genealogy of Jesus Christ in actual fact. The Gospel of Matthew was written for Jews. All through it Joseph is prominent, Mary is scarcely mentioned. In Luke, on the other hand, Mary is the chief personage in the whole account of the Saviour’s conception and birth. Joseph is brought in only incidentally and because he was Mary’s husband. In all of this, of course, there is a deep significance.
2. In Matthew, Jesus appears as the Messiah. In Luke He appears as ‘the Son of Man’, our Brother and Redeemer, who belongs to the whole race and claims kindred with all kinds and conditions of men. So in Matthew, the genealogy descends from Abraham to Joseph and Jesus, because all the predictions and promises touching the Messiah are fulfilled in Him. But in Luke the genealogy ascends from Jesus to Adam, because the genealogy is being traced back to the head of the whole race, and shows the relation of the Second Adam to the First.
3. Joseph’s line is the strictly royal line from David to Joseph. In Luke, though the line of descent is from David, it is not the royal line. In this Jesus is descended from David through Nathan, David’s son indeed, but not in the royal line, and the list follows a line quite distinct from the royal line.
4. The Messiah, according to prediction, was to be the actual son of David according to the flesh (2 Samuel:12-19; Psalm 89:3, 4,3 4-37; 132:11; Acts 2:30; 13:22,23; Romans 1:3; 2 Timothy 2:8). These prophecies are fulfilled by Jesus being the Son of Mary, who was a lineal descendant of David, though not in the royal line. Joseph, who was of the royal line, was not his father according to the flesh, but was his father in the eyes of the law.
5. Mary was the descendant of David through her father, Heli. It is true that Luke 2:30 says that Joseph was the son of Heli. The simple explanation of this is that ,Mary being a woman, her name according to Jewish usage could not come into the genealogy, males alone forming the line, so Joseph’s name is introduced in the place of Mary’s, he being Mary’s husband; Heli was his father-in-law and so Joseph is called the son of Heli, and the line thus completed. While Joseph was son-in-law of Heli, according to the flesh he was in actual fact the son of Jacob (Matt.1:16).
6. Two genealogies are absolutely necessary to trace the lineage of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the one the royal and legal, the other the natural and literal, and these two genealogies we find, the legal and royal in Matthew’s Gospel, the Gospel of law and kingship; the natural and literal in Luke’s, the Gospel of humanity.
7. We are told in Jeremiah 22:30 any descendant of Jeconiah could not come to the throne of David, and Joseph was of this line, and while Joseph’s genealogy furnished the royal line for Jesus, his son before the law, nevertheless Jeremiah’s prediction is fulfilled to the very letter, for Jesus, strictly speaking, was not Joseph’s descendant and therefore was not of the seed of Jeconiah. If Jesus had been the son of Joseph in reality, He could not have come to the throne, but He is Mary’s son through Nathan, and can come to the throne legally by her marrying Joseph and so clearing His way legally to it.’
[R.A.Torrey]
You continue to claim that I have not shown you a single prophecy when I have, in fact, listed over 50. You simply choose to ignore them! Do you deny that the Tanakh contains prophecy? Do you deny that prophets existed in Israel? Or, is it that you don't believe that Jesus is the fulfilment of much of their prophecy?
The tribes of Israel were taught not to mix pagan beliefs with the religion passed down by Moses in the Torah. To be holy under the law meant maintaining separation from all things ungodly and pagan. Agriculture is not itself pagan, and the giving of offerings, and making of (animal) sacrifices, was a way of thanking God for his blessings.
The practice of Christianity in many parts of the world has strayed from the Gospel of grace preached by Paul, but this is not a criticism of the Bible, or of Jesus Christ.
