Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke
Have you ever noticed that in the two Genealogies that have Jesus in them (Matt 1 and Luke 3) it never uses the word begat about Jesus. |
Not so! The Greek word used for begat
gennaō is used in
Matthew 1:16 and 1:20.
Matt 1:16
And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born [begat - same Greek word] Jesus, who is called Christ.
So verse 16 is saying "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was
begotten Jesus, who is called Christ.
Mat 1:20
But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife:
for that which is
conceived [begotten - same Greek word] in her is of the Holy Ghost.
In other words,
that which is begotten in her is of the holy Ghost.
Let's not forget the announcement of Gabriel in
Luke 1:35 ...
And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be
born [begotten - same Greek word] of thee shall be called the Son of God.
So Gabriel announced to Mary that
that which is begotten of her shall be called the Son of God. Why? Because the One God, the Father, has caused this - that a child would be miraculously
begotten in her and
for that reason (Greek dio kai) he shall be called "the Son of God."
Matthew and Luke clearly state that Jesus indeed was
begotten (past tense of begat) in the womb of Mary by the power of God's Spirit.
So Matthew does indeed use the same Greek word in the genealogy when speaking of Jesus. Sadly, it was
the translators who chose to use the words 'born & conceived' instead of 'begotten'
Likewise, Luke used the same Greek word for 'begat'; however
the translators used the word 'born'
It's therefore, a translation issue.
Likewise
Micah 5:2 - which is simply stating that the birth of the Messiah in Bethlehem, had been spoken of ages ago i.e.
whose goings forth have been from of old, from old time.
The translators (because of their obvious trinitarian bias to present a pre-existing 'God the Son') chose to translate the Hebrew as
from everlasting when it comes to Jesus; yet the same Hebrew is rightly translated
of old (time) in
Gen. 6:4;
1 Sam. 27:8;
Isa 51:9;
Jer 28:8; Ezek 26:20;
Amos 9:11;
Micah 7:14,
Mal. 3:4.
And
Hebrews 7:3 (as already pointed out) is simply stating that
there is no genealogical record, no time of birth/death given when it comes to the priest Melchizedek. So, using Hebraic metaphor, there is no record of Melchizedek actually dying. Therefore his priesthood is ongoing.
In
this sense Jesus the Son of God;
likewise abideth a priest continually.
That is the point, that the writer of Hebrews is making.
Hope this clarifies ...
Linear Mode
