A perfect saviour to an imperfect people and generations
There
has been no religious story mired in so much controversy than the Christmas
story. The fact that Yeshua Hamashiac was not born on 25 December cannot be
debated. The debate is thus not centred on the actual date of the birth of
Yeshuah. The controversy, however, is centred on the celebration of Christmas
with those in favour of the celebration claiming that the birth of Christ is
pivotal to all that followed including his death, burial and resurrection
whilst those against it point the celebration’s pagan origins and go to the
extent of providing undeniable evidence. But did it ever occur to you that
there is an even greater controversy to the birth of Christ rather than the
Christmas story.
Few people read the story of the genealogy
of Christ yet it is in the genealogy that the controversy is laid bare. The
controversy is not negative but rather positive. The story of his genealogy in
the Gospel according to Saint Matthew reads as follows: “{1:1} The book of the
generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. {1:2} Abraham
begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;
{1:3} And Judas begat Phares and Zara of
Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram; {1:4} And Aram begat
Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon; {1:5} And
Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz
begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse; {1:6} And Jesse begat David the
king; and David the king begat Solomon of
her [that had been the wife] of Urias; {1:7} And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam
begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa; {1:8} And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat
begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias; {1:9} And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham
begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias; {1:10} And Ezekias begat Manasses; and
Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias; {1:11} And Josias begat Jechonias
and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon: {1:12} And
after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel
begat Zorobabel; {1:13} And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and
Eliakim begat Azor; {1:14} And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and
Achim begat Eliud; {1:15} And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan;
and Matthan begat Jacob; {1:16} And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
{1:17} So all the generations from Abraham to David [are] fourteen generations;
and from David until the carrying away into Babylon [are] fourteen generations;
and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ [are] fourteen generations.
{1:18} Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came
together, she was found with child of
the Holy Ghost.”
According to Hebrew traditions genealogies
were recorded always from the father’s lineage. From the above story, there are
only 5 female names which feature and interestingly all the women have
negatives which are the source of the controversy I will make reference to.
There is also another woman not mentioned here who I will include in my
analysis of this great controversy. The list of the controversial women who
feature in Christ are:
- Eve – the woman through whom sin visited humanity
- Thamar – the woman who was impregnated by her father in law
- Rachab – the woman who was a well-known prostitute
- Ruth – the woman who was from a cursed gentile nation which was banned from the house of YHW
- Bathsheba – the woman that had been the wife of Uriah who was murdered to satisfy David’s lust.
- Mary – the woman who was found with child of the Holy Ghost before she had been intimate with her husband.
These six women should never have been
mentioned in the genealogy of a perfect Messiah because of the imperfections in
their stories which imperfections I will make plain as we proceed with this
story.
I will start with Eve. Eve was not a
perfect woman and is the cause of the human suffering. When God created man he
created him perfect without any sin. The bible says, “… God created man in his
[own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he
them. …. And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, [it was] very
good.” Genesis 1:27-31. “Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man
upright;….” Ecclesiastes 7:29. The day man was created sin was unknown to
humanity because then man was upright and perfect. The first to be created was
Adam out of whom Eve was created. Disaster came the day Eve connived with the
serpent to disobey God. Pauls says, “…. Adam was first formed, then Eve. And
Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.”
1 Tim 2:13,14. So in short Eve is the reason for the necessity of a saviour
because if she had not sinned there would have been no need for a saviour. Guys
how can we have such an imperfect woman being included in the genealogy of a
perfect saviour?
The next woman is Thamar the widow of Er,
Judah’s firstborn son whom Judah her father in law impregnated. When Er her
husband died she went to her father’s house following failed attempts to be
married by her husband’s brothers. She dressed liked a prostitute and in the
process seduced her father in law in to a sexual encounter. This encounter
resulted in the birth of Phares another ancestor of Christ. This woman indeed
tainted Christ’s ancestry so she, like Eve, does not qualify to be included in
the genealogy story of a perfect saviour.
Following Thamar comes Rahab the
prostitute. The law of Moses outlawed adultery but Rahab was worse than an
adulterer, she was in to prostitution. An intelligent historian would have a
nice way of omitting such a character from the lineage of a perfect saviour.
Why did the historian omit exemplary women like Sarah and include a prostitute?
Rahab, apart from being a prostitute, was also a pagan from a cursed pagan
tribe which had been destined for destruction. Again, the inclusion of such a
character taints the genealogy of a perfect saviour.
Rahab handed over the button to another
Gentile woman called Ruth. Ruth was a cursed Moabite because the bible in Ruth
1:4, concerning Elimelek and Naomi’s sons, says, “They married Moabite women,
one named Orpah and the other Ruth.”
Deuteronomy 23:3 states that, “an Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the
congregation of the LORD; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter
into the congregation of the LORD for ever.” This effectively ruled Ruth out of
the Messiah’s ancestry. How could the Messiah come from a people who had been
barred from the congregation of the LORD for ever? Ruth tainted the entire
Messianic lineage because, David, the person agreed by all Hebrew scholars to
be ancestor of the Messiah who was to come, was only a third generation from
Ruth thereby effectively disqualifying him from this role because no “Moabite
shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to their tenth
generation.” This woman was truly a disaster.
Following Ruth comes an adulterous woman
called Bathsheba. Bathsheba was married by Uriah the
Hittite which implies that she had broken the law of God by getting married to that
Gentile seeing that her husband was of the ethnic Hittite minority resident in
Israel during David’s time. Hittites had lived in the Land of Canaan before and
after the time of Abraham hence they were not descendants of Israel thereby
classifying them as Gentiles. Bathsheba was daughter to Eliam, one of David's
"thirty mighty man." Her
father was the son of Ahitophel who was one of David's chief advisors who was
from Giloh one of the cities of Judah hence she was from David's own tribe and
the granddaughter of one of David's closest advisors. (2 Samuel 23:34; cf 1 Chronicles
3:5; 2 Samuel 15:12). Surely, how could a woman from such an illustrious
lineage get married to a man from a tribe which should have been wiped out of
the land of Canaan?
As if to add salt to wound, Bathsheba went
further to commit adultery with the king who was destined to be the Messiah’s
ancestor thereby tainting the entire Messianic lineage. She bathed in a place
where the king could have full view of her beauty thereby seducing him with that
beauty. The king summoned her and they committed adultery and thus she was
impregnated by the king whilst her husband was on national duty. To conceal
this sin, and save Bathsheba from punishment for adultery, David summoned Uriah
from national duty in the hope that Uriah would return and sleep with his wife thereby
thinking that the pregnancy was his. When this plan failed, the king plotted
successfully Uriah’s death. This, thus tainted the Messiah’s lineage with two
sins, namely adultery and murder. What a controversy? Would it truly be proper
for a man, David, who was a third-generation son of a Moabite woman, who went
on to commit adultery with and proceeded to marry the wife of Hittite men,
qualify to be the ancestor of the Messiah? Don’t you how tow controversial
women again tainted the Messianic lineage?
Following Bathsheba, we come to another
woman from the same tribe with her. This woman is nonother than Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called
Christ. Whilst it is agreeable that Mary was less controversial, did you
ever consider how Joseph, her husband, felt when she was found with child of
the Holy Ghost? Did the community simply accept it or rumours started circulating?
Out of the women above she is the only one who had positive reports. From
historical statements, Mary had a lot of positives in that she was a virgin and
not a woman of loose morals when she was first mentioned in history. We never
read anything negative about her. In fact her exemplary behaviour has led to
some manufacturing prayers to her. As a matter of fact she was married to a man
from her own tribe who was a just or upright person who would not be willing to
humiliate any one by making a public example of that person. However, her
predecessors tainted her positive image in that they were all her ancestors and
as such she shared the same DNA with them hence her blood was contaminated. How
then could the Messiah be borne by a descendant of controversial women?
Mary’s son, the Lord Jesus Christ, was a
perfect person without any blemish. As a baby, wise men worshipped him because
they knew that he was a unique baby. A righteous and devout man called Simeon
who had been notified by the Holy Spirit that he would not die before he had
seen the Lord’s Messiah took baby Jesus in his arms and praised God, saying:
“Sovereign Lord, as you have promised, you may now dismiss your servant in
peace. For my eyes have seen your salvation which you have prepared in the
sight of all nations: a light for revelation to the Gentiles, and the glory of
your people Israel.” As a young boy, he grew in wisdom and stature, and in favour
with God and man. We do not have a single report of misbehaviour or
disobedience as is the case with all other boys. As a man, no negative incident
was recorded about him. His adversaries had to manufacture lies so as condemn
him but they dismally failed. In his trial for crimes he never committed, the
jury said, “I find in him no fault at all.” John 18:18; Luke 23:4; Matthew
27:11-14; Mark 15:2-5. Even satan found no fault in him. John 14:30. God said
of him, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.”
(Matthew 17:5) and “Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be
exalted and extolled, and be very high.” Isaiah 52:13.
Biologically he did not share any DNA with
Joseph and Mary. Joseph’s blood did not flow through his veins because when
Mary became pregnant Joseph was not responsible. No any other natural man was
responsible for that pregnancy because before she had even fallen pregnant, the
angel said to 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 of thee shall be called the Son of God.” (Luke 1:35) Even Mary’s blood did
not flow in his veins because he existed before Mary and her ancestors were
born. John 1:1-3; 8:58. Though he was God, he voluntarily gave his life for the
salvation of mankind (John 10:18). Jesus himself said, “I am the good shepherd,
and know my [sheep,] and am known of mine. As the Father knoweth me, even so
know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep. And other sheep I
have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear
my voice; and there shall be one fold, [and] one shepherd. Therefore doth my
Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. No man
taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down,
and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father.”
John 10:14-18. The writer of the book of Hebrews corroborates this when he writes,
“Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them
that obey him.” Heb 5:8,9.
Joseph and Mary’s blood was tainted
because of their ancestry as pointed above by the story of the mentioned women
but Jesus’ blood was untainted. It takes
the fusing of a man and a woman’s DNA for a child to come into being but this
was not the case with Jesus Christ. Jesus became a child through the work of
the Holy Spirit (Matt 1:18; Luke 1:30-35) hence he had the perfect blood to
atone for sin. Sinful blood cannot atone for sin therefore it was necessary to
have sinless blood for that purpose. In the Old Testament priests had used the
blood of animals but that blood did not do a perfect job because: -
- Animals are inferior to human beings hence animal blood cannot perform better than human blood i.e human life is superior to animal life.
- Animal sacrifices merely pointed to a better and permanent sacrifice that was destined to come in the future.
The
writer of the book of Hebrews therefore writes, “if the blood of bulls and of
goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying
of the flesh: How much more shall the
blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot
to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?” Heb
9:13-15.
There is absolutely no controversy
that Jesus Christ was perfect and sinless yet we claim that he was a descendent
of David, a man who admitted that he was conceived in sin. Psalms 51:5. Even
Christ himself pointed out that the Messiah could not descent from David but it
is David who was inferior to the Messiah. In Matthew 12:35-37 “Jesus answered
and said, while he taught in the temple, How say the scribes that Christ is the
Son of David? For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The Lord said to my
Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool. David
therefore himself calleth him Lord; and whence is he [then] his son?” This
alone is evidence that he was not a descendent of David but he conveniently
became a descendant of David. The question that begs a quintillion dollar
answer is “why did Christ become a descendant of David?”
David was not the best candidate
because: -
- his tribe’s great grandmother was Thamar, a Canaanite woman who cheated Judah, the founder of the Jewish tribe, in to a carnal intimacy which originated the Jewish tribe.
- His other great grandmother was Rahab, another Canaanite woman who was a prostitute.
- His grandmother was Ruth, again a Moabite woman whose nation came out of an incestuous relationship between a woman who cheated his father in to a sexual relationship. Genesis 19:30-37. Further to that, the Moabites were never allowed to enter the congregation of the LORD. Deuteronomy 23:3.
- He caused the death of a Hittite man so that he would snatch the Hittite’s wife with whom he had committed adultery.
- His mother conceived him in sin and he confessed it in this manner, “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.”
So
the question is why would such a tainted person be appointed the Messiah’s
ancestor? How could a perfect Messiah descent from an imperfect lineage?
The writer of the book of Hebrews
says, “Wherefore in all things it behoved
him
to be made like unto [his] brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful
high priest in things [pertaining] to God, to make reconciliation for the sins
of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able
to succour them that are tempted.” Heb 2:17-18. Do you see the greatness of
Christ’s mercy in that he identified with the sinner in order to save the sinner?
Isaiah wrote, “He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and
acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were [our] faces from him; he was
despised, and we esteemed him not. {53:4} Surely he hath borne our griefs, and
carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and
afflicted. {53:5} But he [was] wounded for our
transgressions,
[he was] bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace [was] upon
him; and with his stripes we are healed. {53:6} All we like sheep have gone astray;
we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity
of us all.” Isaiah 53:3-6.
The Messiah therefore made himself a
descendant of an impure ancestry so that he would be a saviour of all sinful
generations. Had his ancestry been purely Israelite then he would have been a
saviour of the Israelites only. Simeon, in Luke 2:29-32, said, “Lord, now
lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word: For mine eyes
have seen thy salvation, Which thou hast prepared before the face of all
people; A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.”
You see that the Messiah was a saviour to all people, whether Gentile or
Israelite.
Christ was therefore indeed Jewish
but with very strong Gentile roots hence at one time he said, “Ye worship ye
know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews” John
4:22. The problem with Jews is that they never realised their Gentile origins
hence they considered Gentiles as not being God’s people also. One thing they
fail to realise is that Abraham, their great grand ancestor was not an
Israelite. If he was not an Israelite it follows that he was a Gentile. Abraham
was made a blessing to all the families of the earth and not of Israel alone.
In any case the promise came before Israel had even become a nation hence the
Messiah could not be for Israel alone but for both Gentiles and Israelites. Therefore,
by allowing Gentile women to mingle with Israelite men he was ensuring that the
Messiah would also be a descendant of Gentiles as well of Israel. The perfect
Messiah, therefore, descended from a tainted ancestry to prove that Christ
Jesus came into the world to save sinners. 1 Tim. 1:5. In that regard a perfect
Messiah came to save an imper