Rachel's Postmortem Posterity

[WebersHome]

.
• Gen 48:5-6 . . Now, your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt before I came to you in Egypt, shall be mine; Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine no less than Reuben and Simeon. Progeny born to you after them shall be yours; but they shall be recorded under the names of their brothers in their inheritance.

Jacob set a rather odd precedent by adopting his own two grandsons Manasseh and Ephraim; thus installing them in tribal positions equal in rank to his original sons; and increasing the total number of his legit sons from twelve to fourteen.

Jacob's motive for adopting Manasseh and Ephraim was in sympathy for his beloved Rachel being cut off during her child bearing years, which subsequently prevented her from having any more children of her own.

• Gen 48:7 . . As I was returning from Paddan, to my sorrow Rachel died in the land of Canaan while we were still on the way, a little distance from Ephrath. So I buried her there beside the road to Ephrath (that is, Bethlehem).

Manasseh and Ephraim brought Rachel's grand total up to six, two boys of her own, two by her maid Bilhah, and two by Joseph's wife Asenath.

That obscure bit of patriarchal preeminence has somehow lost acceptance by modern Jewry as evidenced by its stubborn rejection of Jesus as a valid candidate for David's throne on the basis that the boy was adopted into Solomon's line rather than installed biologically.

However, according to 2Sam 7:16, 2Sam 23:5, Ps 89:4, and Ps 89:35-38, David trumps Solomon just as Jacob trumped Joseph. In other words: though it was essential that Jesus be David's biological progeny, it was not essential that he be Solomon's just so long as he and Jesus are legal kin.

Though Jesus' primary mission was to go to the cross for his people's sins, his ultimate purpose is to be their king. In that respect, the details of his relationship to David and Solomon are extremely important to the Jews, though to most Gentiles only marginally.
_

 

[Minister Monardo]

That obscure bit of patriarchal preeminence has somehow lost acceptance by modern Jewry as evidenced by its stubborn rejection of Jesus as a valid candidate for David's throne on the basis that the boy was adopted into Solomon's line rather than installed biologically.

Sorry, who are you saying was adopted into Solomon's line?

 

[WebersHome]

.

Sorry, who are you saying was adopted into Solomon's line?

The information you seek is located back at the beginning of the thread in the sixth paragraph of post No.1
_

 

[Minister Monardo]

.


The information you seek is located back at the beginning of the thread in the sixth
paragraph of post No.1
_

That obscure bit of patriarchal preeminence has somehow lost acceptance by modern Jewry as evidenced by its stubborn rejection of Jesus as a valid candidate for David's throne on the basis that the boy was adopted into Solomon's line rather than installed biologically.

This is the reason for the question. Are you saying "the boy" means Jesus? If so, how is he adopted
into "Solomon's line".
Matthew 1:
5 Salmon begot Boaz by Rahab, Boaz begot Obed by Ruth, Obed begot Jesse,
6 and Jesse begot David the king. David the king begot Solomon by her who had been the wife of Uriah. 7 Solomon begot Rehoboam, Rehoboam begot Abijah, and Abijah begot Asa.
8 Asa begot Jehoshaphat, Jehoshaphat begot Joram, and Joram begot Uzziah.
This is hereditary genealogy. Where does "adoption" rather than "installed biologically", come in?

 

[WebersHome]

.

how is he adopted into "Solomon's line".

In that day, fathers took part in the naming of sons; especially when the fathers were under divine orders to do so. For example John the Baptist's dad. (Luke 1:5-13 & Luke 1:57-63)

Joseph was ordered to give his fiancée's baby a name. (Matt 1:21)

Joseph complied. (Matt 1:24-25 & Luke 2:21)

The thing is: when Joseph stood with Mary to name her child, his action legally claimed the baby as his own. So then, from that point onwards; Joseph was identified as Jesus' father, i.e. one of his parents. (Matt 13:22 & Matt 13:55 & Luke 2:27 & Luke 2:41 & Luke 2:48 & Luke 4:22)

Now, in accordance with Jacob's precedent (post No.1) Mary's baby, via its acceptance by Joseph, obtained just as much legal right to a position in Solomon's genealogy as those that are biological.
_

 

[Minister Monardo]

.


In that day, fathers took part in the naming of sons; especially when the fathers were under divine orders to do so. For example John the Baptist's dad. (Luke 1:5-13 & Luke 1:57-63)

Joseph was ordered to give his fiancée's baby a name. (Matt 1:21)

Joseph complied. (Matt 1:24-25 & Luke 2:21)

The thing is: when Joseph stood with Mary to name her child, his action legally claimed the baby as his own. So then, from that point onwards; Joseph was identified as Jesus' father, i.e. one of his parents. (Matt 13:22 & Matt 13:55 & Luke 2:27 & Luke 2:41 & Luke 2:48 & Luke 4:22)

Now, in accordance with Jacob's precedent (post No.1) Mary's baby, via its acceptance by Joseph, obtained just as much legal right to a position in Solomon's genealogy as those that are biological.
_

This does not explain why you are saying it is "Solomon's genealogy" rather than David's as you go
on by stating:

However, according to 2Sam 7:16, 2Sam 23:5, Ps 89:4, and Ps 89:35-38, David trumps Solomon just as Jacob trumped Joseph. In other words: though it was essential that Jesus be David's biological progeny, it was not essential that he be Solomon's just so long as he and Jesus are legal kin.

Luke 2:4. Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David.

Mentioning Solomon makes no more sense than mentioning Rehoboam. The lineage is from David,
because the promise was made to David.

As to the body of Christ, the lineage is no longer relevant, as it is pertaining only to the flesh.
Romans 1:
3 concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of David according
to the flesh,
4 and declared to be the Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.

2 Corinthians 5:
16 Therefore, from now on, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we have
known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know Him thus no longer.
17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold,
all things have become new.

Back to the topic of Rachel,

Gen 48:7 . . As I was returning from Paddan, to my sorrow Rachel died in the land of Canaan while we were still on the way, a little distance from Ephrath. So I buried her there beside the road to Ephrath (that is, Bethlehem).

The most relevant point from this verse posted is the place where Rachel was buried. Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebecca, Jacob and Leah were all buried in the Cave of Machpelah.

Matthew 2:
17 Then was fulfilled what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying:
18 A voice was heard in Ramah, (where Rachel was buried)
Lamentation, weeping, and great mourning,
Rachel weeping for her children,
Refusing to be comforted,
Because they are no more.

 

[Minister Monardo]

.


In that day, fathers took part in the naming of sons; especially when the fathers were under divine orders to do so. For example John the Baptist's dad. (Luke 1:5-13 & Luke 1:57-63)

Joseph was ordered to give his fiancée's baby a name. (Matt 1:21)

Joseph complied. (Matt 1:24-25 & Luke 2:21)

The thing is: when Joseph stood with Mary to name her child, his action legally claimed the baby as his own. So then, from that point onwards; Joseph was identified as Jesus' father, i.e. one of his parents. (Matt 13:22 & Matt 13:55 & Luke 2:27 & Luke 2:41 & Luke 2:48 & Luke 4:22)

Now, in accordance with Jacob's precedent (post No.1) Mary's baby, via its acceptance by Joseph, obtained just as much legal right to a position in Solomon's genealogy as those that are biological.
_

I now see why you refer to it as adoption, by Joseph, into his lineage.
Thank you for clarifying that for me.

 

[WebersHome]

.

Mentioning Solomon makes no more sense than mentioning Rehoboam. The lineage is from David, because the promise was made to David.

Solomon was chosen by God to perpetuate David's throne.( 1Chron 22:9-10 & 1Kings 1:13)
_

 

[Minister Monardo]

However, according to 2Sam 7:16, 2Sam 23:5, Ps 89:4, and Ps 89:35-38, David trumps Solomon just as Jacob trumped Joseph. In other words: though it was essential that Jesus be David's biological progeny, it was not essential that he be Solomon's just so long as he and Jesus are legal kin.

One other thing that did not follow from this paragraph, "Jacob trumped Joseph"? How so?
Jacob and all of his sons made obeisance to him in accordance with his dream.
You mentioned that Joseph's two sons born in Egypt were claimed by Jacob. Jacob placed Ephraim
ahead of Manasseh with his blessing. The Lord established Ephraim as the firstborn of Israel, as
the northern kingdom was often referred to as Ephraim.
Jeremiah 31:9. They shall come with weeping,
And with supplications I will lead them.
I will cause them to walk by the rivers of waters,
In a straight way in which they shall not stumble;
For I am a Father to Israel,
And Ephraim is My firstborn.

 

[Minister Monardo]

.


Solomon was chosen by God to perpetuate David's throne.( 1Chron 22:9-10 & 1Kings 1:13)
_

Truth. The covenant that Messiah fulfills for us all is based on His promise to David.
Isaiah 55:3. Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you, even the sure mercies of David.
2 Samuel 7:
14 I will be his Father, and he shall be My son. If he commits iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men and with the blows of the sons of men.
15 But My mercy shall not depart from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I removed from before you.

This began with Solomon and the first temple., with the throne conditional upon obedience.
I should also mention Messiah's acknowledgment of him prophetically.
Luke 11:31. The queen of the South will rise up in the judgment with the men of this generation and condemn them, for she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and indeed a greater than Solomon is here.
Disobedience is punished, but does not result in being cut off. This is the basis for;
Hebrews 12:
5 And you have forgotten the exhortation which speaks to you as to sons:
My son, do not despise the chastening of the Lord,
Nor be discouraged when you are rebuked by Him;
6 For whom the Lord loves He chastens,
And scourges every son whom He receives.
7 If you endure chastening, God deals with you as with sons; for what son is there
whom a father does not chasten?

Thank you very much for your patience in responding to my inquiries, and considering
my input. This is a highly important topic. I apologize for going off topic somewhat, I
know your focus was on Rachel.

 

[WebersHome]

.

I apologize for going off topic somewhat, I know your focus was on Rachel.

Rachel was for getting the ball rolling. You took it in exactly the direction I was hoping someone would go. You've been very helpful. Thanks.
_