Re: [TruthTalk] Jesus Blood

[Wm. Taylor]

jt wrote   >   The promise however, is not made to everyone who was ever descended from Adam.  God narrows it down to the seed of Abraham through Isaac and on from there; so by this we see that the promise does not have to do with bloodlines because Ishmael was just as much a son of Abraham after the flesh.   To John and Judy and all,   The bloodline of significance to this discussion is the one containing the Seed promised to Eve in the garden. I would like to point out that Jesus did not come through Ishmael but Isaac. The Ishmael comment is irrelevant to the subject at hand; he has nothing to do with the truthfulness of our premise. There is only one bloodline leading from Eve to Jesus. It is the Seed promised to Eve, again to Abraham, through Isaac and Jacob and Judah, then David and on through the ages to and through Mary to Jesus. Gentiles are included in that blood through our common heritage in Adam through Eve, the giver of life. This is why Jesus can be the Kinsmen Redeemer, because we are related to him by our common blood. When the covenant was cut with Abraham, he slept. It was a unilateral covenant, in other words, the fulfillment being dependant upon God's faithfulness to his promise concerning the Seed, and not upon Abraham's obedience or any of the rest of ours. Sure there are consequences for disobedience, just like blessings for obedience, but the covenant stood because God was faithful to his promise in and through his Son, the Jew Jesus Christ; its fulfillment being made in him. In other words, Jesus stood in for the sleeping Abraham as his substitute and his representative. Being the God-man, Jesus fulfills the entire covenant.   Before discounting what I say, why don't you all trace the bloodline. You will find that the Seed passes unsevered through the entire OT. God included the whole human race in his promise to Eve precisely by narrowing its fulfillment down to but one representative man, his Son Jesus Christ.   Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: Judy Taylor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 8:06 AM Subject: [TruthTalk] Jesus Blood From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Much of what you say below, Judy is good.   However, blood line does seem to be important.   Luke is the one who gives us the lineage of Christ back to Adam, not Bill.  (Luke chapter 3).  JD   jt: There is a genealogy in Matthew also but we already know that Jesus is the foster son of Joseph because Mary was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit and the holy child born of her is the son of the Most High.  Jesus is a legal heir to the throne of David through Joseph who is of the kingly line; and even though a foster son, he is the first born into the family.   Maybe someone can help me here but as I remember, Matthew goes through Joseph and Luke actually goes through Mary (?)  I am not sure of your point above, however. One of the most powerful sermon illustrations I have ever heard was the reading of geneology of the gospel of Luke.   In the Matthew text, Christ is tied to Abraham.   In Luke, Christ is "..the son of Enoch, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, THE SON OF GOD" (Lu 3"38)   and, so, again, blood line is a critical issue to the biblical writer.    jt: I've also heard that each of the two genealogies is for a different purpose. What is the point of  the sermon you refer to and Luke 3:38 going back to Adam since Adam is the original man from whom all humanity came through procreation?.  The promise however, is not made to everyone who was ever descended from Adam.  God narrows it down to the seed of Abraham through Isaac and on from there; so by this we see that the promise does not have to do with bloodlines because Ishmael was just as much a son of Abraham after the flesh.