Was Jesus a Literal Son of David?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

JohnDB

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2010
5,259
3,476
113
TN
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Also of note....the women of the Matthew lineage.

Tamar (pretended to be a harlot to get pregnant)

Rayhab the prostitute....married Joshua.

Ruth, the Moabite. (Incest descendants)

Notice that Bathsheba's name is not mentioned....just said as "Uriah's wife"

Just saying.....noticing the ones mentioned and contrasted with those deliberately not mentioned.....enlightening.
 

Mark51

Member
Nov 8, 2020
150
48
28
73
BROOKLYN
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
In Romans 1:3 Paul declares that Jesus was a descendant of David “according to the flesh.” Is it true? Matthew’s genealogy traces Joseph’s lineage to David, not Mary’s. Ditto for Luke. No gospel passage declares that Mary herself descended from David.

It’s pretty clear that during Jesus’s ministry and for at least a little while afterwards, the common perception was that Jesus was a biological son of Joseph. Luke 3:23. Paul never once mentions a virgin conception, so I suppose he could have shared that perception. By the time Matthew and Luke wrote and their gospels got circulated, folks thought differently. But nobody has bothered to make the case for Jesus being a literal Son of David. A bit surprising, given the prophecy that the Messiah would be of the seed of David (2 Sam. 7:12-16) -- not by adoption (as Joseph adopted Jesus), but by seed.
The linage of Christ can seem to be contradictory. Yes, although Joseph’s linage is from David, Matthew’s account is not a true “blood line” because Jesus did not have a biological father. However, his step-father was also from the linage of David. In Luke’s account, Joseph is identified as the son of Heli-although being Mary’s father. According to Jewish custom, daughters were not identified in genealogical records. Joseph is identified because of his marriage to Mary. This was important for inheritance rights under Jewish customs.

Most important, Luke identified Nathan (David’s son) in Mary’s linage-1 Chronicles 3:5. In other words, the “blood line” was through Mary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amigo de christo

AngelicArcher

Active Member
Mar 15, 2025
253
221
43
London
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
In Romans 1:3 Paul declares that Jesus was a descendant of David “according to the flesh.” Is it true? Matthew’s genealogy traces Joseph’s lineage to David, not Mary’s. Ditto for Luke. No gospel passage declares that Mary herself descended from David.

It’s pretty clear that during Jesus’s ministry and for at least a little while afterwards, the common perception was that Jesus was a biological son of Joseph. Luke 3:23. Paul never once mentions a virgin conception, so I suppose he could have shared that perception. By the time Matthew and Luke wrote and their gospels got circulated, folks thought differently. But nobody has bothered to make the case for Jesus being a literal Son of David. A bit surprising, given the prophecy that the Messiah would be of the seed of David (2 Sam. 7:12-16) -- not by adoption (as Joseph adopted Jesus), but by seed.
The father of Jesus was God. Because Jesus was God,the word,made flesh and who dwelt among us.

Judaism is passed through the mother. Mary,his mother,was descended through King David.
 

amigo de christo

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2020
29,901
50,670
113
53
San angelo
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The linage of Christ can seem to be contradictory. Yes, although Joseph’s linage is from David, Matthew’s account is not a true “blood line” because Jesus did not have a biological father. However, his step-father was also from the linage of David. In Luke’s account, Joseph is identified as the son of Heli-although being Mary’s father. According to Jewish custom, daughters were not identified in genealogical records. Joseph is identified because of his marriage to Mary. This was important for inheritance rights under Jewish customs.

Most important, Luke identified Nathan (David’s son) in Mary’s linage-1 Chronicles 3:5. In other words, the “blood line” was through Mary
caught that my friend .
I have seen it too . one did the lineage of solomon
the other through nathan .
Some of us DO read our bibles indeed .
but do beware of men for men have a way of twisting things and make claims of YE NEED to sit under us
or our greek , or etc . PAY THEM NO MIND they are the blind leading the blind .
Not only does their hermes , their greek , and they leaders CONTRADICT one the other
HECK they all got errors within .
To know and understand the bible is quite simple really .
You dont have to learn greek
you dont have to learn hermeuntics
You dont have to sit under the RCC, watchtower or mormon or any other denomination .
ALL you has to know and trust in , IS THE GOD WHO INSPIRED THE TRUTH IN THAT BIBLE .
i keep it real simple . cause men sure do love to have followers and power and control indeed .