"stone" <stone_2003@cheerful.com> wrote in message
news:5cfa0b68.0312202327.75188354@posting.google.com...
Matthew and Mark said that Mary had other children; they should know.
Mt 13:55 Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother called Miryam, and
his brothers, Manasseh, Ephraim, Benjamin, Pharez, Zerah, Jesse, and his
sister Rachel?
Tell me, would that list of names have affected the meaning, the message in
the narrative of Mt 13, (verses 54-58)?
The answer is no but that list of names is not quite biblical and is not
theologically sound. There are a few localities that are not covered and the
name Rachel is out of place. LOL.
Let's try again.
Mt 13:55 Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother called
Miryam-Rachel, and his brothers, Manasseh, Ephraim, Benjamin, Pharez, Zerah,
Jesse and Simon?
Still not correct because the name Jacob is missing, part of Jacob is
missing and a part of Joseph is missing. I added the name Simon to my first
list of names. It stands for Cephas. :-) That Miryam could have had two
names wouldn't change one iota to the story. Note that the name Zerah stands
for a part of Edom while that of Pharez stands for Hebron and the
surrounding areas.
Matthew's list is correct. The names of Jacob and Joseph are very important
and Jacob must be mentioned first.
Matthew's list of names is short, is complete and its construction is
biblically and theologically correct So is that in Mark.
"Is not this the carpenter's son? Is not His mother called Miryam, and His
brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?
Myriam, Moses' sister, Jacob = Israel, Joseph the northern kingdom, Simon,
the priesthood? and Judah = Judea.
Now watch Liber. R. Eisenman hit the roof. LOL.
.
|
