THE HEIR TO THE THRONE OF DAVID

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23081, 6 January 1937, Page 11

THE HEIR TO THE THRONE OF DAVID

TO THE EDITOR Sir,—Mr F. R. Hall makes a very curious statement in his letter in today’s paper when he says that perhaps I do not understand the difference between the genealogies of Matthew and Luke! Here is a quotation from my first letter under the above title which appeared in the Daily Times of December 26, 1936:—“The first of the two genealogical tables of Christ is given in Matthew i, of His supposed father according to the law, through Solomon—the regal line—and in Luke iii, of His mother. Joseph was the son-in-law of Heli, who was the father of Mary, and her line is traced through Nathan, another son of David, establishing the natural line.” It is your correspondent himself who does not seem to understand the difference between these two genealogies. The Gospel of Matthew gives us a different aspect of the life and character of Christ from that of Luke Matthew was written first of all for the Jews, and accordingly our Saviour is presented as King. Luke, on the other hand, gives us the aspect of Christ as Son of Man. Matthew, writing specially for the Jews, only goes back as far as Abraham in the genealogy he gives. But Luke, writing for everyone, goes back to Adam. According to Jewish law. Christ was the legal heir of Joseph.

“Matthew i, 16, is important, showing that * Joseph the husband of Mary ’ was legal heir to the throne of David.

for the genealogical table following David’s time is that of the kings. And also that although * the husband of Mary,’ he was not the begetter of Jesus as in the preceding cases. The changed expression is significant. ‘ Mary, of whom was born Jesus.’ The latter did not come of natural generation . . .

“Under ‘the announcement to Joseph,’ notice the testimony to the virgin birth (verses 18. 20). Had Jesus been begotten after the flesh He would have been a sinner like us, and incapable of being our Saviour. And yet had He not been the legal descendant of Joseph, and Heir to the throne, the Jews would have been justified in rejecting Him. Behold the wisdom and power of God! Compare the predictions of the virgin birth. Genesis iii, 15; Isaiah vii, 14; Jeremiah xxxi, 22, and the corresponding account in Luke i, 28-35. . . : Verses 22 and 23 (of

Matthew i) are peculiar to Matthew, who, in writing distinctively for Israel, is careful to connect the events of Jesus’ life with the Old Testament in which they believed and which contained His credentials. ...” Your correspondent wants to know how Jeremiah’s great commission as given in Jeremiah i, 10, has been fulfilled. A commission is a legal warrant to execute some office, trust or duty. Jeremiah received his commission from God Himself. Here it is in a nutshell: “Thou shalt go to all that I shall send thee, and whatsoever I command thee thou shalt speak. (Jeremiah i, 7.) Like the other prophets, Jeremiah not only had a message for his own time and his own people but for all time and for all people and especially for the times in which we are living. Jeremiah certainly fulfilled his commission, but all that he foretold has not come to pass yet. All, however, will be fulfilled in the near future. ~. One of the greatest exponents of the British-Israel theory was Mr Reader Harris, K.C., and he admitted that the only proofs they had were tradition and legend! Bishop Titcombe. another of their leaders, acknowledged that it was only a theory! God said “the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince. .. .” (Hosea iii, 4). “ O no! nothing of the kind,” say the Bnt-ish-Israelites, “they have had kings reigning all the time”! After Christ was risen from the dead the apostles asked Him this question: “Lord, wilt Thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel”? (Acts i, 6). “What a foolish question!” says the British-Israelites, “ for Israel has never ceased to be a kingdom! ” The following verse refers to the second coming of Christ: “After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up.” (Acts xv, 16.) The British-Israelites do not believe that verse either! The “profane wicked prince of Israel,” who is described in Ezekiel xxi, 25, 26, is Zedekiah, and then we read this: “I will overturn, overturn, overturn it; . . . until He come whose right it is; and I will give it Him.”—l am, etc., Maran-atha. [This correspondence is closed.—Ed. O.D.T.]