Featured

[Featured][bsummary]

O Come, O Come, Emmanuel!

We have another reader contribution to share with you.  This one is from SilentKnight (thank you, brother!).  I have to say that I find this Scripturally/exegetically convincing for a number of reasons, but time does not permit me to unpack that all myself.  In short, I think that Isaiah 7:14, like Revelation 12:5, speaks both of Christ and His Church.  Both are necessary parts in the fulfillment of these prophecies.



O Come, O Come, Emmanuel! – Part 1

In light of Revelation 12 and the upcoming sign on September 23, 2017, there have been many discussions about the woman and the man-child that is to be born. We have spoken about her without a name, though sometimes we call her Israel. We have spoken of the child without a name, though many call him Jesus. Some of the divide between groups of believers is tied to the identity of this unnamed child. For months now, as I have watched the debate about who the child is, I have resisted the urge to shout out his name. But I do believe the time has come to share his name.

The woman is Zion, the child is Emmanuel.

Before you dismiss this too quickly, allow me to take you on a short biblical journey. A journey that will possibly leave you with a new appreciation for what is about to take place and what the sign means for Christ's Body. You may also chuckle a little with God as He reveals hidden truth out of error!

I know! We’ve all been taught that Emmanuel is Jesus. Amy Grant even sings about it. We sing about Emmanuel at Christmas. Because of the baby. You know, the one that is Jesus.

But where do we get that from? Why do we believe that Jesus is Emmanuel? Would you believe it all comes from just one verse in Matthew? Let’s take a closer look at the first chapter of Matthew and see what might be hidden there.


What’s in a name?

Matthew 1:18-23:

Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily. But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, 'Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel', which being interpreted is, God with us.

Wait, what? "And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus." How did this fulfill the word of the prophet saying, "they shall call his name Emmanuel"?

There it is. From this verse, countless songs, sermons, poems, and books have attached the name Emmanuel to Jesus. But God may be hiding something beautiful here. First of all, if we want to take things literally and hold God to account, then technically they didn’t name him Emmanuel which is what the prophecy said. But we have been taught not to question things, so sure, it fulfills the prophecy. And certainly, Jesus is and will be with us in fulfillment of this name (via the Incarnation). So I will not outright steal that name from him. But there is more going on here.


What’s in a number?

There is another problem in Matthew 1 as well. A second "error". Perhaps the two errors work together to form a hidden truth. In Matthew 1:22, Matthew starts by saying, "And all this has come to pass…" We naturally go back to verse 18 where Matthew starts talking about the birth of "Jesus Christ" and we think, that is what the "all this" is that is referred to in Matthew 1:22. But Matthew had already written 17 more verses prior to 18. What if the "all this" included "all that"? So, what is in the first 17 verses? A bunch of names of people who begat a bunch of other people. The kind of stuff you skip over to get to the good stuff. Let’s not skip it this time.

Matthew 1:1-16:

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren; And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram; And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon; And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse; And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias; And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa; And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias; And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias; And Ezekias begat Manasses; and Manasses begat Amon; and Amon begat Josias; And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon: And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel; And Zorobabel begat Abiud; and Abiud begat Eliakim; and Eliakim begat Azor; And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud; And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob; And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

Matthew 1:17:

So, all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.

ALL of this came to pass in order to fulfill the word of the prophet about Emmanuel. But that still leaves us with the Jesus and Emmanuel issue.

So, why does Matthew tell us the number of the generations in verse 17? Can’t we count for ourselves if we really want to know the number? He is telling us so that we will notice that he counted wrong. If he hadn’t told us the count, we never would have noticed a problem, but if you look closely, there are 14 generations between Abraham and David, there are 14 generations between David and Babylon, but (unless you double count Jechonias) there are only 13 generations between Babylon and Jesus. Not 14 like Matthew said. So please permit me the license to simplify Matthew 1 to get straight to the point:

Modified Matthew 1:

These are the generations of Jesus Christ, 14 generations from Abraham to David, fourteen generations from David to Babylon, and 14 generations from Babylon to Christ. Now the birth of JESUS Christ was like this. Mary had a baby and they named him Jesus. All of this fulfills the word of the prophet saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

Matthew is differentiating Christ from Jesus Christ. You see, Jesus was the 13th generation. Emmanuel is the 14th generation. Matthew did not count wrong. Nor did he get the fulfillment of prophecy wrong. Matthew was giving us the big picture. Watch what happens when we use this story as a type of things to come.

Modified Matthew 1:18-23:

Now the birth of Emmanuel was on this wise: When as his mother (the bride) was espoused to Jesus, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Jesus her husband, being just, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily. But while he thought on these things, behold, the Father said to him, Jesus, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Emmanuel.

Glory be to God on high! Again, this is just a modified version to demonstrate how perfectly it serves as a type or foreshadowing of what is to come.  Of course the actual Scripture speaks only of Mary and Joseph.


So who is Emmanuel?

Mary is the picture of the bride of Christ. The Bride of Christ is Zion (Rev. 21:9-10). And in a physical sense – is the church of those who believe on the Word of God. Mary said to the angel – "let it be so, according to your word." When we believe in God’s Word incarnate, Jesus Christ, we are saying to Him – "Let it be so, according to your word!"

We then receive the earnest of the spirit – it is our moment of Pentecost. The seed of God is within us and through sanctification we begin to nourish the child within (the new creature). Until one day, we bring forth the man-child. Of course, this is all a metaphor. But it is the metaphor that God chose to best illustrate his relationship to us and to the new us. This gets a bit confusing, because the bride is really the belief system that grafts us into Israel, grafts us into the kingdom of God. It is not any one of us, but all of us together – it is Zion (Rev. 21:9-10). At the same time, Zion is birthing the Sons of God - Emmanuel.

There is much work for Emmanuel to do and an inheritance to receive:

Revelation 3:21:

To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.

What Jesus has received from his father, he hands down to us.


* * *


A look at the original Immanuel prophecy

Let’s go back to the original prophecy that Matthew was claiming to be fulfilled and take a closer look.

Isaiah 7:12-14, 12:

But Ahaz said, 'I will not ask, nor will I test the Lord.' 13 Then he said, 'Listen now, O house of David! Is it too slight a thing for you to try the patience of men, that you will try the patience of my God as well? 14 Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign; Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.'

Immanuel means "God with us". The prophecy will be finally fulfilled in Revelation 21:3:

And I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, 'Behold, the tabernacle of God is among men, and He will dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them.'

Notice that this is not true yet. It is a future fulfillment. Now, there was an immediate fulfillment for Ahaz, it was fulfilled in the birth of his son Hezekiah, who went on to defeat the Assyrian assault on Jerusalem. It will be fulfilled in full when Immanuel is born during the fulfillment of Revelation 12, which leads to God dwelling among (with) us.

But let’s look closer at the original prophecy in Isaiah 7:11:

Ask thee a sign of the LORD thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above.

Do you see it? This is a sign, and God even says, shall it be in the height above? Then John comes along 800 years or so later and says, "I saw a great and wondrous sign in the heavens, a woman..." Also, if you read the seventh chapter of Isaiah, you will see that Isaiah is told to bring his son, with him to the meeting. His son’s name, Shearjashub means "a remnant shall return".

There is much more to say about Emmanuel but that will have to wait for part 2. In the meantime, please enjoy this music and listen to the words with a new outlook on their prophetic meaning.


Gary's summary:

1. The original prophecy of Immanuel called for a sign in the depth or the height above (Is. 7:11-14; compare to Mic. 5:3, Rev. 12:1-2).  Not on the earth.  The sign is of a virgin woman in labor (Virgo) giving birth to a son.

2. The prophecy in Isaiah 7:14 emphatically stated that the child would be named Immanuel, but Joseph was commanded by an angel to name his Son Jesus and not Immanuel.

3. Unless you double-count Jechonias (which some people do), there were only 13 generations from the exile to Jesus, not 14, thus the completion of the prophecy occurs when Christ's mystical Body (the Church) is birthed and joined to the head.  The Church is the 14th generation and is properly Immanuel.

4. Jesus was then the template or foreshadowing of both Isaiah 7:14 and Revelation 12:5, but the final, literal, word-for-word fulfillments of both prophecies occurs when the Church is birthed and raptured.

I'll add an additional point: the name Immanuel contains the informal name for God or god, which is "El" as in "Elohim", whereas it is widely understood that the name Jesus contains part of the proper Divine Name of Yahweh.  Thus there may be an intentional and pointed distinction here between the names showing the reader that Christ is truly Yahweh, but Immanuel is little 'e' elohim.

Post A Comment
  • Blogger Comment using Blogger
  • Facebook Comment using Facebook
  • Disqus Comment using Disqus

54 comments :

  1. Gary- That was an awesome divinely inspired post.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you brother. All credit to SilentKnight (Jim) for this one!

      Delete
  2. "...For as soon as Zion was in labor,
    She gave birth to her children." (is. 66:8)

    Excellent post! Thank you for sharing this!

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "My pastor then says that there are people who look for constant signs from God but end up getting so absorbed into looking for signs that they forget what the main purpose of the Bible is; Jesus Christ."

      That's true and it's a good thing that's not the case here. Our focus is the Gospel and we trumpet it very loudly.

      Delete
  4. Gary, thank you very much for this elaborate bible study! Some posts ago, one of your unsealed articles had led me to examine exactly this name "Immanuel" and I also have commented on this ambiguity the HS revealed to me. It further reminds me of John 1:14 (now look what it says in context just the verse prior to that about those who are born from above!) "the word became flesh and dwelt/tabernacled among/in us". Further more, it might be interesting to examine the person of Ahaz and how he did humblebrag before God NOT to demand a sign! Is that how God works? No, of course not! We are in contrary CALLED to ask for signs from God and to let Him reveal them to us! I think the traditional teaching in church did as well misinterpret 1 Corinthians 1:22 in that way that the "Greeks" i.e. the foremost heathen church do not want or need signs whereas signs are ONLY meant for Jews. Thus, the church rejected signs of God completely. But that is NOT what the verse says!! It only stresses how BOTH groups are missing the gospel (read context!) because the ones focus on signs too much and the others too much on intellectual discernment and NO ONE of them gets the message by heart! That is what these verses say and NOT that we ought not to look for signs (in the heavens) AT ALL! Much love to you, bless you Jesus! :)

    ReplyDelete
  5. WOW! MIND BLOWN! Thank you Gary. When I read this "The woman is Zion, the child is Emmanuel." All kinds of lights turned on in my head.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Big thank you to SilentKnight (Jim)

      Delete
    2. Thanks James. It's exciting stuff and I hope to get more out soon.

      Delete
  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Like one of those pictures that reveal another picture when you stare at it long enough to unfocus your eyes and go deep, this is another teaching unfolding during THESE times which are part of the bloom of the rose, petal after petal unfolding, as the Lord's End Times Wisdom, captured in the 'Scroll of Daniel' is ongoingly UNSEALED. Thank you, Maranatha :)

    ReplyDelete
  8. This scripture in Isaiah 7 has been given to me twice when I have asked for confirmation on the Revelation 12 sign. Just these past two days, I have been thinking on it and the name Immanuel. The Holy Spirit reminded me that Immanuel means God with us or God + us(the church). We will be united to our Head at the resurrection/rapture, and will finally be Immanuel, God with us. I just find it amazing that He was showing us the same thing at the same time! God is good and so gracious to send confirmation to what the Spirit says, especially because I am prone to question if it was really Him that I heard. God bless you and thanks for sharing this wonderful insight! Blessings in Christ Jesus, Kay.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kay, there is even more to the timing that you might think. I have been waiting to reveal this information for a while now. This timing came down to multiple aspects that all came to fruition today. So the spirit may have held back this article just to confirm his message to you.

      Delete
  9. What an awesome article - the bible is even deeper and more mind blowing than I even realized! Praise God for giving us the living word!

    ReplyDelete
  10. the author's modified Matthew 1:18-23 (changing Joseph to Jesus) just sounds wrong

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For me the same thoughts.. I think its a strong connection from isaiah to revelation, but modifying Joseph to Jesus doesn't make much sense and sounds almost blasphemic.. Jesus has no son..
      Maybe better to state it as it is: The sign of the virgin is coming out a second time.
      By the way: There was a sign in the sky with the birth of Jesus: The magi saw it and came to see the newborn King

      Delete
    2. How can a comparison Joseph-Jesus be blasphemic? Joseph and his brethren is the most stunning foreshadow to Christ revealing himself to Israel in the end of 7 years tribulation. "Jesus has no sons"? Now who are WE then if " he and the father are 1" John 10:30? Ephraim was blessed before Manasseh and is a foreshadow of the "multitude of nations" (Genesis 48:19) See Matthew 5:9 / Luke 20:36 / Romans 8:14+19; 9:26 / Galatians 3:26 we are constantly called "Sons of God". We are called his brethren and friends too but Jesus calls his disciples "children" too - see John 21:5 those were adult men going fishing! ;) Peace and grace unto you

      Delete
  11. yellow stone is going crazy...sorry- small digression.

    ReplyDelete
  12. WOW is right!!!! Just checked my quake app. Talk about birthing pains!! Dolly needs to update her RIS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Right at the same time lil Kim is testing another nuke. Pressures on (excuse the pun).

      Delete
    2. It showed up on my quake watch app. 6.3!!! YIKES!

      Delete
  13. How can you be a Silent Knight when you and Gary go about blowing people's mind!?!
    I'm singing and doing a jig after taking a swig of this intoxicating revelation wine! I'm so joyful inside after reading this article!!

    May your oil never run dry! Shalom!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Had to chuckle at this Ejimanze. :) Don't hurt yourself!

      Delete
    2. You should change your handle to "The Trumpeting Knight"!! Keep up the good work!

      Delete
  14. It is amazing how multiple pieces of scripture are being revealed of late. Micah 5, the various verses of Isaiah, Leviticus...and now this. Amazing...great job SK!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Lance. I hope to share more in order to bring hope, joy, and understanding to those who are awake and looking up...

      Delete
  15. Mat 1:18 says JESUS not Immanu El which means Saturn is with us.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Brilliant! (Part One)

    SilentKnight, your study reminded me of a study I had done on the line of Jesus through both Joseph and Mary. Along the way I had mapped the generations on a spreadsheet to graphically layout how each generation gives rise to the next. Each generation begins with the father of the next and each father being given a number to refer to the generational iteration.

    We know that there were 42-generations given us in The Gospel According to Matthew. My intention was to see what that looked like visually counting generations and lining them up according to (Matthew 1:17 NKJV)

    "So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations, from David until the captivity in Babylon are fourteen generations, and from the captivity in Babylon until the Christ are fourteen generations."

    Here is what I found: The model understand that G-D is the Father of Abraham. Each father/son generation is assigned a generational number. Two methods are used starting with generation "0" or starting with generation "1". Thus the first generation of G-D the Father of Abraham is assigned the number zero "0" in one column and "1" in an adjacent column. The first generation of Abraham in this family tree would be assigned the number "1" or "2" depending on where we begin the count.

    The layout understands that father and son share the same row but adjacent columns. Each row begins with the father and ends with the son. The son of one row is then the father of the next. This is the structure that is given in Scripture and that which is required to create the pattern that gives us 14-generations of (Matthew 1:1-6 NKJV), 14-generations of (Matthew 1:7-11 NKJV) and the 14-generations of (Matthew 1:12-16).

    Tracking to the 40th generation from G-D we find Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus. (I will let you unpack the significance of "40" in this context). G-D in Christ by the Holy Spirit gave rise (birth) to the Church on Pentecost, thus the Church (we) were born of the 42nd generation from our father Abraham as children of Christ.

    Looking at the generations by column you will either see that from G-D to Christ there are 42-generations (0-41) or that from Abraham to the Church there are 42-generations (1-42).

    I added an additional reference using the days of the week to represent each generation. Keeping the Sabbath holy I used Sunday as the first day of creation and Abraham's birth. (Remember that this is a figurative reference to a day of the week not literal). Tracking the days through the generations we find that David, son of Jesse, was "born" on the Sabbath. Joseph, son of Jacob of the house of David, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, falls on a "Friday" and that Christ, Fathers the Church by His Holy Spirit on the Sabbath (Saturday). In other words, the seven day model suggests that the Church could be born on a Sabbath.

    Remember, my use of days of the week (above) are symbolic and not literal. They are being used as part of a search for patterns of evidence. One pattern which is clearly seen is in 42-days or six, sevens. (7+7+7+7+7+7=42)

    ReplyDelete
  17. Brilliant! (Part Two)

    Another spreadsheet I created maps the first Pentecost. If we understand that our Lord Jesus Christ was crucified on Friday, April 3, 33AD (The Day of the Cross according to historical and stellar research by Rick Larson on the Star of Bethlehem) and that He rose on the third day being, Sunday, April 5, 33AD; then we can count the days until His Ascension being, Friday, May 15, 33AD (assuming His ascension in daylight based upon ). This would make the birthday of the Church on Saturday, May 23, 33AD.

    I modelled this while asking if the birth of the Church was a foreshadowing of the coming Rapture? If so, may we inquire as to the time of day?

    If my dates are right then the Sabbath began at sunset on Friday, May 22, 33AD. Peter gives us the time of day of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit via (Acts 2:15 NKJV),

    "For these are not drunk, as you suppose, since it is only the third hour of the day."

    ...with the third hour of the day being about or shortly after 9am.


    If, by this model, we understand the Church as being the 42nd generation from Abraham, and that the Church was spiritually born, "When the Day of Pentecost had fully come," (Acts 2:1 NKJV); may we also ask the question if the birth of the Church on that first Pentecost is a foreshadowing of the Rapture? Many have answered this as "yes". If so, may we also understand that the birth of the Church about the ninth hour foreshadows the time of day of the Rapture of the Church?

    If so, we may want to be looking sometime after sunset on Friday, September 22nd and the ninth hour of Saturday, September 23rd. Looking at that time frame what do we find? That in the ninth hour of Saturday, September 23, 2017 the moon will rise over Jerusalem (According to "https://www.timeanddate.com/moon/israel/jerusalem" will be at 0-degrees elevation, 101-degrees EAST at 0916); bringing into "view" the fullness of what we here call the Sign of Revelation 12.

    This appears to fit with the timing given us by Matthew as Peter addresses the mockers who said, "They are full of new wine."

    "New wine" indeed! How prophetic and unintended by the mockers I'm sure!

    The Greek renders (Acts 2:13 NKJV) this way,

    2.13 BUT~OTHERS MOCKING WERE SAYING - OF SWEET WINE THEY HAVE BEEN FILLED.

    What sweet wine indeed! It's an image that takes me back to the Cana wedding with water, wine and marriage!

    Challenge: Dig on the details of Jewish marriage and look for parallels to the coming Rapture?


    CLOSING

    Am I suggesting to know the time or day of the Rapture? No. I am simply digging for the hidden things which the men of Hezekiah king of Judah copied from the proverbs of Solomon saying,

    "It is the glory of God to conceal
    a matter,
    But the glory of kings is to
    search out a matter."


    Fear not. Question everything. Hold fast to the LORD and love like there is no tomorrow!

    Grace and peace to you,


    Pastor Rich

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Reminds me of the new convent Matthew 26:29 where Jesus said , But I say unto you , I will not drink from this fruit of the vine , from now on until that DAY that I drink it NEW with you in my fathers Kingdom !Rapture , Wedding day ? Maranatha !

      Delete
  18. Wow, what a find. You were surely led by the Spirit in this. One of the greatest revelations of all time I think. The altitude of my peace joy and strength are soaring. The value and significance of this website is immeasurable. Its like an indestructible tank we are riding in through a battlefield. Thank you! !!!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Find the spreadsheet I created here: http://www.firstflightmedia.com/Rich/Line-of-Joseph.xls

    Feel free to study, change, debunk or expand on it if you will.

    With thanks,

    PR

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Richard I tend to follow Scott Clarkes explanation about Pentecost being the "conception" of the church by the Holy Spirit and rapture i.e. resurrection equalling the "birth" which was long time teached with a misleading label. As he explains it it makes complete sense to me with so many other scriptures about "birth". Furthermore, the day and time of the rapture is clearly stated by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:52 so it HAS TO be at the Feast of Trumpets. Blessings, YSIC

      Delete
    2. Thanks for sharing your research Richard. I haven't read through what you wrote, but will try to get a chance to do so.

      Delete
    3. Annabel,

      Thank you for your response! I think we are on the same page and I rather like your choice of the word "conception". That may be better understood in our modern context. For if the Church is seen in light of a developing fetus yet to be born in the presence of G-D, then we do have a complete picture of the Church Age as being that of a child in the womb, all Her days written and complete in Christ.

      I honestly think that we can view the first Pentecost as either birth or conception. It is a matter of perspective. Part of the beauty and symmetry of the Gospel is it's ability to shed light (truth) through many different perspectives, as light through a diamond.

      Thinking "out loud", both birth and conception are equal to life and are differentiated by developmental progress. If the church was born on Pentecost, then it has since been progressing developmentally until a future point in time. Conception does not impart this concept, thus why I would not have used that term. That said, "conception" does perfectly describe the inception of the Church at Pentecost, one which will be born on Her delivery day; the Rapture.

      So I can see it both ways. Thank you for expanding my viewpoint in this!

      Excellent, thank you!

      I am continuing to do my own study into the finer details of the FOT per execution, timing and duration.

      Blessings to you!

      YBiC

      Delete
    4. All,

      One more note on the model provided above. Double counting was troublesome to me. I am not saying that it is wrong, but it did not sit well with in my spirit. It was a stumbling block in working with this until recently.

      My studies did not begin in what I have called the "Line of Joseph" from Matthew. (Linked above and reflective of SilentKnight's inspired writing). My studies began with the "Line of Mary" from (Luke 3:23-38 NKJV). Luke traces Jesus earthly lineage all the way to Adam, "the son of God." Matthew does not.

      Chief reasons I started by using G-D the father of Abraham in my "Line of Joseph" are found in (Luke 3:38 NKJV) and (Deuteronomy 6:5 NKJV). G-D should be first in all things, the beginning and the end. This is how these spreadsheets are modelled. G-d the Father of all things and first in all things. G-d the Son, the last which is first. All things point to the Christ.

      Secondly, is that Luke specifically names Adam as "the son of God." It was then a natural thing to begin my study of Matthew with G-D the Father of Abraham. This is an unspoken truth in the lineage of Joseph so I began the line from Abraham with G-D The Father as generation zero in one view, Abraham His son as generation one in another.

      The number of generations from G-D The Father to Christ who Fathered His Church is 42-generations. (0-41) The number of generations from Abraham the father of Isaac to the Church being the child of Christ is 42-generations. (1-42). Forgive me for repeating my earlier posting.

      It just became apparent that there were parallel lines being reconciled one to another. G-D to Abraham (and his children). Christ to His children (the Church).

      In this view there was no overlap as a result of the deportation. Just another perspective.

      YBiC

      PR

      Delete
  20. My mind is blown. My heart is pounding and spirit is weeping with confirmation from God the Father. He has been showing me 7:14 everywhere repeatedly for months, I didn't know what He was trying to show me. 7-14 is my birthday, but I was sure it was something much more. Tonight it was confirmed, through more REVEALING and confirmation of what is coming.. My heart is overwhelmed with His continual confirmations and my spirit so excited.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  21. Sorry, I can't quite see it. It explicitly notes 'from Abraham to David', if we count Abraham as 1 (rather than starting first at Abrahams offspring), then there is no issue with counting Jechonias twice, particularly as Matthew is explicit in noting "from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations". From the carrying away is different to 'after babylon' which is when Jechonias had his son. I believe counting Jechonias twice here is intentional.

    and let us not forget Isaiah 9 "For unto us a Child is born,
    Unto us a Son is given;
    And the government will be upon His shoulder.
    And His name will be called
    Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
    Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace"

    His earthly name was 'Jesus', but he was indeed our "Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace", and our King of Kings, our Lord of Lords, and most definitely our Emmanuel, for Jesus, at his birth, literally became God with us (on earth), and when Christ ascended into heaven, God remained "with us" (as the Holy Spirit), and he will be with us (his bride) in flesh/spirit in the coming kingdom.

    Note that Mary did not call Jesus 'Wonderful', 'counsellor' etc, as all these names embodied the trinity, just as Emmanuel embodies the trinity in its entirety.

    The key scripture to all this. Isaiah 7 - and a VIRGIN will give birth to a son. Israel was called virgin Israel at one point, but also accused of being an adulterous wife. Mary was the only individual who could fulfil this. A constellation 'virgo' that we see as a great sign in heaven, cannot be counted the same as Isaiah 7, as we know that the virgin in Isaiah was conceived with child, virgo Rev12 does not mention conception, and was not deemed a virgin in Rev12.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Couple things that might help:

      1. The word for Virgin in Isaiah 7 can also mean young woman. Else it would not have been fulfilled in Ahaz's wife. Remember, there are multiple fulfillments of this prophecy, but it started with an immediate fulfillment for Ahaz.

      2. Certainly, Jesus did fulfill elements of "God With Us", but notice that even Isaiah 9 did not add Emmanuel to Jesus' names. Once again, though, I won't take the title from Jesus, I'm just adding it to the Sons.

      3. Rev 12 does not mention conception, but I believe that is implied by the fact that she is pregnant. The Isa 7 prophecy covers both the conception and the birth. Rev 12 is dealing with the later stages of pregnancy and the birth.

      4. Counting Jechonias twice is certainly a valid way of looking at things. But I believe counting that generation only once is also valid. If you just count the generations mentioned in Matt 1, you will not find 42, only 41 and the missing one is in the last group. It is true that if you break it down based on Babylon, then Jechonias was involved before and after (or rather during), but the wording of "14 generations" is not true. So I think Matthew may have been inspired to allow this ambiguity so that we could see this hidden secret at some point.

      Your viewpoints are certainly important. What I wrote is just something to consider, and if it brings joy and/or understanding that is wonderful.

      Thanks for reading and for your thoughts.

      Delete
  22. SK,

    I had also ran into the problem of double counting in my model. This is when I considered the differentiation of Jesus and Christ generationally and came to much the same conclusion you have shared here.

    PR

    ReplyDelete
  23. So so beautiful!
    Thank you so much for this. Our God is so great and wonderful!

    ReplyDelete
  24. My wife and I were talking of the first Pentecost today on the way to an appointment. Today was the first time I have discussed it with anyone from the perspective of conception and not birth.

    During that conversation I had a bit of an epiphany. She was perplexed by Isaiah 66:7, which makes perfect sense! Afterall, "Who has seen such things?" But I immediately blurted out something that could only have come from the Holy Spirit.

    Christ, the Head of the Church was born first was He not? Why is it strange that the head comes before the body? Then I realised that human childbirth is just like that! We are meant to be born head first followed by the body.

    This may be a reason why we see the Sign in two different lights. One light being the birth of Christ, The Head of the Church to be followed by the Church which is His Body at the Rapture.

    If so, then even the human occiput anterior (head first) position childbirth foreshadows the Rapture.

    Blessings to all,

    PR

    ReplyDelete
  25. I don't quite get all that you are saying in this article, but I find it very interesting. Especially since the day before I read it the Lord answered my prayer to be led in the truth about the sign in Rev. 12 by speaking to me through songs and road signs. He put in my mind that Immanuel God with us will happen at the rapture. We will be one then. (Like Jesus prayed in John 17). I guess He knew I just needed it explained simply :) I hope the next article comes out soon!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's always awesome when God hears and responds to our desire to know him and understand him better.

      Delete
  26. The apokalypsis of the sons of God came to mind as I read this article:
    For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation(apokalypsis) of the sons of God. - Romans 8:19 KJV
    And not only [they], but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, [to wit], the redemption of our body. - Romans 8:23 KJV

    ReplyDelete
  27. #3 "...this generation shall not pass away..." (paraphrased)

    ReplyDelete
  28. If you want your ex-girlfriend or ex-boyfriend to come crawling back to you on their knees (no matter why you broke up) you must watch this video
    right away...

    (VIDEO) Have your ex CRAWLING back to you...?

    ReplyDelete


Recommended

[Top Post][grids]

World News

[Top World News][bleft]

Highlights

[Highlights][twocolumns]

Bible Study

[Bible Study][list]

Astronomy

[Astronomy][bleft]

Greg's Thoughts

[Top Greg][twocolumns]

Jeff's Musings

[Top Jeff][bsummary]

Birth Pangs

[Birth Pangs][bleft]

Politics

[Political][twocolumns]

Wolf Watch

[Wolves][bsummary]

In-Depth Articles

[In-Depth][bleft]

Archaeology

[Archaeology][twocolumns]

Science

[Top Science][list]