Active Users:1691 Time:26/09/2026 04:02:10 AM
The "begats" shouldn't be bypassed at all. Tom Send a noteboard - 01/02/2012 08:10:48 PM
There's an incredible amount of information that those "begats" give the reader. There are 42 generations, broken into a trinity of 14s. The numerological implication is significant, as 42 signifies the end of tribulation (i.e., the Messiah has come). Furthermore, the names remind the reader of the continuity with the Old Testament, which is important from a traditional Christian standpoint to refute groups that wanted to discard the Old Testament completely. It's why Matthew comes first in the New Testament, actually.

Not only that, but there are further implications. The reader is reminded of the original covenant with Abraham, of the Exodus, the anointing of David and the promise made that the Messiah would arise from his house, the Babylonian exile and the entire spiritual tradition of the Jews.

Furthermore, the whole concept of Hebrew tradition is stood on its head at the very end. The list begins like one of the numerous lists from the Old Testament, then ends by reminding us that Joseph was not Jesus's father. Spiritually, Jesus is the descendant of this house, but physically he is not. He fulfills the promise made, over and over again, to the forebears of Joseph but he comes directly from God.

Also, the unusual circumstances of his birth are legitimized by mention of the four other women prior to Mary who get referenced in that whole list of "begats". Tamar, who posed as a prostitute to have sex with her father-in-law, Rahab, the prostitute of Jericho who hid the Israelite spies before Joshua had the town destroyed, Ruth, who was a Moabite and not even Jewish and whose marriage to Boaz was very unconventional, and Bathsheba, who committed adultery with David while her husband Uriah was fighting in the army (and placed so as to die).

There's a reason why they're mentioned. Anyone reading that whole list and familiar with the stories sees how everything comes together perfectly. All those "begats" are incredibly important in tying the Old Testament to the New.
Political correctness is the pettiest form of casuistry.

ἡ δὲ κἀκ τριῶν τρυπημάτων ἐργαζομένη ἐνεκάλει τῇ φύσει, δυσφορουμένη, ὅτι δὴ μὴ καὶ τοὺς τιτθοὺς αὐτῇ εὐρύτερον ἢ νῦν εἰσι τρυπώη, ὅπως καὶ ἄλλην ἐνταῦθα μίξιν ἐπιτεχνᾶσθαι δυνατὴ εἴη. – Procopius

Ummaka qinnassa nīk!

*MySmiley*
Reply to message
Inspired by The Guardian, which books (classic or otherwise) do you think could be shorter? - 30/01/2012 02:10:22 PM 1548 Views
What'll happen if I mention The Count of Monte Cristo? - 30/01/2012 02:25:56 PM 1071 Views
LOL - 30/01/2012 04:30:07 PM 1250 Views
- 30/01/2012 05:05:19 PM 1064 Views
The Wheel of Time. *NM* - 30/01/2012 02:59:03 PM 544 Views
Agreed. *NM* - 30/01/2012 03:10:23 PM 435 Views
Hmph. *NM* - 30/01/2012 10:05:04 PM 461 Views
Hmph indeed. *NM* - 31/01/2012 05:38:18 PM 456 Views
<3 *NM* - 31/01/2012 06:01:10 PM 421 Views
Exactly. - 30/01/2012 03:26:23 PM 1080 Views
I'd really love someone to do a good job of this. - 30/01/2012 04:29:01 PM 1034 Views
I don't think Ivanhoe really needs to be pruned - 30/01/2012 03:22:37 PM 1080 Views
Mansfield Park needs a jolly good rework. - 30/01/2012 04:34:54 PM 1025 Views
In fairness, all Mansfield Park needs to be cut is its heroine... - 30/01/2012 10:34:43 PM 1091 Views
The Karamazov Brothers, or whichever order those words go in. - 30/01/2012 08:16:19 PM 1069 Views
War and Peace. That second epilogue really has to go. - 30/01/2012 10:37:28 PM 1176 Views
"Could" be shorter doesn't always mean "should" be shorter. - 31/01/2012 02:18:44 AM 1146 Views
Re: "Could" be shorter doesn't always mean "should" be shorter. - 31/01/2012 04:00:13 AM 1154 Views
I agree. I would even go farther than that. - 01/02/2012 07:59:13 PM 1192 Views
Re: I agree. I would even go farther than that. - 02/02/2012 12:51:45 PM 1249 Views
I don't really think any book should be abridged - 31/01/2012 09:50:34 AM 1151 Views
The Bible. Although I hear it's sort of been abridged before. - 31/01/2012 04:46:28 PM 1120 Views
Why would you cut out Matthew 1? - 31/01/2012 05:11:24 PM 1006 Views
Not all of it. - 01/02/2012 04:14:13 PM 1180 Views
The "begats" shouldn't be bypassed at all. - 01/02/2012 08:10:48 PM 1003 Views
Tom. Thanks for that information. *NM* - 02/02/2012 02:10:34 PM 549 Views
Everything by Ayn Rand. - 31/01/2012 05:46:11 PM 1016 Views
Everything by Thomas Hardy - 02/02/2012 02:27:03 PM 1095 Views

Reply to Message