Thoughts for the Day

Luke 1:26-27 In the sixth month of Elizabeth’s pregnancy, God sent the angel Gabriel to Nazareth, a town in Galilee, to a virgin pledged to be married to a man named Joseph, a descendant of David. The virgin’s name was Mary.

Here begins a conundrum.  If Jewish tribal lineage is traced through the male line (which seems the case) and Jesus had no earthly father (the virgin birth is fundamental to Christianity), how do we understand Jesus as the promised king from the line of David?  It seems a stumbling block for those looking for a legalistic answer, and a trap for those determined to make it fit.  But can there be an answer that doesn’t deny at least one of these statements?  Chris Wright in speaking about prophecy imagines a Victorian grandfather promising his grandson the independence of having his own horse when he grows up, but when the time comes buying him a car instead – something which neither of them could have envisaged but both fully accept.  Is there perhaps something of this here?  It’s hardly thinkable that tribal lineage rules would have made provision for a once in history supernatural virgin birth.  And surely the “what” of prophecy allows at least a little leeway for some unexpected “how”.  Consider too Paul’s argument that we are children of Abraham through faith rather than biology, or John the Baptist’s statement that God could raise up children of Abraham from mere stones.  Strict genealogists would certainly struggle with those linages!  And what about John the Baptist himself?  From Malachi we read “I will send you the prophet Elijah …” while Gabriel declares John will “go on before the Lord in the spirit and power of Elijah” and Jesus says of him “If you are willing to accept it, he is the Elijah who was to come.”  Perhaps that’s part of the answer too!  We do know Jesus was born into a Jewish family in the line of David, and, if we are willing to accept it, He is the promised King