FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43  
44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   >>  
e is familiar with the genealogy of our Lord in the first chapter of St. Matthew's gospel. Three links are manifestly omitted in the eighth verse, between Joram and Ozias--namely, Ochozias, Joaz, and Amasias. We cannot suppose that St. Matthew, himself a Jew, could have been in error about the genealogy of the house of David. Much less can we suppose that he would have attempted, on this point, to deceive the Jews, for whom he wrote his gospel. Above all, it is plain, that if he had fallen into such an error; it would have been at once discovered and have been proclaimed to the world by the enemies of the Christian religion. We must infer, therefore, that it was perfectly conformable to the usage of the Jewish nation to say, "Joram begot Ozias", although in point of fact three generations had intervened between them. Now, Dr. Colenso must admit that his examples will prove absolutely nothing, if omissions of this kind were made in the genealogies from which they are taken. _We_ do not assert that such _was_ the case; but we challenge _him_ to prove that it was _not_. Take, for example, the text: "And the sons of Pallu, Eliab" (_Num._, xxvi. 8). Can he show that no intervening links are omitted between these two names? He will find, on a close examination of the Pentateuch, from which he professes to derive his data, that Pallu must have been over 110 years of age when Eliab was born. It is, therefore, most likely that there were two or perhaps three links omitted in this genealogy between Pallu and Eliab. If so, we should add two or three generations in the examples which Dr. Colenso has adduced from the family of Pallu. He cannot argue that Pallu was the _immediate father_ of Eliab, because it is said that Eliab was the _son_ of Pallu: for do we not also read: "The Book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the _son of David_, the _son of Abraham"?_ (_Matth._, i. 1). II. Dr. Colenso next assumes that the 600,000 men of the exodus were _all_ descendants of Jacob. We contend, as a far more probable opinion, that amongst them were counted, not only the descendants of _Jacob himself_, but also the descendants of his _servants_. If we take up the book of Genesis, and glance through the brief history of the Patriarchs, we shall find abundant reason to believe that, when Jacob was invited by Joseph to come down into Egypt, he must have had a goodly retinue of servants. His grandfather, Abraham, had been able to lead forth an a
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43  
44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   >>  



Top keywords:

descendants

 
Colenso
 

omitted

 

genealogy

 

servants

 

examples

 

Matthew

 

generations

 
gospel
 

Abraham


suppose

 

generation

 

Christ

 

adduced

 

family

 
father
 

familiar

 

abundant

 
reason
 

invited


Patriarchs

 

glance

 

history

 

Joseph

 
grandfather
 

retinue

 

goodly

 

Genesis

 

exodus

 

assumes


contend

 

counted

 
opinion
 
probable
 

proclaimed

 

enemies

 

Christian

 

discovered

 

fallen

 

religion


nation

 
Jewish
 

perfectly

 

conformable

 

manifestly

 

Ochozias

 

Amasias

 

eighth

 
deceive
 
attempted