Rephaim

[Rella]

Simply fascinating..... I just never looked into them much, until now

What say you?

[NyawehNyoh]

.
It amazes me the range of colors stemming from Adam; and the variety of sizes from Pygmy to Nephaim. Pretty remarkable; and makes one wonder what color Adam and his dimensions. What'd the guy look like that got all this started?

● Acts 17:26 . . He made from one, every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth

The Greek word translated "nation" is ethnos which basically pertains to race.

NOTE: Quid Pro Quo: your turn; what say you Rella?
_

[Texas Conservative]

[Texas Conservative]

Dogs and wolves are the same species.  Look at the variety in dogs.  From tall to small.  It's not hard to envision it is the same with humans.

[Alan]

Scary, scary, people.

[Rella]

.
It amazes me the range of colors stemming from Adam; and the variety of sizes from Pygmy to Nephaim. Pretty remarkable; and makes one wonder what color Adam and his dimensions. What'd the guy look like that got all this started?

● Acts 17:26 . . He made from one, every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth

The Greek word translated "nation" is ethnos which basically pertains to race.

NOTE: Quid Pro Quo: your turn; what say you Rella?
_

Well... I had always assumed that Adam would be of mid-eastern coloring because when Jesus came and was born to Mary , she would have had the miseastern colorings..... and her lineage went back that direction.

But truth be told could be wrong because Adam was formed from the ground... which could have made him black, as well as
the African nearness might conclude that to be the case.

But if you think back to when GOD made them.... Gen 1: 26 when God said " And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." 

The let them.... and I know it will be coming  ....might have meant that God formed the races at that point and sent each off to tend the earth where we commonly think those to be... i.e. The yellow people into the far east, the blacks to Africa, the darker skins to the mid east.. and the whiter ones to the north.

That would explain the start of the races,  and as they were to have dominion over everything and all the earth it could well be.... If there was only one man and one woman... and they were to multiply... only 2 people to take care of everything
until the kids grew up and married each other.

As to Adam... I think I am of the Mid eastern colorings.... but, if you have read me long enough you will know I think Adam was made separate from the people in Gen 1: 26.

Now, aren't you sorry you asked?

● Acts 17:26 . . He made from one, every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth.. However read below because we have only the benefit of what we normally read as our preferred translation of the bible.... which could indicate......

But then he killed them all with a flood... all except Noah and 7 others. His wife, Sones... and their wives.

We were never told specifics on this either but if the Sons each had wives of different colors... the races would continue on.

● Acts 17:26 . . He made from one, every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth   

Look at the wording in the Greek /English interlinear...

Hemade then of one every nation ofmen to dwell upon all theface of the earth havingdetermined [the]appointed times and the boundaries of the habitation of them ,

This surly explains where the assorted races came in. At least for me it does. :He made one of every nation of men and by saying the boundaries of them God specified the boundaries for their homelands.

Now just a word on the subject of this thread.

https://www.christianity.com/wiki/bible/who-are-the-rephaim-in-the-bible.html[/size]

Deuteronomy 2:20-21 mentions the Rephaim along with other large people. Deuteronomy is a book of the last words of Moses before Joshua sends them into the Promised Land, and Moses recounts much of the Israelite history.

In Deuteronomy 3, there is an interesting story about King Og of Bashan, a giant man who was the "last of the Rephaim."

The Hebrew word Rephaim is often translated as "giants," and taking the biblical descriptions into account, it's clear the Rephaim were considered giant people, tall of stature. ( I just could not resist mentioning this)The Rephaim could be interpreted as a people group, like the Israelites, or from a family line. Whichever, the Old Testament continually associates Rephaim with giant people.

For example, when describing King Og of Bashan, Deuteronomy says his bed was 14 feet by 6 feet, an object that people could still see years later. Deuteronomy 2 makes it clear in descriptions of those men that they were large or especially tall, what we would consider giants. 



● Acts 17:26 . . He made from one, every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth   

Look at the wording in the Greek /English interlinear...

Hemade then of one every nation ofmen to dwell upon all theface of the earth havingdetermined [the]appointed times and the boundaries of the habitation of them ,

This surly explains where the assorted races came in. At least for me it does. :He made one of every nation of men and by saying the boundaries of them God specified the boundaries for ther homelands.

[NyawehNyoh]

.
It's very easy to trace Jesus' biological origin.

● Luke 1:32 . . .The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David

Before Jesus could be considered for David's throne, he first had to be among David's biological descendants; no exceptions.

● Ps 89:35-36 . . Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure forever, and his throne as the sun before me.

● Ps 132:11 . .The Lord has sworn in truth unto David; and He will not turn from it: "Of the fruit of your body will I set upon your throne"

The New Testament verifies that Jesus satisfies the biological requirement.

● Acts 2:29-30 . . Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us unto this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne.

● Rom 1:1-3 . . Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh

The Greek word for "seed" is a mite ambiguous because it can refer to spiritual progeny as well as to biological progeny; for example:

● Gal 3:29 . . If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed.

Abraham's seed obviously refers to spiritual progeny; whereas David's seed refers to biological progeny because his is 1) the fruit of his body and 2) of his loins according to the flesh.

FAQ: Jesus was virgin conceived. How then could David possibly fit into Jesus' biological genealogy?

REPLY: That would be a piece of cake if Mary's biological father descended from David; which the genealogy given in Luke would easily prove were it not so controversial; and that's unfortunate because Luke's genealogy goes all the way back to Adam.
_

[Rella]

.
It's very easy to trace Jesus' biological origin.

● Luke 1:32 . . .The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David

Before Jesus could be considered for David's throne, he first had to be among David's biological descendants; no exceptions.

● Ps 89:35-36 . . Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure forever, and his throne as the sun before me.

● Ps 132:11 . .The Lord has sworn in truth unto David; and He will not turn from it: "Of the fruit of your body will I set upon your throne"

The New Testament verifies that Jesus satisfies the biological requirement.

● Acts 2:29-30 . . Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us unto this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne.

● Rom 1:1-3 . . Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh

The Greek word for "seed" is a mite ambiguous because it can refer to spiritual progeny as well as to biological progeny; for example:

● Gal 3:29 . . If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's seed.

Abraham's seed obviously refers to spiritual progeny; whereas David's seed refers to biological progeny because his is 1) the fruit of his body and 2) of his loins according to the flesh.

FAQ: Jesus was virgin conceived. How then could David possibly fit into Jesus' biological genealogy?

REPLY: That would be a piece of cake if Mary's biological father descended from David; which the genealogy given in Luke would easily prove were it not so controversial; and that's unfortunate because Luke's genealogy goes all the way back to Adam.
_

I will reply to you later.... I have some info that should help but am out of time at the moment.... LOL, replying to Buff took a wee bit longer 

[Amo]

The races and other differences which exist among us now, are no doubt nothing compared to that which God built into us by design. To facilitate I would imagine far greater variety than our increasingly devolved state allows for. The variety and complexity we see now, is observably far less than it once was. Not to mention the size of creatures and humans as well.

[Rella]

FAQ: Jesus was virgin conceived. How then could David possibly fit into Jesus' biological genealogy?

REPLY: That would be a piece of cake if Mary's biological father descended from David; which the genealogy given in Luke would easily prove were it not so controversial; and that's unfortunate because Luke's genealogy goes all the way back to Adam.
_

First the simple answer to the Mary question is because we are told that in 1 Chronicle 3:5
Mary was a descendant of David's son Nathan.

Davids sons were recorded in 1 Chron 3

Now these were the sons of David who were born to him in Hebron: the firstborn was Amnon, by Ahinoam the Jezreelitess; the second was Daniel, by Abigail the Carmelitess; 2 the third was Absalom the son of Maacah, the daughter of Talmai king of Geshur; the fourth was Adonijah the son of Haggith; 3 the fifth was Shephatiah, by Abital; the sixth was Ithream, by his wife Eglah. 4 Six were born to him in Hebron, and there he reigned seven years and six months. And in Jerusalem he reigned thirty-three years. 5 These were born to him in Jerusalem: Shimea, Shobab, Nathan and Solomon, four, by Bath-shua the daughter of Ammiel; 6 and Ibhar, Elishama, Eliphelet, 7 Nogah, Nepheg and Japhia, 8 Elishama, Eliada and Eliphelet, nine. 9 All these were the sons of David, besides the sons of the concubines; and Tamar was their sister.

It has been suggested that it was Josephs lineage that tied back to David and if so how, then, could Jesus be a descendant of David and qualify to sit on the throne? Enter the genealogy in Luke 3, which is Mary's. According to Jewish usage, Mary's ancestry is given in her husband's name. The original Greek merely says Joseph was "of Heli" or Eli (verse 23). In fact, since Joseph's father is said to be Jacob in Matthew 1:16, Heli is most probably Mary's father. Joseph, then, is his son-in-law.

What we do know of Joseph's pedigree.... in our search for Mary's

2 Samuel 7 : 8-17  ..... especially vs. 17

8 "Now therefore, thus you shall say to My servant David, 'Thus says the Lord of hosts, "I took you from the pasture, from following the sheep, to be ruler over My people Israel.

9 I have been with you wherever you have gone and have cut off all your enemies from before you; and I will make you a great name, like the names of the great men who are on the earth.

10 I will also appoint a place for My people Israel and will plant them, that they may live in their own place and not be disturbed again, nor will the wicked afflict them any more as formerly,

11 even from the day that I commanded judges to be over My people Israel; and I will give you rest from all your enemies. The Lord also declares to you that the Lord will make a house for you.

12 When your days are complete and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your [c]descendant after you, who will come forth from [d]you, and I will establish his kingdom.

13 He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever.

14 I will be a father to him and he will be a son to Me; when he commits iniquity, I will correct him with the rod of men and the strokes of the sons of men,

15 but My lovingkindness shall not depart from him, as I took it away from Saul, whom I removed from before you.

16 Your house and your kingdom shall endure before Me forever; your throne shall be established forever."'"

17 In accordance with all these words and all this vision, so Nathan spoke to David.

We know that David became king through  prophetic appointment, through Samuel.

As such...No one was allowed to sit on David's throne unless he was a member of the house of David.

NOW: Look at Mathew 1. The genealogy of Joseph.

Verse 6-17 David to Joseph:
6 Jesse was the father of David the king. David was the father of Solomon by Bathsheba who had been the wife of Uriah.

7 Solomon was the father of Rehoboam, Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asa.

8 Asa was the father of Jehoshaphat, Jehoshaphat the father of [j]Joram, and Joram the father of Uzziah.

9 Uzziah was the father of [k]Jotham, Jotham the father of Ahaz, and Ahaz the father of Hezekiah.

10 Hezekiah was the father of Manasseh, Manasseh the father of [l]Amon, and Amon the father of Josiah.

11 Josiah became the father of [m]Jeconiah and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon.

12 After the deportation to Babylon: Jeconiah became the father of [n]Shealtiel, and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel.

13 Zerubbabel was the father of

• Abihud, Abihud the father of Eliakim, and Eliakim the father of Azor.
  
  14 Azor was the father of Zadok, Zadok the father of Achim, and Achim the father of Eliud.
  
  15 Eliud was the father of Eleazar, Eleazar the father of Matthan, and Matthan the father of Jacob.
  
  16 Jacob was the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, by whom Jesus was born, who is called [p]the Messiah.
  
  17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; from David to the deportation to Babylon, fourteen generations; and from the deportation to Babylon to [q]the Messiah, fourteen generations.[/size]

So we see Joseph, the step-father of Jesus. Joseph was a direct descendant of David through Solomon, but also through Jeconiah ( Matthew 1, verses 6-16). Now here, we have a big problem, because Jeremiah 22:24-30 says,
"As I live," says the Lord, "though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, were the signet on My right hand, yet I would pluck you off; and I will give you into the hand of those who seek your life, and into the hand of those whose face you fear—the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and the hand of the Chaldeans. So I will cast you out, and your mother who bore you, into another country where you were not born; and there you shall die. But to the land to which they desire to return, there they shall not return. "Is this man Coniah a despised, broken idol—a vessel in which is no pleasure? Why are they cast out, he and his descendants, and cast into a land which they do not know? O earth, earth, earth, hear the word of the Lord! Thus says the Lord: 'Write this man down as childless, a man who shall not prosper in his days; for none of his descendants shall prosper, sitting on the throne of David, and ruling anymore in Judah.' "

This passage says that no descendant of Jeconiah would have the right to the throne of David. Until Jeremiah, the first requirement for messianic lineage was to be of the house of David. So not only must the Messiah come from the line of David, He must also be apart from Jeconiah. But, as we read in Matthew's genealogy, Joseph IS of the lineage of Jeconiah—meaning, none of his descendants could sit on David's throne. So then, one must beg the question: how could Jesus be the Messiah, if the Messiah must come from the line of David, but also not be of the line of Jeconiah?

This is where the Virgin Birth comes into play. Remember, Jesus is not Joseph's biological son, so the Jeconiah curse doesn't apply to Him. He is, however, Mary's biological son per the Virgin Birth. But this still doesn't explain how Jesus is the descendant of David. To answer this, we must discuss Luke's genealogy.

Unlike Matthew, Luke follows strict Jewish procedure and custom in that he omits no names and mentions no women.

However, if by Jewish custom one could not mention the name of a woman, but wished to trace her line, how would one do so?
He would use the name of her husband (possible Old Testament precedents for this practice are Ezra 2:61 and Nehemiah 7:63).

That would raise the second question: if someone studied a genealogy, how would he know whether the genealogy was that of the husband or that of the wife since in either case the husband's name would be used? The answer is not difficult; the problem lies with the English language.[/b]

NOTE: In English, it is not good grammar to use a definite article ("the") before a proper name ("the" Matthew, "the" Luke, and "the" Mary).

However, it is quite permissible in Greek grammar. In the Greek text of Luke's genealogy, every single name mentioned has the Greek definite article "the" with one exception: the name of Joseph (Luke 3:23).

Someone reading the original would understand by the missing definite article from Joseph's name that this was not really Joseph's genealogy, but his wife Mary's. ...

However...  if that be so then we have the problem of Jeconiah!!!

Furthermore, although many translations of Luke 3:23 read: "...being supposedly the son of Joseph, the son of Heli..." because of the missing Greek definite article before the name of Joseph, that same verse could be translated as follows: "Being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph the son of Heli..." In other words, the final parenthesis could be expanded so that the verse reads that although Jesus was "supposed" or assumed to be the descendant of Joseph, He was really the descendant of Heli. Heli was the father of Mary. Ultimately, Joseph was Heli's "son-in-law."

Next, remember King David had more than one son. I listed the verses above with all of them.

One of them was Nathan.

None of Nathan's descendants had any "Jeconiah-like" curses.

Mary was a descendant of Nathan (Luke 3:23 and verse 31—remember, as explained above, although the English text says "the son of Joseph, the son of Heli..." since the original Greek says Heli is the father-in-law of Joseph, logically, Heli is the biological father of Mary). Now, Jesus is completely safe from the problem of the Jeconiah curse, all while being from the line of David, and of the Tribe of Judah.

In addition  when  original Greek merely says Joseph was "of Heli" or Eli  when Joseph's father is said to be Jacob in Matthew 1:16, Heli is most probably Mary's father. Joseph, then, is his son-in-law.

Side note: The lineage of Jesus through Mary is given in Luke 3:23 through 38 while the lineage of Jesus through Joseph is given in Matthew 1:1 through 16. A comparison of the two shows that the Joseph in Matthew is not the Joseph of Luke.

Remember above when I told you to remember the verse 2 Samuel 7: 17 In accordance with all these words and all this vision, so Nathan spoke to David.

Mary was a descendant of David's son Nathan.

This is confirmed in 1 Chron 3:5 These were born to him in Jerusalem: Shimea, Shobab, Nathan and Solomon, four, by Bath-shua the daughter of Ammiel;

So SHE WAS A DECENDANT OF DAVID ... as was Joseph... just different lines of the family.

And so interesting that her line meets all the requirements of Jesus' birth... and His step fathers line leading back to David means Jesus was also well descended from him..... though not by blood.[/size]

[NyawehNyoh]

.
Back in the Old Testament, a curse was leveled upon a really bad king in Solomon's royal line to David's throne that reads like this:

● Jer 22:29-30 . . O land, land, land, hear the word of the Lord! Thus said the Lord: Record this man as without succession, one who shall never be found acceptable; for no man of his offspring shall be accepted to sit on the throne of David and to rule again in Judah.

The bad king's name was Jeconiah (a.k.a. Jehoiakim and/or Coniah). Joseph was one of his descendants. (Matt 1:11)

It's commonly believed that the curse extended to Joseph, so that had he been Jesus' biological father, it would have prevented Christ from ascending David's throne.

But adopted children inherit from their fathers the same as biological children; so had the curse extended to Joseph, it would have extended to Jesus too whether he was virgin-conceived or not. In other words: seeing as how Jesus got into Solomon's royal line by adoption, then of course he would've got into the curse too because the throne and the curse were a package deal.

However; the wording "to rule again in Judah" indicates that the curse on Jeconiah's royal progeny was limited to the era of the divided kingdom. That condition came to an end when Nebuchadnezzar crushed the whole country and led first Samaria, and then later Judah, off to Babylonian slavery.

When Messiah reigns, the country of Israel will be unified. His jurisdiction won't be limited to Judah within a divided kingdom, but will dominate all the land of Israel. So the curse doesn't apply to him.

● Ezek 37:21-22 . .You shall declare to them: Thus said the Lord God: I am going to take the Israelite people from among the nations they have gone to, and gather them from every quarter, and bring them to their own land. I will make them a single nation in the land, on the hills of Israel, and one king shall be king of them all. Never again shall they be two nations, and never again shall they be divided into two kingdoms.
_

[Rella]

.
Back in the Old Testament, a curse was leveled upon a really bad king in Solomon's royal line to David's throne that reads like this:

● Jer 22:29-30 . . O land, land, land, hear the word of the Lord! Thus said the Lord: Record this man as without succession, one who shall never be found acceptable; for no man of his offspring shall be accepted to sit on the throne of David and to rule again in Judah.

The bad king's name was Jeconiah (a.k.a. Jehoiakim and/or Coniah). Joseph was one of his descendants. (Matt 1:11)

It's commonly believed that the curse extended to Joseph, so that had he been Jesus' biological father, it would have prevented Christ from ascending David's throne.

But adopted children inherit from their fathers the same as biological children; so had the curse extended to Joseph, it would have extended to Jesus too whether he was virgin-conceived or not. In other words: seeing as how Jesus got into Solomon's royal line by adoption, then of course he would've got into the curse too because the throne and the curse were a package deal.

However; the wording "to rule again in Judah" indicates that the curse on Jeconiah's royal progeny was limited to the era of the divided kingdom. That condition came to an end when Nebuchadnezzar crushed the whole country and led first Samaria, and then later Judah, off to Babylonian slavery.

When Messiah reigns, the country of Israel will be unified. His jurisdiction won't be limited to Judah within a divided kingdom, but will dominate all the land of Israel. So the curse doesn't apply to him.

● Ezek 37:21-22 . .You shall declare to them: Thus said the Lord God: I am going to take the Israelite people from among the nations they have gone to, and gather them from every quarter, and bring them to their own land. I will make them a single nation in the land, on the hills of Israel, and one king shall be king of them all. Never again shall they be two nations, and never again shall they be divided into two kingdoms.
_

But Nathan was not under the curse, therefore did not extend to Jesus.