Why Mary & Joseph?
- Thread starter Webers.Home
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Mary could be related to David but it more likely comes from his actual father, God.
Luk 1:26 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,
Luk 1:27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.
Luk 1:28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
Luk 1:29 And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be.
Luk 1:30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
Luk 1:31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
Luk 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
Luk 1:33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
David being Jesus' father here just means an ancestor, like great great great great grandfather or something similar. The DNA God sent via the Holy Spirit was what directly tied Jesus to David.
Luk 1:26 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,
Luk 1:27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.
Luk 1:28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.
Luk 1:29 And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be.
Luk 1:30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God.
Luk 1:31 And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.
Luk 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:
Luk 1:33 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.
David being Jesus' father here just means an ancestor, like great great great great grandfather or something similar. The DNA God sent via the Holy Spirit was what directly tied Jesus to David.
Actually Mary is linked directly to David:
Mat 1:15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;
Mat 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
Luk 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,
Joseph's father was Jacob, not Heli. This means Luke is actually giving the geneaology of Mary not Joseph. Being the son of Joseph there means a son through marriage. "as was supposed" means he entered the family through marriage as a step-son calling Mary's father his own father. Heli is Mary's father.
Take not that Matthew uses begat for the birth of Joseph but Luke uses "as was supposed" when calling him a son of Heli. That's not a birth father. Jacob begat Joseph. That is his birth father.
Barnes:
As was supposed - As was commonly thought, or perhaps being legally reckoned as his son.
Clarke:
As the Hebrews never permitted women to enter into their genealogical tables, whenever a family happened to end with a daughter, instead of naming her in the genealogy, they inserted her husband, as the son of him who was, in reality, but his father-in-law.
Gill:
Which was the son of Eli; meaning, not that Joseph was the son of Eli; for he was the son of Jacob, according to Mat_1:16, but Jesus was the son of Eli; and which must be understood, and carried through the whole genealogy, as thus; Jesus the son of Matthat, Jesus the son of Levi, Jesus the son of Melchi, &c. till you come to Jesus the son of Adam, and Jesus the Son of God; though it is true indeed that Joseph was the son of Eli, having married his daughter; Mary was the daughter of Eli: and so the Jews speak of one Mary, the daughter of Eli, by whom they seem to design the mother of our Lord: for they tell (b) us of one,
Luk 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,
Luk 3:24 Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,
Luk 3:25 Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,
Luk 3:26 Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:27 Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
Luk 3:28 Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,
Luk 3:29 Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
Luk 3:30 Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,
Luk 3:31 Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
Luk 3:32 Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,
Luk 3:33 Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:34 Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,
Luk 3:35 Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,
Luk 3:36 Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
Luk 3:37 Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
Luk 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.
Mat 1:15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;
Mat 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
Luk 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,
Joseph's father was Jacob, not Heli. This means Luke is actually giving the geneaology of Mary not Joseph. Being the son of Joseph there means a son through marriage. "as was supposed" means he entered the family through marriage as a step-son calling Mary's father his own father. Heli is Mary's father.
Take not that Matthew uses begat for the birth of Joseph but Luke uses "as was supposed" when calling him a son of Heli. That's not a birth father. Jacob begat Joseph. That is his birth father.
Barnes:
As was supposed - As was commonly thought, or perhaps being legally reckoned as his son.
Clarke:
As the Hebrews never permitted women to enter into their genealogical tables, whenever a family happened to end with a daughter, instead of naming her in the genealogy, they inserted her husband, as the son of him who was, in reality, but his father-in-law.
Gill:
Which was the son of Eli; meaning, not that Joseph was the son of Eli; for he was the son of Jacob, according to Mat_1:16, but Jesus was the son of Eli; and which must be understood, and carried through the whole genealogy, as thus; Jesus the son of Matthat, Jesus the son of Levi, Jesus the son of Melchi, &c. till you come to Jesus the son of Adam, and Jesus the Son of God; though it is true indeed that Joseph was the son of Eli, having married his daughter; Mary was the daughter of Eli: and so the Jews speak of one Mary, the daughter of Eli, by whom they seem to design the mother of our Lord: for they tell (b) us of one,
Luk 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,
Luk 3:24 Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,
Luk 3:25 Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,
Luk 3:26 Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:27 Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
Luk 3:28 Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,
Luk 3:29 Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
Luk 3:30 Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,
Luk 3:31 Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
Luk 3:32 Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,
Luk 3:33 Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:34 Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,
Luk 3:35 Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,
Luk 3:36 Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
Luk 3:37 Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
Luk 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.
-
1
- Show all
How Jesus is related to David through his mother:
Jesus, Joseph (Mary), Heli, Matthat, Levi, Melchi, Janna, Joseph, Mattathias, Amos, Naum, Esli, Nagge, Maath, Mattathias, Semei, Joseph, Juda, Joanna, Rhesa, Zorobabel, Salathiel, Neri, Melchi, Addi, Cosam, Elmodam, Er, Jose Eliezer, Jorim, Matthat, Levi, Simeon, Juda, Joseph, Jonan, Eliakim, Melea, Menan, Mattatha, Nathan, David, Jesse, Obed, Booz, Salmon, Naason, Aminadab, Aram, Esrom, Phares, Juda, Jacob, Isaac, Abraham, Thara, Nachor, Saruch, Ragau, Phalec, Heber, Sala, Cainan, Arphaxad, Sem, Noe, Lamech, Mathusala, Enoch, Jared, Maleleel, Cainan, Enos, Seth, Adam.
Look at that list which includes David, Juda (Judah), Jacob, Abraham, Noe (Noah), Mathusala, Enoch, Seth and Adam. That's an impressive genealogy! No wonder God chose Mary to birth his Son!
Luk 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,
Luk 3:24 Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,
Luk 3:25 Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,
Luk 3:26 Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:27 Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
Luk 3:28 Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,
Luk 3:29 Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
Luk 3:30 Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,
Luk 3:31 Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
Luk 3:32 Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,
Luk 3:33 Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:34 Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,
Luk 3:35 Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,
Luk 3:36 Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
Luk 3:37 Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
Luk 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.
Jesus, Joseph (Mary), Heli, Matthat, Levi, Melchi, Janna, Joseph, Mattathias, Amos, Naum, Esli, Nagge, Maath, Mattathias, Semei, Joseph, Juda, Joanna, Rhesa, Zorobabel, Salathiel, Neri, Melchi, Addi, Cosam, Elmodam, Er, Jose Eliezer, Jorim, Matthat, Levi, Simeon, Juda, Joseph, Jonan, Eliakim, Melea, Menan, Mattatha, Nathan, David, Jesse, Obed, Booz, Salmon, Naason, Aminadab, Aram, Esrom, Phares, Juda, Jacob, Isaac, Abraham, Thara, Nachor, Saruch, Ragau, Phalec, Heber, Sala, Cainan, Arphaxad, Sem, Noe, Lamech, Mathusala, Enoch, Jared, Maleleel, Cainan, Enos, Seth, Adam.
Look at that list which includes David, Juda (Judah), Jacob, Abraham, Noe (Noah), Mathusala, Enoch, Seth and Adam. That's an impressive genealogy! No wonder God chose Mary to birth his Son!
Luk 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,
Luk 3:24 Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,
Luk 3:25 Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,
Luk 3:26 Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:27 Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,
Luk 3:28 Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi, which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Elmodam, which was the son of Er,
Luk 3:29 Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer, which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi,
Luk 3:30 Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of Jonan, which was the son of Eliakim,
Luk 3:31 Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son of Nathan, which was the son of David,
Luk 3:32 Which was the son of Jesse, which was the son of Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson,
Luk 3:33 Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of Phares, which was the son of Juda,
Luk 3:34 Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, which was the son of Thara, which was the son of Nachor,
Luk 3:35 Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of Heber, which was the son of Sala,
Luk 3:36 Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
Luk 3:37 Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,
Luk 3:38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth, which was the son of Adam, which was the son of God.
-
1
- Show all
I hear you, and you may very well be right in all aspects. However, I think that "we" are collectively barking up the wrong "tree." I think that we would be better of spending more time trying to understand the relationship between Abraham, David, and Christ. Then again, that's not what this thread is about . . . so it's probably best that I leave it alone. 
-
1
- Show all
No, they sure won't. In order to believe, the "heart" must be Circumcised of the Sinful Nature. Until then, believing in Christ is 100% impossible, nor is the ability to Turn and Repent. Thus, I maintain that Colossians 2:9-15 are the single most important, fundamental, Seven Perfect verses in the entire Bible.
I hear you, and you may very well be right in all aspects. However, I think that "we" are collectively barking up the wrong "tree." I think that we would be better of spending more time trying to understand the relationship between Abraham, David, and Christ. Then again, that's not what this thread is about . . . so it's probably best that I leave it alone.
From the secular and contemporary humanist perspective, we do not care much about the lineage of the human individual except in what determines his morals, motives and actions. Because morals are not inherited biologically or genetically, on the contrary, from a human point of view, we should sympathize with him and help him to overcome the term conservative societies for him, because in the first and the last he is just a human being.
Only when this social stigma affects him negatively, turns him into a raging beast, or motivates him to take revenge on society, then should the title 'son of adultery' be entered into the moral equation, not as a crime in itself, but as a motive for this person to commit his moral crimes.
Only when this social stigma affects him negatively, turns him into a raging beast, or motivates him to take revenge on society, then should the title 'son of adultery' be entered into the moral equation, not as a crime in itself, but as a motive for this person to commit his moral crimes.
-
1
- Show all
The point is that even without physical contact, God is capable of making even a rock into a physical descendant of someone.
If Jesus is the biological child of Joseph through the Holy Spirit, that wouldn't make the virgin birth untrue. It would be the result of a supernatural event as opposed to conventional physical relations.
Not that Jesus' status as a biological descendant of Joseph is necessarily true, but it does stand as valid interpretation given the capability for God to make even a rock into a descendant of someone.
If Jesus is the biological child of Joseph through the Holy Spirit, that wouldn't make the virgin birth untrue. It would be the result of a supernatural event as opposed to conventional physical relations.
Not that Jesus' status as a biological descendant of Joseph is necessarily true, but it does stand as valid interpretation given the capability for God to make even a rock into a descendant of someone.
Jesus’ genealogy is through Mary.
To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.
- Luke 1:27 (KJV)
Joseph, the man Mary was engaged to, was of the house of David, which is to say the house of Judah. So, with the exception of adoption, Joseph would have no part in the birth of Christ.
To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.
- Luke 1:27 (KJV)
Joseph, the man Mary was engaged to, was of the house of David, which is to say the house of Judah. So, with the exception of adoption, Joseph would have no part in the birth of Christ.
-
1
- Show all
The passage below is how God views women, and thus so do I. We are spirits within human bodies . . . nothing more. Thus, we are all equal.
Galatians 3:28 KJV - 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Galatians 3:28 KJV - 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
-
1
- Show all
Great post. We must keep in mind that Jesus wasn’t the son of Joseph; He was the Son of God (check out His genealogy in the book of Luke). Joseph was only Jesus’ adoptive father.
We must keep in mind that Jesus wasn’t the son of Joseph; He was the Son of God (check out His genealogy in the book of Luke). Joseph was only Jesus’ adoptive father.
If I could impress into others anything, it would be this:
Paul mentions (from the NLT) the Mysterious Plan in both Ephesians chapters 3 and 2 (yes, the order is specific). As we read ALL of the Bible, we must process it ALL through the notion that there is a Mysterious Plan. What pastors refuse to teach is that this Plan is totally centered around the Circumcision of Jesus Christ. Therefore, as we read ALL of the Bible, we must relate it to the Circumcision of Christ as clearly spoken of by the Apostle Paul in Colossians 2:9-15; the Seven most perfect verses in the entire 66 books.
It is the Circumcision of Christ that is the basis for the relationship between Abraham, David, and Christ. Now, I say these things not because I understand them perfectly, for I believe that the "Heart" of this matter will only be Truly revealed once we are in the presence of the Power of God. Therefore, I am still working these things out myself. Here's a snapshot of my findings:
The genealogy of Christ as noted in Matthew 1:1: Jesus is the Son of David, who is the Son of Abraham.
Spiritual Circumcision has been taking place since the days of Adam, Eve, and the first prophet, Abel. However, Spiritual Circumcision was instituted in the lives of Abraham and Sarah as found in Genesis chapter 17. Clearly, the hearts of Abraham and Sarah had been Circumcised. They had been cleansed so that they would be blameless before God.
King David is an absolute reflection of this Spiritual Circumcision, for Scripture tells us that he was being taught by the Spirit while since suckling from his mother's breasts. And more, as we think of the Mysterious Plan and as we consider the Spiritual Circumcision of Christ as clearly noted in Colossians 2:9-15 when we read all words from king David, we should clearly see the future reflection of Jesus Christ, David's Holy Son. It is impossible to read "anything" from David and not recognize Jesus as the prime example (though there are obvious exceptions).
And as mentioned, the Purpose of Christ is to Circumcise Hearts, to cleanse and make people right with God (Romans 2:27-29 - Deut 30:6). Scripture tells us that before Abraham was born, Jesus already existed. Therefore, it was Christ who Circumcised the hearts of Abraham and Sarah (the removal of the Curse of the Lord). It was Christ who taught David while suckling from his mothers' breasts. And it is in Colossians 2:9-15 that we find the most clear example of what happened with, and to, Abraham and David . . . the Circumcision of Christ.
If we read of God's Word closely, we should be amazed by the deep, hidden Mystery that lies between these three men . . . and these three men only. We MUST understand Abraham and what his life means for us all today. We must all note how David was the future reflection of Christ, and of course, we must read of Christ and look backward, recognizing Abraham and David as his representatives from hundreds and thousands of years prior to his life.
Matthew 1:1 KJV - "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham."
John 8:58 NLT - "Jesus answered, "I tell you the truth, before Abraham was even born, I AM!"
-
1
- Show all
.
According to Gen 1:27 and Gen 3:20, women propagate the human race
equally as effective as men do; and here's why.
Eve was constructed with human material taken from Adam's body. That
made her just as biologically human as Adam-- in point of fact, Gen 5:2 calls
the female Adam just as the male is called Adam.
So then, were human material taken from Eve's body to construct another
human-- either male or female --it would make the flesh of that other
person's body Eve's flesh; and consequently Adam's too because his flesh
has been the source of all human flesh from the very beginning. (Acts
17:26)
As a result; virgin-conceived human children are just as much related to
Adam as their human mother if indeed she was in any way biologically
related to Eve.
Was Mary biologically related to Eve? I think we can be reasonably certain
that she was. So, if indeed she was, then we can easily trace Jesus'
biological genealogy not only to David, but also to Adam.
NOTE: Most Christians will readily attest that Jesus Christ is fully Man while in
reality a number of them are not fully persuaded he wasn't some sort of
divine hominid implanted in Mary's uterus so that no part of her body was
used to construct his, i.e. they honestly question whether Jesus' mom wasn't
his surrogate mother rather than his biological mother.
_
According to Gen 1:27 and Gen 3:20, women propagate the human race
equally as effective as men do; and here's why.
Eve was constructed with human material taken from Adam's body. That
made her just as biologically human as Adam-- in point of fact, Gen 5:2 calls
the female Adam just as the male is called Adam.
So then, were human material taken from Eve's body to construct another
human-- either male or female --it would make the flesh of that other
person's body Eve's flesh; and consequently Adam's too because his flesh
has been the source of all human flesh from the very beginning. (Acts
17:26)
As a result; virgin-conceived human children are just as much related to
Adam as their human mother if indeed she was in any way biologically
related to Eve.
Was Mary biologically related to Eve? I think we can be reasonably certain
that she was. So, if indeed she was, then we can easily trace Jesus'
biological genealogy not only to David, but also to Adam.
NOTE: Most Christians will readily attest that Jesus Christ is fully Man while in
reality a number of them are not fully persuaded he wasn't some sort of
divine hominid implanted in Mary's uterus so that no part of her body was
used to construct his, i.e. they honestly question whether Jesus' mom wasn't
his surrogate mother rather than his biological mother.
_