Ne, v souladu s tim, ze v evangeliich je 2 rodokmeny duraz na puvod Josefa a Marir, tvrdim, ze zde Pavel nehovori o Marii, ale o Josefovi a slovo spermatikus bemysli v ciste biologickem slova smyslu, ale i ve smyslu prijeti syna za sveho, byt nebiologickeho.

To nebol preklad toho linku, lebo viem, čo tam bolo a stále je za komentáre, ktoré boli k veci. Ale keď nerozumieš cudziemu jazyku a nedokážeš sa orientovať, čo je čo, tak ti evidentne ani chat GPT nepomôže. Bolo tam aj je napríklad toto:

"If Jesus was the son of Mary and Joseph, but was conceived without the input of Joseph, how can he be a descendant of David?

Good question!

The importance of this question is found in the Old Testament prophecy that the Messiah would come from the line of David. 2 Samuel 7:12–13 says: “When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever.” So if Jesus was not from the line of David, the prophecy would have been false and Christianity would be decisively disproved. The question is: is Jesus really from the line of David?

Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit through Mary when she was still a virgin, so it’s true that Joseph would not have contributed genetically to Jesus’ DNA (Matthew 1:18). But the way the question is phrased assumes that Jewish lineage is always traced through biological fathers, which is false on several counts. In Jewish culture, if a man dies without children, it was common for the man’s brother to marry the widow and conceive children under the first man’s name; this practice was called “levirate marriage.” Another example can be seen in the different fathers attributed to Joseph in Matthew’s and Luke’s genealogies of Jesus. Whereas Luke records Joseph’s father as Heli (Luke 3:23), Matthew records Joseph’s father as Jacob (Matthew 1:16). A possible explanation is that one author recorded Joseph’s biological father while the other recorded his legal father, perhaps his father-in-law through Mary. Thus, given this practice of legally attributing a child’s lineage to someone who wasn’t their biological father, it’s very reasonable to conclude that Jesus was legally declared to be in the line of David through adoption by his father Joseph.

Although I think this is sufficient to resolve the issue, there’s more to be said. Matthew’s and Luke’s genealogies are totally different and seem to completely split off from David; Matthew records Jesus’ genealogy from David’s son Solomon (Matthew 1:6) while Luke records it from David’s son Nathan (Luke 3:31). Matthew was primarily writing to a Jewish audience, so it’s easy to see why he would want to use Joseph’s ancestry through Solomon, whose lineage took a more prominent role in Jewish history and would have resonated more with a Jewish audience. On the other hand, Luke was writing to a largely gentile audience and was extremely meticulous as a historian, so he was likely tracing Jesus’ biological lineage through Mary.

This means that Jesus was both a biological descendant of David through Mary as well as a legal descendant through Joseph!

Skeptics have long argued that these different genealogies are irreconcilable and have therefore dismissed them as “errors in the Bible.” It’s certainly possible, but I think a much more rational explanation is that they were entirely separate genealogies that can be understood from the intent of each author. After all, the early church fathers like Ignatius, Polycarp, and Clement have clearly read both Matthew and Luke and would have definitely noticed the obvious discrepancies in the two genealogies, but no one made a big deal about these sources, which have been indisputably included in every Biblical canon. Skeptics might fall back on the old conspiracy theory, but I think a much better explanation is that they understood the different authors’ intents in using each genealogy.

One last bit of trivia I’d like to leave you with is an explanation of why Matthew’s genealogy lists 3 sets of 14 generations. The first set in Matthew’s genealogy is borrowed from 1 Chronicles 2–3, which records 14 generations from Abraham to David as a form of gematria, an ancient numerical coding system which assigns a number to each letter. It was believed that if the sums of the numbers comprising two words were equal, then they were in some sense spiritually connected. In Hebrew, David’s name would have been written ??? (DWD because vowels were not included), which corresponds to 4–6–4, totaling 14. Thus, the number 14 was significant in Jewish culture as symbolic of King David. By including Jesus as the final generation in the 3rd set of 14, Matthew was essentially saying that Jesus was special by the very circumstances of his lineage, and that he was the fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant.

Takže pokial je to podľa teba blbosť, ako píšeš, tak iba tvoja vlastná, že neni si schopný sa orientovať v cudzom jazyku a rozumieť mu, vieš?