The American Wisdom Series

Presents
Pamphlet 1961 Hebrews kc 13-2

Jesus Christ in the flesh both descended
of the kingship line (through Judah)
and the priesthood line (through Levi)

Let us now continue listening to Paul give supporting evidence and expound on Heb. 7:12
where he stated that because the priesthood was changed that the law requiring the priests
to be after the order of Aaron (i.e. of the tribe of Levi) must also of necessity be changed.

Hebrews 7:13 For He of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar.

[14] For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.

Here is how:

You will find that there are two genealogies of Joseph given in the New Testament, one in Matthew (Note that the NT opens with this most important information) and one in the third chapter of Luke. Many people struggle with these two genealogies because if you read them carefully you will find they are not the same, i.e. they have not all the same fathers. Some even use this to discredit God's Word claiming the two genealogies "conflict" with one another. However, such is not the case at all... and never is. It is just man's ignorance derived from his "slothfulness" in studying and rightly dividing the Word of God that accounts for all the so-called discrepancies.

So why are we given Joseph's genealogy anyway, for he had nothing to do with Christ's descent. Well, in Matthew we are given Joseph's genealogy documenting that he was a "pure blooded" Judahite, the lineage of the kingship, remember? Again, why is this so important? Because it is a matter of the "law"! You see, Christ had no earthy father and so Joseph was Christ's stepfather. So by law, through adoption, Christ became Joseph's son and inherited the rights and lineage of his father Joseph! Therefore, those wicked scripture lawyers of the sons of Cain, i.e. the kenites, could never claim that Jesus Christ had no legal right to be king of Israel. Ironically, it is by this same witness that anyone of any race or language or creed, even the kenites, can through adoption become a child of God and an heir of the promises! And THAT, my friend, qualifies it to open the New Testament!

We move now to the genealogy of Joseph in the Book of Luke and lo and behold, we discover that this is actually not Joseph's genealogy at all! Notice what Luke 3:23 says, "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." The phrase "as was supposed" means "by law"! In other words, Christ was Joseph's son by law, i.e. his stepson. Now what about Joseph? Whose son was he? Well, we read in Matthew that he was "begotten" (sired) by Jacob. Matthew 1:16 "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ." However, in Luke we read that Joseph was the son of Heli, but not by "begettal"! He was Heli's son also "as was supposed", i.e. his son by law! You see, Joseph was the husband of Mary and therefore Heli's "son-in-law"! So the genealogy in Luke is actually Mary's genealogy through her father Heli, Joseph's father-in-law, documenting that Mary's father was also a "pure blooded" Judahite! Why is this important for us to know? Because it tells us that the paternal half of Mary's bloodline was of pure Judah, the kingship line. That leaves open the question of her mother's side. Do we know what bloodline she was from? Yes we do! Read

Luke 1:5-6: "There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. [6] And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless."

We are actually told twice (for emphasis) in the above two verses that Elizabeth, the mother of John of Baptist, was a "pure blooded" Levite. In verse five we are told flat out that she was of the daughters of Aaron. However, to eliminate any doubt and to document that she was a "pure blooded" daughter of Levi, we are told that she and her husband walked "blameless" in all the commandments and ordinances! You see, it was lawful for a Levitical priest to marry ONLY a full blooded Levite woman so as to keep the priesthood line pure (Lev. 22)! For Zacharias to have done otherwise would make void Luke 1:6. Now let's read Luke 1:36 concerning Mary's relationship to Elizabeth and tie this all together: "And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren."

First of all, it is evident that since Mary and Elizabeth were cousins that Christ was of necessity a blood relative of John the Baptist, who was a pure blooded Levite with pure blooded Levite parents. That tells you right away that Christ had Levite blood running through His veins but it was more than just a trace! If you think carefully about what has been said you will see that Mary's mother (because her father was of Judah only) would have been the sister of Elizabeth's mother, who also had to be a pure blooded Levite for Elizabeth's sake. Therefore... Mary's mother was a "pure blooded" Levite and her father was a "pure blooded" Judahite! Do you see the perfection of the Word of God how that Jesus Christ descended in the flesh from both the kingship line and the priesthood line, uniting them into One, even the King of kings and the Lord of lords.