Thanks for the links, adrift and PeterK. Unfortunately, It’s only made me more confused.
These are the points mentioned in the other thread which I’m confused about: "The genealogical inheritance, according to Judaism, is transmitted only through the bloodline. Since the Messiah is supposed to come from the Tribe of Judah, if Jesus was not related to Joseph through his bloodline, then he was not of the tribe of Judah. "
“Women could never be used to define genealogy. Therefore, it doesn’t matter if Mary was without a shadow of a doubt from the Tribe of Judah. It wouldn’t help the case of Jesus. But for Jesus to be linked to the Tribe of Judah, he had to be a biological son of Joseph’s.”
When asked where in the Law it is stated that the genealogical inheritance is transmitted only through the bloodline he states: “It’s found throughout the Torah, as we read the Patriarchal way to conduct their lives, plus in both Talmuds: The Babylonian and Palestinian Talmuds. This has been matter of fact in Judaism for thousands of years. Only after the Second Century Rabbinical Judaism change the law about being Jewish as necessary that the mother must be Jewish. But according to Biblical Judaism, even Jewishness was established by the father. The reason for this change was based on the fact that the Tribal system was over.”
“For Jesus to be a descendant of David or Judah, he had to be a biological son of Joseph’s, according to Judaism, that dictates that the genealogical inheritance is transmitted only through the father and biologically.”
“Genealogical inheritance cannot be transmitted through adoption. Everything else could be inherited by an adopted child, but the genealogy trait is the only thing out of the child’s reach.”
Another Jewish website
here specifically says: “Under Jewish law, tribal affiliation is through the birth father only (Numbers 34:14, Numbers 1:18-44, Leviticus 24:10 ). Since Jesus allegedly had no human father, he had no tribal affiliation. Therefore, Jesus was not from the tribe of Judah and is eliminated from messianic consideration.”
When someone brought up the case of Caleb being adopted into Judah, he remarked:"Caleb was never referred to as a Judahite of from the Tribe of Judah. He was considered “Jewish” for all purposes but never became a Judahite. He was indeed known as son of Jephunneh, but if you check Numbers 13:6, it says in there, "Caleb, son of Jephunneh, of the Tribe of Judah.
Jephunneh was the one from the Tribe of Judah and not Caleb. Then, if you read Joshua 14:14, you will see that Caleb never lost his real identity with the Kenizzites, from Kenaz, a famous ancestor of Edom. (Jos. 14:14; I Chron. 1:51-53) Caleb was adopted and never lost his genealogical identity with Kenaz. That’s why he was identified as a Kenizzite. The Caleb from the Tribe of Judah by descent was the one son of Hezron. (I Chron. 2:18) But the Caleb, one of the twelve scouts was the Kenizzite son of Jephunneh of the Tribe of Judah.
Caleb never became one of Judah. He was always called as the Kenizzite and not a Judahite.
In summary, Caleb, among many other thousands of non-Israelites who took advantage of the Exodus must have undergone some kind of conversion and became “Jewish”. Then, he was adopted by Jephunneh, a man from the Tribe of Judah. But Caleb never lost his real identity of a Kenizzite from the peoples of Edom. Therefore, if Jesus was adopted by Joseph, he could even become a King, but never a Judahite. He would always be known as the son of whoever fecundated his mother Mary."
Could someone refute these claims? Thanks.
