Proof of Christianity

[Captain Colostomy]

Meh. I think(without confirmation) a matrilineal lineage makes zero sense...other than as apologetic tripe. I thought common practice was to follow the father's line.

Then you deny the fact that this is what Jews believe. Don't take my word for it, go look it up.

Min is correct. The genealogies don't appear to be accurate. There are many attempts at explaining that. You might notice that I never said anything to contradict that.

The facts remain : what we do know, that the blood line is female, and the title passes through the male line.

Firstly...what I have called matrilineal descent is actually patrilineal descent on the mother's side, yes? I.e. a daughter with a list of forefathers. Are lists of this kind a common occurance in BCE Israel? (Honestly asking.) I am under the impression 'no'. I don't deny patrilineal lineages were used, only that they seem, to my recollection, to be utilized by male heirs. For a female to have hers conveniently available to be accounted in a gospel seems a stretch. Especially so if one is determined to discount Joseph's line. (The paternity tests were lost....an apparent 'act of god'.) A double downed lineage tree may be a slam dunk for the faithful, but it seems a bit planted to the skeptic.

Secondly...what do the Jews believe, and I deny? A matrilineal line? If I follow you, yes, rabbinical Jews use maternity as proof of a child's ethnicity. But this is, I believe, a more recent development. Furthermore, a history of maternal 'jewishness' doesn't really advance an argument for patrilineal lineages. A true matrilineal lineage I believe would read 'child 'Z', begat by mother 'Y', whose mother was 'X', whose mother was...' ad infinitum, ad nauseum. Frodo, your statement quoted above makes sense only if Jews routinely used a mother's list of forefathers for whatever sundry purpose. Otherwise, you've lost me. (It happens...a lot!)

Facts on a female blood line and a title handed down to a step child seem shaky, doncha think?