Timeline for Were John Baptist and Jesus really related?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 26 at 16:47 | history | edited | SLM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 632 characters in body
|
| Nov 26 at 16:39 | history | edited | SLM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 632 characters in body
|
| Feb 26, 2021 at 19:13 | comment | added | SLM | Added the fact that even if they were not related, it is not to say they didn't know each other. | |
| Feb 26, 2021 at 19:12 | history | edited | SLM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 85 characters in body
|
| Feb 26, 2021 at 17:12 | comment | added | user10859 | @KadalikattJosephSibichan. Your point, of Mary not likely to stay with a stranger but would stay with a relative, for a long period of time, is a good observation. | |
| Feb 26, 2021 at 15:33 | comment | added | SLM | Fixed the "run on" definition of syngenes. Mary visited Elizabeth during Mary's first 3 months and Elizabeth's last 3 months, but appears to have left before John's birth. Mary's pregnancy would be more "worrisome" from 3-9 months on, if Mary was in fact worried. | |
| Feb 26, 2021 at 15:00 | history | edited | SLM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 3 characters in body
|
| Feb 26, 2021 at 9:13 | comment | added | Kadalikatt Joseph Sibichan | If Elizabeth was not related to Mary, the latter would never have taken the risk of staying away from home for say, three months following the Annunciation. Mary was a sensible woman and knew well that it would be difficult to convince the neighbors that she had conceived of the Holy Spirit while she was serving a good old woman in the hills. | |
| Feb 26, 2021 at 7:41 | comment | added | Kevin Fegan |
You put this: "of the same kin, akin to, related by blood" run together with this: "in a wider sense, of the same nation, a fellow countryman", as though they belong together. They are separate definitions of the same word, one or the other, not together. So unless you have another reference indicating which one, either could equally be the case. As far as the issue of tribes, it could just be that a female ancestor of Elizabeth was of Judah, but married into Levites. This would mean Elizabeth and Mary were related through this female ancestor, perhaps a Great-Great-Grandmother.
|
|
| Feb 26, 2021 at 0:04 | history | edited | SLM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 157 characters in body
|
| Feb 26, 2021 at 0:03 | comment | added | SLM | @JaminGrey My understanding is if a woman marries into a different tribe, she becomes of that tribe. But in the case of Elizabeth and Mary, the bible is very clear to say Elizabeth is a daughter of Aaron. Mary is a daughter of David. I don't find examples when a woman from say, Levite, marries into the Dan tribe that she is then specifically called a daughter of Dan. | |
| Feb 25, 2021 at 21:36 | comment | added | Jamin Grey | That doesn't really prove they aren't related. We know the Israeli tribes intermarried from other passages. And people aren't referred to as "25% of the Tribe of Judah, 75% of Levi", but are accounted to one tribe or the other wholly. So the question becomes, what standard is used to ascribe a tribe to someone? Father's tribe? Mother's tribe? some other method? If so, it would be very easy for two people of different tribes to be closely related. Thank you for sharing about the alternate meaning of syngenes! That means it's possible they aren't directly related. | |
| Feb 25, 2021 at 18:44 | history | answered | SLM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |