What have you done in service of the Lord today?

I studied up on my Hebrew, the primary language that the real books of the Bible are written in.

Exactly. We're family. We're not servants.

Then study the hundreds of messianic prophecies, and see how they're fulfilled by Jesus, as recorded by Matthew, in Hebrew.

Family members serve each other out of love.

Yeah, like how he'll be called a Nazarene!

Oh wait, that one isn't anywhere.

Exactly.

Not out of what have you done for me lately.

I learned why Matthew was placed as the first book in the NT, despite being written after mark.

It is, actually, as the same root word for branch stands for Nazarene, and Jesus was called a Nazarene by Nazarenes for growing up in Nazareth.

Isaiah 11:1
"Then a shoot will spring from the stem of Jesse, and a branch from his roots will bear fruit." In Hebrew, the word for "branch" is netzer, "NZR" which letters are included in NaZaReth. It seems that Matthew was referring to the branch, the Nazarene, in turn a reference to God's raising up of the Messiah.

Hence Jesus of Nazareth, the Root of David, whose father was Jesse.

I have in honor of my lord ha-Satan burnt incense.

Not in the Orthodox NT, where John is first.

Where was it implied otherwise?

>What have you done in service of the Lord today?

As a non-Jew, why should I obey the ghost of an unlikely king of the Jews just because he died on a stick ?

>John is first
First they fuck up the canon, then they lose their capital city; can the orthodox do anything right?

Likely because it was written first. (Mark, the shortest, was not necessarily written first, there is no Q, and the early dating of the gospels is ongoing)

To steal the inheritance of the Jew, duh.

kek

Salvation was offered first to the Jew, and then to everyone else. It was always this way. And you obey God because you realize He is God, and you are you.

And because Jesus walked out of that tomb on the third day, proving He is God.

So, a line that says nothing about what the messiah will be called being used to justify a title/name mentioned in Matthew. Good connection there.

By the way, lots of Hebrew words have the same roots. That doesn't make them the same word. And let's not forget that if you believe that whole "virgin birth" nonsense, then Jesus isn't actually related to the davidic line, since Joseph isn't the real father.

Were you born this stupid, or did it take work to get there?

It's because the church fathers thought Matthew was written first. Augustine writes:

Now, those four evangelists whose names have gained the most remarkable circulation over the whole world [...] are believed to have written in the order which follows: first Matthew, then Mark, thirdly Luke, lastly John. (Harmony of the Gospels, 1.2)

Eusebius reports the testimony of earlier fathers in his Ecclesiastical History. One that he cites is Irenaeus (d. 202), who thought that Matthew was written before Mark:

Matthew published his Gospel among the Hebrews in their own language, while Peter and Paul were preaching and founding the church in Rome. After their departure Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, also transmitted to us in writing those things which Peter had preached. (Ecclesiastical History, 5.8.2–3)

Eusebius also reports that Clement of Alexandria (d. 215) thought that Matthew preceded Mark (Ecclesiastical History, 6.14.5–6).

In light of this apparently general agreement, it's not surprising that these two Gospels are in the order they are in.

>there is no Q
Why?

Joseph as the adoptive father also goes back to David; Mary as a brotherless woman inherits and goes back to David.

Joseph as biological father would have disqualified Jesus to sit on the throne.

I bet you don't know why.

wtf I hate this board now

There is a Y; there is no Q.

wtf me too.

Tamar tricked her father in law into fucking her by dressing as a prostitute
>forgetting to tell him Matthew fabricated parts of the genealogy so it'd fit the Davidic 14-14-14 sequence (Matthew said Joram was the father of Uzziah/Azariah when he was actually his great-great-grandfather)
>forgetting to mention the final sequence only has 13 names

An innocent question.