Ok . . . how important are Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph? (Part II)

This is going to be a little tough, that is to consolidate the New Testament verses concerning Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph. Even Isaac, whose story might not seem terribly remarkable in the Old Testament, is noted multiple times in the New Testament. It's also a little difficult to avoid some overlap with the New Testament study on Abraham. These names were closely linked in the minds of the Jewish people. "Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" were and continue to be identified with a real heritage and a real God:

 

A Production of the Jewish Destiny Foundation

(Destiny Foundation website)

In turning from the Old Testament to the New Testament, this Jewish heritage is affirmed. In the midst of this heritage, Jesus Christ was born.


New Testament:

• Matthew 1:1-16, "The record of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham: Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers . . . Salmon was the father of Boaz by Rahab, Boaz was the father of Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of Jesse. Jesse was the father of David the king . . . Eliud was the father of Eleazar, Eleazar the father of Matthan, and Matthan the father of Jacob. Jacob was the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, by whom Jesus was born, who is called the Messiah."
• Isaac and Jacob - portrayed as historical men.
• From the standpoint of one writing about a real Christ, what help is there in linking Him to ancestors who never lived?
• How would Christianity be destinguished from mythology if Christ's own ancestors were written down as mythical?
• If this Judaic genealogy is fabricated, why trace such a long line of descent? (I obviously abbreviated by excluding some names)
• If the genealogy simply points from Christ to metaphorical figureheads of David and Abraham, why identify the women Rahab and Ruth? The lineage is already being traced from father to son.
• Matthew 22:23-34, "On that day some Sadducees (who say there is no resurrection) came to Jesus and questioned Him, asking, 'Teacher, Moses said, "IF A MAN DIES HAVING NO CHILDREN, HIS BROTHER AS NEXT OF KIN SHALL MARRY HIS WIFE, AND RAISE UP CHILDREN FOR HIS BROTHER [in part in order to prevent the family name from dying out--see Deuteronomy 25:5-10--as well as to keep the widow from poverty]." Now there were seven brothers with us; and the first married and died, and having no children left his wife to his brother; so also the second, and the third, down to the seventh. Last of all, the woman died. In the resurrection, therefore, whose wife of the seven will she be? For they all had married her.'
        But Jesus answered and said to them, 'You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. But regarding the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God: "I AM THE GOD OF ABRAHAM, AND THE GOD OF ISAAC, AND THE GOD OF JACOB"? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.' When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at His teaching.
        But when the Pharisees heard that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered themselves together."
• Isaac and Jacob - portrayed as historical men.
• When Christ says that the "I Am the God of . . ." statement means God is the God of the living, how can one still say that Isaac and Jacob never lived?
• If Isaac and Jacob were merely figurative, how is the resurrection of the dead more than figurative? Yet, Christ said that the Sadducees were mistaken.
• If in fact, Isaac and Jacob never lived, why did Christ assume that the only other option was that they were dead?
• How could Jesus silence the Sadducees with His argument, if they thought that Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob never really lived in the first place?
• As the Son of God, One able to truly expound Scripture, and One able to see the thoughts in mens' hearts, how could Jesus be mistaken about whether Isaac and Jacob really lived?
• Luke 13:22-30, "And He was passing through from one city and village to another, teaching, and proceeding on His way to Jerusalem. And someone said to Him, 'Lord, are there just a few who are being saved?' And He said to them, 'Strive to enter through the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able. Once the head of the house gets up and shuts the door, and you begin to stand outside and knock on the door, saying, "Lord, open up to us!" then He will answer and say to you, "I do not know where you are from." Then you will begin to say, "We ate and drank in Your presence, and You taught in our streets"; and He will say, "I tell you, I do not know where you are from; DEPART FROM ME, ALL YOU EVILDOERS." In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but yourselves being thrown out. And they will come from east and west and from north and south, and will recline at the table in the kingdom of God. And behold, some are last who will be first and some are first who will be last."
• Isaac and Jacob - portrayed as historical men.
• How could an imaginary Isaac and Jacob be in the same kingdom as Christ's real disciples?
• How could Christ's listeners one day actually see Isaac and Jacob if these men never lived?
• How could the evildoing of Christ's unbelieving listeners be contrasted with the faith/righteousness of an imaginary Isaac and Jacob?
• How can those of the Christian faith from the east, west, north, and south participate in the same kingdom as a merely imaginary Isaac and Jacob?
• John 4:1-6, "Therefore when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John (although Jesus Himself was not baptizing, but His disciples were), He left Judea and went away again into Galilee. And He had to pass through Samaria. So He came to a city of Samaria called Sychar, near the parcel of ground that Jacob gave to his son Joseph; and Jacob’s well was there. So Jesus, being wearied from His journey, was sitting thus by the well. It was about the sixth hour."
• Jacob and Joseph - portrayed as historical men.
• Why did the author simply identify the ground as that which "Jacob gave to his son Joseph" if that exchange never took place?
• Why name a landmark, such as Jacob's well, after a man who never owned that landmark because he never lived?
• How could Jesus sit beside a well that really shouldn't exist because those stories of the patriarchs digging wells in Genesis was merely figurative?
• Why tell the location of this well if people might later do fact-checking to see if it really originally belonged to a real Jacob?
• If Jacob was a historical man, how could "his son Joseph" not be?
• Romans 9:1-16, "I [apostle Paul] am telling the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience testifies with me in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and unceasing grief in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons . . .whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.
        But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; nor are they all children because they are Abraham’s descendants, but: 'THROUGH ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE NAMED.' That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants. For this is the word of promise: 'AT THIS TIME I WILL COME, AND SARAH SHALL HAVE A SON.' And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac; for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, it was said to her, 'THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER.' Just as it is written, 'JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED.'
        What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! For He says to Moses, 'I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION.' So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy."
• Isaac and Jacob - portrayed as historical men.
• Why would sonship naturally "belong" to the Israelites, if their forefathers were imaginary?
• Why would Paul contrast "children of the flesh" with "children of the promise" if the forefather Israel (Jacob) was merely imaginary?
• If Abraham and Jacob were historical men, how could Isaac be just a name?
• How can one provide basis for the idea of "children of promise" by pointing back to an imaginary Isaac (the promised son of Abraham)?
• Why say "our father Isaac" in regard to an imaginary person? This would seem misleading.
• Why discuss God's real purpose and calling in regard to Jacob and Esau, if these men never lived?
• Hebrews 11:1-22, "Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the men of old gained approval. By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible. By faith Abel offered to God a better sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained the testimony that he was righteous, God testifying about his gifts, and through faith, though he is dead, he still speaks . . . By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac [see Genesis 22--Isaac was not killed], and he who had received the promises was offering up his only begotten son; it was he to whom it was said, “IN ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS SHALL BE CALLED.” He considered that God is able to raise people even from the dead, from which he also received him back as a type. By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau, even regarding things to come. By faith Jacob, as he was dying, blessed each of the sons of Joseph, and worshiped, leaning on the top of his staff. By faith Joseph, when he was dying, made mention of the exodus of the sons of Israel, and gave orders concerning his bones . . . And all these, having gained approval through their faith, did not receive what was promised, because God had provided something better for us, so that apart from us they would not be made perfect."
• Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph - portrayed as historical men.
• How could faith be exemplified in "men of old", if those men never lived?
• Why would the author write that Abel, for example, "is dead", if Abel never lived?
• How could Abraham exemplify faith in offering up Isaac, if this instance never took place because Isaac never lived?
• What persuasion is there in refering back to an imaginary promise regarding an imaginary Isaac?
• How could Isaac exemplify faith regarding real things to come in blessing Jacob and Esau, if Jacob and Esau were imaginary?
• How could Joseph exemplify faith regarding the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt, if he himself never lived?
• Why speak of the bones of a man (Joseph) who never lived?
• In writing, "so that apart from us they would not be made perfect", why would one draw a connection between real New Testament Christians and imaginary Jewish ancestors?