In the camp of Yahweh. (Part II)

Transition to the time of Christ. What mention was made of the tabernacle of testimony and Israel's wandering in the wilderness? If the wilderness narrative was simply a theological portrait, then surely this should be clear in the writings of the New Testament authors. Where the Pharisees and scribes had been blind, the New Testament authors expounded under Divine inspiration.

"Before the Throne of God" by Glad

New Testament References to the Tabernacle:

• Mark 2:23-26, "And it happened that He was passing through the grainfields on the Sabbath, and His disciples began to make their way along while picking the heads of grain. The Pharisees were saying to Him, 'Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?' And He said to them, 'Have you never read what David did when he was in need and he and his companions became hungry; how he entered the house of God in the time of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the consecrated bread, which is not lawful for anyone to eat except the priests, and he also gave it to those who were with him?'"
• Tabernacle of Testimony - portrayed as a historical tent of worship
• How were the Pharisees so confident that the disciples were doing that which was "not lawful on the Sabbath" if the Sabbath law(s) were mentioned alongside an imaginary tent of testimony (i.e. the tabernacle) in the Pentateuch?
• Why would Jesus, the Son of God, recognize a pretend legal system which gave instruction on an imaginary tent of testimony?
• According to Jesus, King David entered a real place called the "house of God". What physical house of God (recognized by God Himself) was there before the temple, other than the tent of testimony?
• How could a known ancestral high priest serve in an imaginary house of God?
• How could bread be consecrated bread outside of being prepared for service in a real Tent of Testimony or Temple?
• Why would God ordain a mere tent of testimony, rather than a more enduring structure, if the nation of Israel never migrated?
• Acts 7:44-50, "'[Stephen speaking before the Jewish Council] Our fathers had the tabernacle of testimony in the wilderness, just as He who spoke to Moses directed him to make it according to the pattern which he had seen. And having received it in their turn, our fathers brought it in with Joshua upon dispossessing the nations whom God drove out before our fathers, until the time of David. David found favor in God’s sight, and asked that he might find a dwelling place for the God of Jacob. But it was Solomon who built a house for Him. However, the Most High does not dwell in houses made by human hands; as the prophet says:      
        "HEAVEN IS MY THRONE,
              AND EARTH IS THE FOOTSTOOL OF MY FEET;
              WHAT KIND OF HOUSE WILL YOU BUILD FOR ME?" says the Lord,
              "OR WHAT PLACE IS THERE FOR MY REPOSE?                                           
        WAS IT NOT MY HAND WHICH MADE ALL THESE THINGS?"'"
• Tabernacle of Testimony - portrayed as a historical tent of worship
• Stephen was on trial before the Jewish Council. Why would he offer the defense that real Jewish forefathers had worshiped God at an imaginary tabernacle of testimony? How would fiction justify him?
• How could an imaginary tent of testimony endure until the time of the real King Solomon?
• Why follow up a story about a merely imaginary house of God by stating that God "does not dwell in houses made by human hands"?
• Why would God ordain a mere tent of testimony, rather than a more enduring structure, if the nation of Israel never migrated?
• How could Stephen defend himself before the Jewish Council with an imaginative tale of Jewish forefathers wandering in the wilderness and dispossessing the nations of Canaan? Would the Jewish Council really consider this an irrefutable argument?
• Hebrews 8:1-5, "Now the main point in what has been said is this: we have such a high priest, who has taken His seat at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a minister in the sanctuary and in the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, not man. For every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices; so it is necessary that this high priest also have something to offer. Now if He were on earth, He would not be a priest at all, since there are those who offer the gifts according to the Law; who serve a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, just as Moses was warned by God when he was about to erect the tabernacle; for, 'SEE,' He says, 'THAT YOU MAKE all things ACCORDING TO THE PATTERN WHICH WAS SHOWN YOU ON THE MOUNTAIN.'"
• Tabernacle of Testimony - portrayed as a historical tent of worship
• Why would the author of Hebrews write that the "true tabernacle" was pitched by the Lord and not man? If the tabernacle of testimony was immaterial, how can you contrast it with an immaterial true tabernacle?
• How could earthly high priests serve a "copy and shadow of the heavenly things" if they were serving in an immaterial tabernacle of testimony?
• How could a real ancestor Moses erect an immaterial tabernacle?
• Why would God provide a pattern for the crafting of an immaterial tabernacle?
• Why would God strictly command Moses about the crafting of that which was not meant to be crafted?
• Why would God ordain a mere tent of testimony, rather than a more enduring structure, if the nation of Israel never migrated?
• Hebrews 9:1-12, "Now even the first covenant had regulations of divine worship and the earthly sanctuary. For there was a tabernacle prepared, the outer one, in which were the lampstand and the table and the sacred bread; this is called the holy place. Behind the second veil there was a tabernacle which is called the Holy of Holies, having a golden altar of incense and the ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, in which was a golden jar holding the manna, and Aaron’s rod which budded, and the tables of the covenant; and above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat; but of these things we cannot now speak in detail.      
        . . . the priests are continually entering the outer tabernacle performing the divine worship, but into the second, only the high priest enters once a year, not without taking blood, which he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance . . .
        But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things to come, He entered through the greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this creation; and not through the blood of goats and calves, but through His own blood . . ."
• Tabernacle of Testimony - portrayed as a historical tent of worship
• If the "first covenant" ordained an immaterial tabernacle, how could that tabernacle be an "earthly sanctuary"?
• Why say that "we cannot now speak in detail" of the character of the earthly tabernacle if it was merely imaginative?
• How could a merely imaginary tabernacle be holy?
• How could the high priests offer sacrificial blood in an imaginary taberacle?
• Why write that Christ entered a "more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands" if the earthly tabernacle was also immaterial?
• Why write that the ark, manna, "Aaron's rod which budded", and the stone tablets were kept in the tabernacle if the story of Israel wandering in the wilderness was imaginary?
• Why would God ordain a mere tent of testimony, rather than a more enduring structure, if the nation of Israel never migrated?

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?

Ok . . . how important are Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph?

I got a little side-tracked from the broader Biblical story. My excuse is that the facts/customs/beliefs about Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph seemed rather closely related (in more ways than one). The textual study of how Abraham is placed in Scripture is back in the March 25th and April 9th posts. But Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph are also more than just characters in Genesis. Their names do appear in other Old and New Testament books. So, what was Scripture saying about Isaac, Jacob, and Joseph before the onset of modern archaeology?

Map from Bible History Online of the Twelve Tribe Settlements

Old Testament:

• Exodus 3:3-6, "So Moses said, 'I must turn aside now and see this marvelous sight, why the bush is not burned up.' When the LORD saw that he turned aside to look, God called to him from the midst of the bush and said, 'Moses, Moses!' And he said, 'Here I am.' Then He said, 'Do not come near here; remove your sandals from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground.' He said also, 'I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.' Then Moses hid his face, for he was afraid to look at God."
• Isaac and Jacob - portrayed as historical men.
• Why would you have a God of a historical Abraham who is at the very same time the God of an imaginary Isaac and Jacob?
• God speaking directly to Moses called Himself the God of Isaac and Jacob. Why would a real God identify Himself as the God of imaginary figures?
• Why would Moses be afraid of a God who identified Himself with mythology?
• Joshua 16:4-17:10, "The sons of Joseph, Manasseh and Ephraim [direct sons--see Genesis 41:50-52--with Manassah being the firstborn], received their inheritance. Now this was the territory of the sons of Ephraim according to their families: the border of their inheritance eastward was Ataroth-addar, as far as upper Beth-horon. Then the border went westward at Michmethath on the north, and the border turned about eastward to Taanath-shiloh and continued beyond it to the east of Janoah. It went down from Janoah to Ataroth and to Naarah, then reached Jericho and came out at the Jordan [River]. From Tappuah the border continued westward to the brook of Kanah, and it ended at the sea. This is the inheritance of the tribe of the sons of Ephraim according to their families, together with the cities which were set apart for the sons of Ephraim in the midst of the inheritance of the sons of Manasseh, all the cities with their villages . . . Now this was the lot for the tribe of Manasseh, for he was the firstborn of Joseph. To Machir the firstborn of Manasseh, the father of Gilead, were allotted Gilead and Bashan, because he was a man of war . . . The border of Manasseh ran from Asher to Michmethath which was east of Shechem; then the border went southward to the inhabitants of En-tappuah. The land of Tappuah belonged to Manasseh, but Tappuah on the border of Manasseh belonged to the sons of Ephraim. The border went down to the brook of Kanah, southward of the brook (these cities belonged to Ephraim among the cities of Manasseh), and the border of Manasseh was on the north side of the brook and it ended at the sea. The south side belonged to Ephraim and the north side to Manasseh, and the sea was their border; and they reached to Asher on the north and to Issachar on the east."
• Joseph - portrayed as a historical man.
• How do you have real cities defining the borders of imaginary tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh (see the Twelve Tribes Settlement map above, and the following Google Map)?
• Why would the real river Jordan and the real Mediterranean Sea define borders of imaginary tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh?
• How can you say real tribes (Ephraim and Manasseh) are descendents of imaginary people (Ephraim and Manasseh, the sons of Joseph)?
• Why would firstborn status be important for the tribe of Manasseh, if the story of Manasseh being the firstborn son of Joseph was simply imaginative?

• Joshua 24:2-4, "Joshua said to all the people, 'Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, "From ancient times your fathers lived beyond the River, namely, Terah, the father of Abraham and the father of Nahor, and they served other gods. Then I took your father Abraham from beyond the River, and led him through all the land of Canaan, and multiplied his descendants and gave him Isaac. To Isaac I gave Jacob and Esau, and to Esau I gave Mount Seir to possess it; but Jacob and his sons went down to Egypt."'"
• Isaac and Jacob - portrayed as historical men.
• Why would Joshua's parting speech to the Israelite people be about imaginary characters?
• How could the descendents of a real Abraham be multiplied through imaginary figures (Isaac and Jacob)?
• How could an imaginary Jacob travel to a real Egypt?
• I Kings 18:36-39, "At the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice, Elijah the prophet came near and said, 'O LORD, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel [Jacob], today let it be known that You are God in Israel [nation] and that I am Your servant and I have done all these things at Your word. Answer me, O LORD, answer me, that this people may know that You, O LORD, are God, and that You have turned their heart back again.' Then the fire of the LORD fell and consumed the burnt offering and the wood and the stones and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench. When all the people saw it, they fell on their faces; and they said, 'The LORD, He is God; the LORD, He is God.'"
• Isaac and Jacob - portrayed a historical men.
• Why would Elijah call for aid from the God of imaginary figures?
• Why would God respond Elijah's request for real action after Elijah said He was the God of imaginary men?
• How could the people worship the real God of imaginary characters?
• I Chronicles 2:1-2, "These are the sons of Israel [Jacob]: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Issachar, Zebulun, Dan, Joseph, Benjamin, Naphtali, Gad and Asher."
• Jacob and Joseph - portrayed as historical men.
• Why would the twelve tribes (Many verses interchange Joseph with Ephraim and Manasseh. But Levi held no land, so the land-holding tribes still numbered twelve with Ephraim and Manasseh.) of Israel retain identical names to merely imaginary figures, such as Joseph? Wouldn't this grow old?
• Why would record be kept of the sons of an imaginary man Jacob?
• I Chronicles 29:10-19, "So David blessed the LORD in the sight of all the assembly; and David said, 'Blessed are You, O LORD God of Israel [Jacob] our father, forever and ever . . . But who am I and who are my people that we should be able to offer as generously as this? For all things come from You, and from Your hand we have given You. For we are sojourners before You, and tenants, as all our fathers were; our days on the earth are like a shadow, and there is no hope. O LORD our God, all this abundance that we have provided to build You a house for Your holy name, it is from Your hand, and all is Yours. Since I know, O my God, that You try the heart and delight in uprightness, I, in the integrity of my heart, have willingly offered all these things; so now with joy I have seen Your people, who are present here, make their offerings willingly to You. O LORD, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel, our fathers, preserve this forever in the intentions of the heart of Your people, and direct their heart to You; and give to my son Solomon a perfect heart to keep Your commandments, Your testimonies and Your statutes, and to do them all, and to build the temple, for which I have made provision.'"
• Isaac and Jacob - portrayed as historical men.
• Why would David identify the real Israelite people as sojourners just like imaginary forefathers?
• Why would David acknowledge that "all things" come from God based in part on the sojourner status of imaginary forefathers?
• Why would David call an imaginary  Isaac and Jacob fathers of the real nation of Israel?
• How could the God of imaginary forefathers preserve the hearts of a real people and David's own son?
• Why build a temple for the God of imaginary forefathers?
• How did David and the nation of Israel know God's name was holy, if all they ever heard were tales regarding God's involvement in the lives of imaginary forefathers?
• Jeremiah 33:14-26, "'Behold, days are coming,' declares the LORD, 'when I will fulfill the good word which I have spoken concerning the house of Israel and the house of Judah. In those days and at that time I will cause a righteous Branch of David [Christ the Messiah] to spring forth; and He shall execute justice and righteousness on the earth' . . . The word of the LORD came to Jeremiah, saying, 'Thus says the LORD, "If you can break My covenant for the day and My covenant for the night, so that day and night will not be at their appointed time, then My covenant may also be broken with David My servant so that he will not have a son to reign on his throne, and with the Levitical priests, My ministers. As the host of heaven [stars] cannot be counted and the sand of the sea cannot be measured, so I will multiply the descendants of David My servant and the Levites who minister to Me."' And the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah, saying, 'Have you not observed what this people have spoken, saying, "The two families which the LORD chose, He has rejected them"? Thus they despise My people, no longer are they as a nation in their sight. Thus says the LORD, "If My covenant for day and night stand not, and the fixed patterns of heaven and earth I have not established, then I would reject the descendants of Jacob and David My servant, not taking from his descendants rulers over the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. But I will restore their fortunes and will have mercy on them."'"
• Isaac and Jacob - portrayed as historical men.
• How can the descendents of an imaginary man, Jacob, be as firmly established as nighttime and daytime?
• Why would the descendents of an imaginary Jacob be identified alongside those of a real King David, who is identified as the forefather of Christ (Branch of David)?
• Why would the name of an imaginary man, Isaac, be placed between those of two historical men, Abraham and Jacob?
• Amos 5:4-6, "For thus says the LORD to the house of Israel,
              'Seek Me that you may live.
        But do not resort to Bethel [Judges 1:22]
              And do not come to Gilgal [I Samuel 11:14-15],
              Nor cross over to Beersheba [II Chronicles 19:4];
              For Gilgal will certainly go into captivity
              And Bethel will come to trouble.
        Seek the LORD that you may live,
              Or He will break forth like a fire, O house of Joseph,
              And it will consume with none to quench it for Bethel . . .'"
• Jacob and Joseph - portrayed as a historical men.
• Why say "house of Israel" if Israel/Jacob was an imaginary man?
• Why say "house of Joseph" if Joseph was an imaginary man?
• How could the descendents of an imaginary man Joseph live in real cities and later be taken into captivity?

New Testament: (this is getting a little long, so I'll postpone the New Testament verses)