FIRSTBORN: EVIDENCE OF BIBLICAL INSPIRATION

FIRSTBORN: PROOF THE BIBLE IS INSPIRED

One of the strangest proofs of the inspiration of the Bible is the fact that (where recorded) the firstborn of Jesus’ lineage who deserved a double portion, never received it. This cannot simply be a coincidence. God must have guided it. These things do not happen by themselves. The great exceptions will be the nation Israel and Israel’s Messiah, Jesus Christ (Ex 4:22; Mt 1:25; Lk 2:7).

Deuteronomy 21:17 But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his.

Adam’s firstborn was Abel who was slain. The blessings went to Seth (Gen 4).

Abraham’s firstborn was Ishmael but Isaac received the double portion of the blessings (Gen 16).

Isaac’s firstborn was Esau but Jacob received his blessings by deceit (Gen 27).

Judah’s firstborn was Er whom God killed. His firstborn illegitimate son through Tamar should have been Zarah but he was replaced by Pharez who was in the lineage of Jesus (Gen 39).

Jacob’s firstborn son was Reuben but the double portion was given to Joseph through Ephraim and Manasseh while the spiritual blessing was given to Judah (Gen 48).

Joseph’s firstborn was Manasseh but the greater blessing went to the second-born Ephraim whom God called his first-born (Gen 48; Jer 31:9).

Although not related to this study, it is interesting that Egypt’s firstborn died in the plagues (Exodus 4-12).

Aaron’s firstborn, Nadab, died (Num 3:2; 26:61).

Jesse’s firstborn was Eliab but God chose his eighth-born, David, to be king (1 Sam 16; 1 Chron 2).

David’s firstborn was Amnon but he chose Solomon, his tenth child and fourth by his seventh wife, to be king (1 Chron 3:6).

A strange list is found in Second Chronicles 3:10-43. The only mention of “firstborn” in Judah’s king list is Josiah’s firstborn Johanan who did not become king after his father (1 Chron 3:15). The list makes no mention that the sons who reigned after their father were the firstborn; it merely says “his son reigned.”

How can anybody accuse all the Bible writers of deliberately manipulating the many stories and removing the firstborn from their birthrights? Either this is another incredible coincidence or it is proof of the divine inspiration of the Bible.