11:10:49 AM Feb 15th 2013
Does anyone think that it should be mentioned that the "one true descendant" variant could be justified in that the "true" part of it implies that the descendant isn't necessarily the only descendant, but the only one that is a true (functional or explicit) reincarnation of the ancestor, and meaning that all the other descendants don't fulfill the prophesy or what have you because they aren't the ancestor reborn?
04:45:29 AM Apr 3rd 2011
edited by Camacan
edited by Camacan
The first bit of natter makes the case for this not being an example of the trope. But please Repair, Don't Respond. We have bunch of entries misusing the sub-example markup here to add additional Conversation on the Main Page, rapidly losing relation to the trope at hand. If there is an example in here, please be familiar with Example Indentation when returning it to the main page. I'd leave it off there — the descent of a prominent historical religious figure with rich, complex and contradictory documentation is hot natter bait.
- In the The Bible, * detailed genealogies are laid out for Jesus to establish him as the true King of Israel and the savior of mankind.
- Not quite this trope as these only provide a link to important figures (King David, etc) by Jesus' time he could have been born to nearly a tenth of the nation of Israel.
- Oddly, the two lists are almost completely different. A common Fan Wank is that one traces Mary's ancestors while the other traces Joseph's, even though both explicitly follow the male line. The entire thing avoids the trope (and becomes fairly bizarre that they would mention it at all) when you consider that one of the core concepts of Christianity is that Joseph wasn't Jesus' father.
- According to the Jews, there is also the line of Hilel, which was prominent in Judea until 425 AC, and then relocated to Babel. There still seem to be some descendants.
- Note, however, that the Judaism doesn't really consider Jesus important at all (he's a false prophet to them) while for Christianity, Joesph would be, as Jesus' adoptive and legal father, descended by way of Jesus and Mary (more or less). This would be a valid view at the time as such concepts as blood brothers and what not would allow for otherwise unrelated people to be, for all intents, considered relatives.