Genealogy of Jesus

  • Thread starter Thread starter GeorgeSword
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

GeorgeSword

Guest
Anyone who has read Matthew and Luke will know that the two genealogies of Jesus they present are vastly different. I’m starting to (try, at least) to seriously study Scripture, but I’ve found this a bit bugging. I’ve no problem with the idea that Scripture does not have to be wholly historical or scientifically correct. I guess all that really matters is the fact that Jesus was descended from David, but it’s been bugging me a bit. I’ve heard some people suggest that one geneaology was that of Joseph and one of Mary, yet both of them say they are of Joseph, and if we were to accept one as being that of Mary it would contradict belief in Joachim and Anne being her parents.
 
GeorgeSword said:
Anyone who has read Matthew and Luke will know that the two genealogies of Jesus they present are vastly different. I’m starting to (try, at least) to seriously study Scripture, but I’ve found this a bit bugging. I’ve no problem with the idea that Scripture does not have to be wholly historical or scientifically correct. I guess all that really matters is the fact that Jesus was descended from David, but it’s been bugging me a bit. I’ve heard some people suggest that one geneaology was that of Joseph and one of Mary, yet both of them say they are of Joseph, and if we were to accept one as being that of Mary it would contradict belief in Joachim and Anne being her parents.
Click to expand...
Can you give some examples of contradictions?
 
Luke 3:

23Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph,
the son of Heli, 24the son of Matthat,
the son of Levi, the son of Melki,
the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph,
25the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos,
the son of Nahum, the son of Esli,
the son of Naggai, 26the son of Maath,
the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein,
the son of Josech, the son of Joda,
27the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa,
the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel,
the son of Neri, 28the son of Melki,
the son of Addi, the son of Cosam,
the son of Elmadam, the son of Er,
29the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer,
the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat,
the son of Levi, 30the son of Simeon,
the son of Judah, the son of Joseph,
the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim,
31the son of Melea, the son of Menna,
the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan,
the son of David, 32the son of Jesse,
the son of Obed, the son of Boaz,
the son of Salmon,[a] the son of Nahshon,
33the son of Amminadab, the son of Ram,**
the son of Hezron, the son of Perez,
the son of Judah, 34the son of Jacob,
the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham,
the son of Terah, the son of Nahor,
35the son of Serug, the son of Reu,
the son of Peleg, the son of Eber,
the son of Shelah, 36the son of Cainan,
the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem,
the son of Noah, the son of Lamech,
37the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch,
the son of Jared, the son of Mahalalel,
the son of Kenan, 38the son of Enosh,
the son of Seth, the son of Adam,
the son of God.

Matthew 1:

1A record of the genealogy of Jesus Christ the son of David, the son of Abraham:
2Abraham was the father of Isaac,
Isaac the father of Jacob,
Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers,
3Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar,
Perez the father of Hezron,
Hezron the father of Ram,
4Ram the father of Amminadab,
Amminadab the father of Nahshon,
Nahshon the father of Salmon,
5Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab,
Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth,
Obed the father of Jesse,
6and Jesse the father of King David.
David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife,
7Solomon the father of Rehoboam,
Rehoboam the father of Abijah,
Abijah the father of Asa,
8Asa the father of Jehoshaphat,
Jehoshaphat the father of Jehoram,
Jehoram the father of Uzziah,
9Uzziah the father of Jotham,
Jotham the father of Ahaz,
Ahaz the father of Hezekiah,
10Hezekiah the father of Manasseh,
Manasseh the father of Amon,
Amon the father of Josiah,
11and Josiah the father of Jeconiah[a] and his brothers at the time of the exile to Babylon.
12After the exile to Babylon:
Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel,
Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,
13Zerubbabel the father of Abiud,
Abiud the father of Eliakim,
Eliakim the father of Azor,
14Azor the father of Zadok,
Zadok the father of Akim,
Akim the father of Eliud,
15Eliud the father of Eleazar,
Eleazar the father of Matthan,
Matthan the father of Jacob,
16and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.**
 
You do not see women mentioned very often in genealogies. Eph 5:31 says, “For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh.” Jesus also pointed this out to the hypocrites when talking about divorce. Marriage is a covenant relationship between a man and a woman (I highly recommend a study on covenants). It used to be that when a woman got married she took her husbands name (like my wife gave up her last name and took mine). I’m old enough to remember seeing mail addressed to my mother as “Mrs. Leo S”. Notice, the Matthew genealogy ends “and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.” If it is not Mary’s genealogy, then maybe one of them could belong to Joseph’s mother? I would point out that the “traditional” names of Mary’s parents (Joachim and Anne) come from a spurious writing (the Protevangelium of James), which was written about the middle of the 2nd century, so I wouldn’t put a lot of trust in its accuracy (although the Church apparently uses it as a foundational source for some of the Marian dogmas, but that’s for another thread).
 
Cachonga said:
I would point out that the “traditional” names of Mary’s parents (Joachim and Anne) come from a spurious writing (the Protevangelium of James), which was written about the middle of the 2nd century, so I wouldn’t put a lot of trust in its accuracy (although the Church apparently uses it as a foundational source for some of the Marian dogmas, but that’s for another thread).
Click to expand...
I would point out that the Proto Evangelium of James got these names from existing Christian tradition. It didn’t create these names.
 
The purpose of this geneology is to tie Jesus to the OT.Matthew is talking to a community of Jewish Christians. Everything is tied ti that. why Does Matthew have the Sermon on the mount? Luke has it on the plain. Is a discrapancy or a viewpoint.Matthew is using and idiom that Jewish members of the church would understand and relate to.Jesus has the sermon on the mount in Mt because Jesus is the New Moses and he is proclaiming the New covenant as Moses proclaimed the Old Covenant from Mount Sinai.Mountains were a place were there would be theophanies(manifestation of God). amid thunder and lightening. Notice the similarity of the transfiguration and the manifestation on Mount Sinai.
Getting back to geneology-Difficult as this stuff is for the modern reader, there is a point to it-it is a truncated version of OT history tieing Jesus to the OT.What Matthew is trying to say is -if you want to know and understand Jesus read the OT and deuteros.This explains density and periscoping(periscoping means a shaving down of members of a geneology to it’s most important members-which was what you wanted to do anyway-prove that you’re related to famous people.)
The list isn’t strictly historical-sources of the geneology(first of three sections) include Ruth4:18-22;1chronicles1;34-2:15,to which Rahab and Ruth have been added.
second part sources-1Chronicles 3:1-16;exilic-2kings24:14;Jer27:20.First three names of third part come fromEzra3:2;Hag2:2;1Chron.3:16-19.other names are from oral tradition.
Matthew is probably most noted for the five women in the geneology-Tamar(gen38),Rahab(Joshua2),Ruth, Bathsheba(2 Samuel11:1-27) and Mary. Why are these women in there? Except for Mary they were all kinda shady or acted in an unconventional way.Which was probably the point-they did the extraordinary the irregular, showed initiative and played an important role in God’s plan.That the number 14 pops up refelects a rabbinical technique called gemetria.
 
Lukan geneology-There are more differences then similarities between Luke and Matt.Similarities-Jesus’ lineage traced through Joseph: same lineage between David andAmminadab;same names in lineage between Herzon and Abraham. Differences- no explicit reference to women;Luke traces Jesis’ lineage back to"Adam-son of God"Matthew has the descending order of beginning with abraham and descending to Jesus.Luke has the geneology after Jesus’ baptism while Matthew has it in the beginning of the Gospel.Luke’s Davidic ancestry source is different then Matthew’s. Luke has a source of 36 names unknown to Matthew and the OT and uses the sacred number 7 in it’s theology. From Joseph to God there is seven times eleven names-77.Jesus is the culmination of what God has started at creation. their are many uses of numbers but let’s cut to the chase.As with many geneologies to sho the quality of the ancestors was to show the quality of the descendant.Luke’s geneology proves Jesus indentity as Davidic and how this fits with God’s plan,which is traceable to God’s creation of humanityThese point to the nature of Luke’s geneology: it’s not an archive nor is it a true family record but it to preach who Jesus is and what He means for the salvation of all people.
 
GeorgeSword said:
Anyone who has read Matthew and Luke will know that the two genealogies of Jesus they present are vastly different. I’m starting to (try, at least) to seriously study Scripture, but I’ve found this a bit bugging. I’ve no problem with the idea that Scripture does not have to be wholly historical or scientifically correct. I guess all that really matters is the fact that Jesus was descended from David, but it’s been bugging me a bit. I’ve heard some people suggest that one geneaology was that of Joseph and one of Mary, yet both of them say they are of Joseph, and if we were to accept one as being that of Mary it would contradict belief in Joachim and Anne being her parents.
Click to expand...
It helps me to understand that, at least in the times of the Bible, genealogies were about more than simple biology. As you note, one function is obviously to present Jesus as “son of David”…but also son of God. Also in line with the covenant God made with the chosen people. Matt and Luke each had their own interests and theologies that were reinforced by the way they wrote their accounts of the birth of Jesus.
 
Both are accurate geneaologies. I asked this very question to an apologist earlier in the month and he gave me a very good answer.

It was tradition that, if the father of a jewish family were to die and the widow re-marry, the second husband would be counted as the father of the widow’s children which she had with her deceased spouse. This was not uncommon in biblical times. I would submit to you that:
  1. St. Joseph’s mother married Jacob and had Joseph.
  2. Jacob died
  3. Joseph’s mother married Heli
  4. Who was counted as the father of Joseph
  5. Luke’s family tree is Heli’s.
Or it could be that Heli died and Joseph’s mother married Jacob. Either way is good. This was very common in Judaic times - both trees can be correct without a contradiction.

I hope this helps.

👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top