The Jewish follower that gave these to me, also pointed out that Jews did not trace heritage by women, only men. I’m sorry if these are all wrong, like I said, I put them up to see what others would think of them, and the response seems rather obvious to me. I don’t have the time to check them all out for myself, so thanks for pointing out any of these contradictions that you see as absolutely wrong.
This is true and also the reason why Joseph is mentioned in both genealogies as opposed to Mary in Luke and Joseph in Matthew. The father’s trade was also passed down to the son, and the mother taught the daughter to do “woman work.” This would account for the two different genealogies. Matthew, who deals with Joseph, gives Joseph’s, and Luke who describes the Annunciation, Mary’s, so that Jesus could be shown to be Abraham and David’s descendant both legally and genetically. It is interesting to note that if Joseph is Jesus’ physical father (i.e. God artificially inseminated Mary), then Jesus had a cursed lineage due to Jeconiah. If Jesus has no biological relationship with Joseph, then it’s entertaining to wonder how He is a man.
Linguistic proof for Luke being Mary’s genealogy is the terminology of Luke before each name using the article
tou for all except Joseph. A Greek audience would immediately realize that the equivalent to son of Joseph in Luke would be “Jesus being (as was supposed the son of Joseph) the son of Heli” with the understanding that Jesus was the grandson of Heli through Mary.
In addition to this, genealogies were kept in the Temple which was destroyed in 70 AD, so a pre-70 AD author would not have had the pleasure of fabrication, yet on the contrary a later one wouldn’t have had evidence against him.
