Question #29
Why do Genealogies of Christ Differ?
Can you please explain why the genealogy of Christ differs between that documented in Matthew vs. that in Luke?
The Answer:
Two explanations have been proposed for the two genealogies of Jesus. First, some suggest that both genealogies give the genealogy through Joseph with Matthew providing the legal heirship of Jesus to the throne of David by naming the successive heirs of the kingdom from David to Jesus, while Luke gives Jesus’ actual descent from David. The second explanation is that Matthew gives Jesus’ descent through Joseph and Luke gives Jesus’ descent through Mary.
While either explanation can resolve the issue, the second seems to be the better solution. It is supported by early writings, e.g., Origen, Iraenaeus, and Tertullian. It tells us in what sense Joseph was the father of Jesus. Most translations include only “as was supposed” in the parentheses; however, the parentheses should also include “the son of Joseph.” (See Lenski’s commentary on Luke for a full discussion of this point.) If the closing parenthesis is appropriate where it stands (Keep in mind that there was no punctuation in the original.), then “as was supposed” seems to modify the entire genealogy. Thus, Jesus is only “supposed” to be the son of God. Some translations attempt to handle the issue with commas, but Lenski’s solution is far clearer.
Jewish tradition indirectly supports the second solution. Lightfoot cites from the Talmudic writers on the pains of hell the statement that Mary, the daughter of Heli, was seen in the infernal regions, suffering horrid tortures. This demonstrates the bitter animosity in which the Jews held Christians, it also establishes that Jewish tradition held Mary to be the daughter of Heli.
The second solution also demonstrates the manner in which Jesus was the son of David. If Mary was the daughter of Heli, then Jesus was strictly a descendent of David, not only legally through his “supposed” father, but actually by direct personal descent through his mother. This is significant since Jesus was the seed of woman. (See the primal messianic prophecy in Gen. 3:15, Gal. 3:16 and Gal. 4:4. Note also that in Matthew’s genealogy (Matt. 1), Matthew uses the term “begot” for each generation until he gets to Joseph and Mary where it does not appear.)
Finally, the second solution provides a simple explanation of the entire issue. Mary, since she had no brothers, was an heiress. Accordingly her husband, according to Jewish law, was reckoned among her father’s family as his son. Joseph was the actual son of Jacob and the legal son of Heli. Matthew gives Jesus’ right to the theocratic crown; Luke gives his natural pedigree.
Do you have more questions about the Bible? Then you have come to the right place! We have hundreds of answers to submitted questions, we have thousands of pages of detailed notes on Bible books (including Daniel, Zechariah, Revelation, Hosea, and Joel), we have hundreds of audio and video Bible classes, we have thousands of sermons (many in video), and we have much, much more! Please take a few minutes to look around, and don't forget to bookmark the site! Thanks for visiting!