Sorry if already posted, but...

[cweb255]

What of the two different geneologies of Christ?

Matthew: Jesus from Joseph from Heli from Matthat from Levi from Melchi from Janna from Joseph from Mattathias from Amos from Naum from Esli from Nagge from Maath from Mattathias from Semei from Joseph from Judah from Joanna from Rhesa from Zorobabel from Salathiel from Neri from Melchi from Addi from Cosam from Elmodam from Er from Jose from Eliezer from Josim from Matthat from Levi from Simeon from Judah from Joseph from Jonan from Eliakim from Melea from Menan from Mattatha from Nathan from David from Jesse.

Luke: Jesus from Joseph from Jacob from Matthan from Eleazar from Eliud from Achim from Zadok from Azor from Eliamkim from Abiud from Zorobabel from Salathiel from Jschonias from Josias from Amon from Manasses from Ezekias from Achaz from Joatham from Ozias from Joraz from Josaphat from Asa from Abia from Roboam from Solomen from David from Jesse.

I don't understand?

 

[hola]

The majority opinion from what I've heard is that one lineage is through Joseph, and the other is actually through Mary...although in that lineage it puts it in some way as Joseph was the "supposed" father of Jesus, I believe...which reminds us that Joseph wasn't the actual father.

One line is from Nathan to Jesus, the other is from Solomon to Jesus. There are other explanations for this that I've heard, I haven't got the references in hand where I could list their points or reasons as to why one lineage is through Nathan. It seems that one lineage is to show Jesus as an heir of David's throne.

Somebody else more knowlegable in this can probably help you with this better than I have tried.

I believe that some prayer and study will help. Usually, I've learned many answers to questions that I've had, even if they seemed impossible to understand or figure out, after praying about it, and God showing me in his timing.

I have some other questions myself...but God is faithful. He's answered so many prayers that I know that he's real. Even if I won't understand everything (and that may be a good thing for a human being who is prone to use things that God has created for good the wrong way), I can still learn not to lean on my own understanding, and trust in him...allowing him to direct my steps/path.

God bless you...and I hope and pray that God will show you his answer to this.

God bless!

 

[Macca]

The majority opinion from what I've heard is that one lineage is through Joseph, and the other is actually through Mary...although in that lineage it puts it in some way as Joseph was the "supposed" father of Jesus, I believe...which reminds us that Joseph wasn't the actual father.

One line is from Nathan to Jesus, the other is from Solomon to Jesus. There are other explanations for this that I've heard, I haven't got the references in hand where I could list their points or reasons as to why one lineage is through Nathan. It seems that one lineage is to show Jesus as an heir of David's throne.

Somebody else more knowlegable in this can probably help you with this better than I have tried.

I believe that some prayer and study will help. Usually, I've learned many answers to questions that I've had, even if they seemed impossible to understand or figure out, after praying about it, and God showing me in his timing.

I have some other questions myself...but God is faithful. He's answered so many prayers that I know that he's real. Even if I won't understand everything (and that may be a good thing for a human being who is prone to use things that God has created for good the wrong way), I can still learn not to lean on my own understanding, and trust in him...allowing him to direct my steps/path.

God bless you...and I hope and pray that God will show you his answer to this.

God bless!

Part of the reason for the two lists is the two earthly parents, one from Joseph; from Solomon, but the kingly line was cursed by God in the later kings; they were never to have a lasting king on the throne of Israel
The line of Mary (the natural mother) needed to be from David, but not from the kingly line. Thus there is no curse on this side of the family. (they had no right to the throne, so the curse did not carry to them.)
Sorry I have not quoted the Ch. & V. for the curse, but it is n later vs of Kings or Chronicles)
Macca.

 

[hola]

Part of the reason for the two lists is the two earthly parents, one from Joseph; from Solomon, but the kingly line was cursed by God in the later kings; they were never to have a lasting king on the throne of Israel
The line of Mary (the natural mother) needed to be from David, but not from the kingly line. Thus there is no curse on this side of the family. (they had no right to the throne, so the curse did not carry to them.)
Sorry I have not quoted the Ch. & V. for the curse, but it is n later vs of Kings or Chronicles)
Macca.

That's exactly what I've heard also...I just haven't studied it out fully to give what I thought was an appropriate answer.

I think there may be another verse in Jeremiah that they had used as well...but I'm not sure.

God bless!

 

[jbarcher]

"One line is from Nathan to Jesus, the other is from Solomon to Jesus."

Yes. You can see where the lines split.

Note that the lineage in Matthew is of the kings. That would be proper with Matthew's portrayal of Christ as king. If Luke portrays Christ as the Son of Man, it would be proper to show that Christ is part of the line of David.

Some have said that both lines are of Joseph. You can read the perspective of another here and from more CF'ers here.

 

[cweb255]

peschitta_enthusiast has a very solid point methinks. That is one point easily resolved. Now to solve all my other problems...

 

[prodromos]

They are both genealogies of Joseph.

Matthan and his wife gave birth to Jacob. On Matthan's death, his widow married Matthat and gave birth to Heli, so Jacob and Heli are uterine brothers even though Jacob is a decendant of Solomon and Heli of Nathan.

Heli married, but died without producing a child, thus his widow became the wife of Heli's brother Jacob in order to raise up a child for his deceased brother according to the law. Thus Joseph is the biological son of Jacob and the legal son of Heli. Note that Matthew's Gospel states that Jacob begat Joseph whereas Luke avoids explicit begetting terms and merely calls Joseph the son of Heli.

John.

 

[G4m]

What of the two different geneologies of Christ?

Matthew: Jesus from Joseph from Heli from Matthat from Levi from Melchi from Janna from Joseph from Mattathias from Amos from Naum from Esli from Nagge from Maath from Mattathias from Semei from Joseph from Judah from Joanna from Rhesa from Zorobabel from Salathiel from Neri from Melchi from Addi from Cosam from Elmodam from Er from Jose from Eliezer from Josim from Matthat from Levi from Simeon from Judah from Joseph from Jonan from Eliakim from Melea from Menan from Mattatha from Nathan from David from Jesse.

Luke: Jesus from Joseph from Jacob from Matthan from Eleazar from Eliud from Achim from Zadok from Azor from Eliamkim from Abiud from Zorobabel from Salathiel from Jschonias from Josias from Amon from Manasses from Ezekias from Achaz from Joatham from Ozias from Joraz from Josaphat from Asa from Abia from Roboam from Solomen from David from Jesse.

I don't understand?

I found this article quite helpful!

http://www.carm.org/questions/2geneologies.htm

"There is no discrepancy because one genealogy is for Mary and the other is for Joseph. It was customary to mention the genealogy through the father even though it was clearly known that it was through Mary."

 

[andy153]

Dear cweb255

What of the two different geneologies of Christ?

There is no genealogical record in Matthew chapter 1.

The first verse makes it clear that this is the book of the generation of Jesus Christ.

Generation and genealogy are two different things.

andy153

 

[cweb255]

I still think peschitta_enthusiast explained it better, as Matthew chronology is 14-14-13, and how is generation and genealogy different. Please explain (sources?)

 

[andy153]

Dear cweb255,

There is in no genealogical record in Matthew chapter 1, heres why :

The names recorded in Matthew are different to those in Luke.

The numbers recorded in Matthew are different to those recorded in Luke.

Genealogy always goes back in time, Matthew's account comes forward.

In a genealogy you can only be descended from one father, Jesus is mentioned as the son of David and the son of Abraham.

If it were a true genealogical record Jesus would be mentioned as A son of David or A son of Abraham not THE son.

David and Abraham are mentioned in the wrong order, it should be Abraham then David not the other way round.

Generally, womens names were not recorded in genealogical records as in Luke's record, Matthews version contains the names of 5 women.

The book also states that it is not a genealogy, it says "the book of generation" which is different.

Generation means begotten by natural or artificial means i.e. to generate.

Geneaology means account of descent by enumeration.

Here's how genealogy works:

Me, my father, my grandfather, my great grandfather. (4)

You, your father, your grandfather, your great grandfather (4)

Anybody, anybodys father, anybodys grand....... well you get the picture.

Numbers cannot lie, if the numbers are not correct it is not intended as a genealogical record. The authors of scripture were not that careless

with love and respect, andy153

 

[hola]

Dear cweb255,

There is in no genealogical record in Matthew chapter 1, heres why :

The names recorded in Matthew are different to those in Luke.

The numbers recorded in Matthew are different to those recorded in Luke.

Genealogy always goes back in time, Matthew's account comes forward.

In a genealogy you can only be descended from one father, Jesus is mentioned as the son of David and the son of Abraham.

If it were a true genealogiacl record Jesus would be mentioned as A son of David or A son of Abraham not THE son.

David and Abraham are mentioned in the wrong order, it should be Abraham then David not the other way round.

Generally, womens names were not recorded in genealogical records as in Luke's record, Matthews version contains the names of 5 women.

The book also states that it is not a genealogy, it says "the book of generation" which is different.

Generation means begotten by natural or artificial means i.e. to generate.

Geneaology means account of descent by enumeration.

Here's how genealogy works:

Me, my father, my grandfather, my great grandfather. (4)

You, your father, your grandfather, your great grandfather (4)

Anybody, anybodys father, anybodys grand....... well you get the picture.

Numbers cannot lie, if the numbers are not correct it is not intended as a genealogical record. The authors of scripture were not that careless

with love and respect, andy153

I think your point of "generation" is interesting.

I'll have to look at it again...I remember that one of the "counts" had to do with the TIME of the Babylonian captivity, not with one of those named on the list. I know the authors didn't lie...I'm not about to believe the peschitta so quickly either, as/although some may.

Thanks for sharing...although you're not really responding to me when you make these posts...I'm just thankful to hear your perspective as well and to consider it.

God bless you,

hola

 

[prodromos]

"There is no discrepancy because one genealogy is for Mary and the other is for Joseph. It was customary to mention the genealogy through the father even though it was clearly known that it was through Mary."

Through other sources we know that Mary's father was named Joachim, so it isn't Mary's geneology.

 

[G4m]

Through other sources we know that Mary's father was named Joachim, so it isn't Mary's geneology.

Hi prodromos, I'm going to check this out, thanks!

Can you provide a link anyways?

 

[prodromos]

I've been trying to find an online copy of the Protoevangelion of James without any success, as this is the primary source of information about Mary's parents.
this link (http://www.gosaintanna.org/church/life.asp) mentions other sources though I am not familiar with any others apart from the fact that the Orthodox church has held feast days for Saints Joachim and Anna as well as for Mary's entry into the temple as a child. They have long been a part of Orthodox tradition.

John.