The inconsistent genealogies of Jesus in Matthew and Luke are that one is the genealogy of his mother, and one of his father Josephstrange that both takes the line of Joseph then
In mathews Joseph are the 27th in the line in Luke he is 42nd.
And why should Josephs bloodline count, after all according to the bible he wasnt the "real" father of Jesus.
Now again which is it.
and to continue with Matthew and Luke after jesus birth where did they go? According to Matthew 2:14 they went to Egypt and to Lukes 2:39 they went to Nazareth.
Who was the apostles? was it according to Matthew and Mark or according to guess who yet again that got a diffrent list.......................... Luke
Originally posted by finti
strange that both takes the line of Joseph then
mathew 1:6-16 have
Jesus -Joseph - Jacob............... Luke 3:21-31 has
Jesus - Joseph - Heli................In mathews Joseph are the 27th in the line in Luke he is 42nd.
And why should Josephs bloodline count, after all according to the bible he wasnt the "real" father of Jesus.
Now again which is it.
Men were the most important for the blood line and adoption was the same as your own flesh. It was important for Jesus to be from the blood line of Judah, which Joseph was, and he adopted Jesus.
Sorry, I got the Mary blood line wrong. I know somewhere it is mentioned.
also......
Luke and Matthews information is different just as some of the other disciples info is different. They wrote about what "they" thought was important.
It seems that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, Caesar Augustus issued a decree for a census, They went to their home town to register and at sometime they did have to leave for Egypt and then later on back to Nazareth. Jesus wasn't a baby when the Magi visited him. It was later on.
Luke and Matthews information is different just as some of the other disciples info is different. They wrote about what "they" thought was importantgetting two totally different blood line is kind of a big deal actually they dont even agree on the father of Joseph, so which one is suppose to be the right one cause they are very much different.
Originally posted by finti
getting two totally different blood line is kind of a big deal actually they dont even agree on the father of Joseph, so which one is suppose to be the right one cause they are very much different.
At first it might seem that way, but looking through it, the important thing that in both blood lines, it was traced back to David, Jessie, and all the way back to Judah, fulfilling OT prophecies.
The Natural and Legal Father of Joseph
Heli (Gr. HELEI--Luke 3:23). In Luke he is said to be the father of Joseph, while in Matthew, Jacob was Joseph's father.
The most probable explanation of this seeming contradiction is afforded by having recourse to the levirate law among the Jews, which prescribes that when a man dies childless his widow "shall not marry to another; but his brother shall take her, and raise up seed for his brother" (Deut., xxv, 5).
If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the widow of the dead man shall not be married to a stranger outside the family; her husband's brother shall go in to her, take her as his wife, and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her.
Deuteronomy 25:5, NKJV
The child, therefore, of the second marriage is legally the child of the first (Deut., xxv, 6). Heli having died childless, his widow became the wife of his brother Jacob, and Joseph was the offspring of the marriage, by nature the son of Jacob, but legally the son of Heli. It is likely that Matthew emphasized the natural, and Luke the legal descent.
Mary was the daughter of Jacob, and Joseph was the son of Jacob's brother, Heli. Mary and Joseph were therefore first cousins, and both of the house of David. Jacob, the elder, having died without male issue, transmitted his rights and privileges to the male issue of his brother Heli, Joseph, who according to genealogical usage was his descendant.
-A. Hervey, Bishop of Bath and Wells
Genealogies of Our Lord Jesus Christ
Whether you take Matthew or Lukes genealogy list, they both still go back to David, Jessie and Judah. It doesn't change anythingpoint is that that then anybody can make up a list of genealogy just make sure it dates back to the persons you wanna be in your link. The huge diffrences with Matthew and Luke versions just emphasize the argument that the bible aint nothing but a fairy tale
Originally posted by Jury
[b]The Natural and Legal Father of JosephHeli (Gr. HELEI--Luke 3:23). In Luke he is said to be the father of Joseph, while in Matthew, Jacob was Joseph's father.
The most probable explanation of this seeming contradiction is afforded by having recourse to the levirate law among the Jews, which prescribes that when a man dies childless his widow "shall not marry to another; but his brother shall take her, and raise up seed for his brother" (Deut., xxv, 5).
If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son, the widow of the dead man shall not be married to a stranger outside the family; her husband's brother shall go in to her, take her as his wife, and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her.
Deuteronomy 25:5, NKJVThe child, therefore, of the second marriage is legally the child of the first (Deut., xxv, 6). Heli having died childless, his widow became the wife of his brother Jacob, and Joseph was the offspring of the marriage, by nature the son of Jacob, but legally the son of Heli. It is likely that Matthew emphasized the natural, and Luke the legal descent.
Mary was the daughter of Jacob, and Joseph was the son of Jacob's brother, Heli. Mary and Joseph were therefore first cousins, and both of the house of David. Jacob, the elder, having died without male issue, transmitted his rights and privileges to the male issue of his brother Heli, Joseph, who according to genealogical usage was his descendant.
-A. Hervey, Bishop of Bath and Wells
Genealogies of Our Lord Jesus Christ [/B]
finti....go back and read this again real slow....put on your thinking cap now.
Heli having died childless, his widow became the wife of his brother Jacob,and Joseph was the offspring of the marriage, by nature the son of Jacob , but legally the son of Heli
Mary was the daughter of Jacob, and Joseph was the son of Jacob's brother, Heli. Mary and Joseph were therefore first cousins, and both of the house of David
finti....go back and read this again real slow....put on your thinking cap nowtake a look at it again debbiejoe this dude cant make up his mind of whom died childless, jacob or heli
The child, therefore, of the second marriage is legally the child of the first (Deut., xxv, 6). Heli having died childless, his widow became the wife of his brother Jacob, and Joseph was the offspring of the marriage, by nature the son of Jacob, but legally the son of Heli. It is likely that Matthew emphasized the natural, and Luke the legal descent.
Jacob, the elder, having died without male issue, transmitted his rights and privileges to the male issue of his brother Heli, Joseph, who according to genealogical usage was his descendant.
Ok, all of this is exactly why I left catholism behind. Too many unanswered questions.
One of the things that bothered me about Eve is that Eve & Adam had three sons. Therefore, to create the rest of the population, Eve would have had to have bore children from her sons. She then had daughters. If any of this is true, we are built on incest from the very beginning!