• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Contradiction: Which geneaology of Jesus is correct?

Skwim

Veteran Member
.

Boy, I would have thought that by now a side-by-side comparative listing would have been posted. In any case, here it is.

jesus geneology.png
Matthew 1
26
generations between David and Joseph

Luke 3
40
generations between David and Joseph

Boy, aside from different lineages, something's sure not kosher in the deli here.

.
 
Last edited:

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
I disagree. Since the objective of both genealogies is to support a theological and not a genealogical argument, "correct" isn't at issue. And the arguments they support can certainly be seen to be inspired.
sojourner: you are mistaken. It is critical to the Christian religion that Jesus be a descendant of David of the tribe of Judah, because the Messiah MUST fulfill this prophecy. (It's one of the reasons the Bahai messiah is not authentic--they have no proof of this.) Thus ANY AND EVERY genealogy of Jesus must ACCURATELY show such a lineage. You can't do that with a false lineage.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
sojourner: you are mistaken. It is critical to the Christian religion that Jesus be a descendant of David of the tribe of Judah, because the Messiah MUST fulfill this prophecy. (It's one of the reasons the Bahai messiah is not authentic--they have no proof of this.) Thus ANY AND EVERY genealogy of Jesus must ACCURATELY show such a lineage. You can't do that with a false lineage.
But the way in which each gets there is an intentional theological argument.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
They are not theological arguments. They are genealogical lines.
You're mistaken. Why do you think Matthew's contains women: Rahab (a prostitute), Ruth (a foreigner) and Mary (an unwed mother)? These constitute a theological argument that Jesus comes from illegitimacy, yet is of David's lineage. It is congruent with the overarching theological theme of Matthew, which is that the outsiders are insiders. (Sheep/goats, wheat/weeds, us/them.)
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
You're mistaken. Why do you think Matthew's contains women: Rahab (a prostitute), Ruth (a foreigner) and Mary (an unwed mother)? These constitute a theological argument that Jesus comes from illegitimacy, yet is of David's lineage. It is congruent with the overarching theological theme of Matthew, which is that the outsiders are insiders. (Sheep/goats, wheat/weeds, us/them.)
They are both desparate attempts to show lineage where none exists. Each one has its own set of problems. I thought it was Luke's that was supposed to be Mary's lineage according to some?
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
They are both desparate attempts to show lineage where none exists. Each one has its own set of problems. I thought it was Luke's that was supposed to be Mary's lineage according to some?
I disagree. Studied the synoptics in seminary. You?
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
I'm just a Jew that studied the gospels on my own with the help of a text or two. LOL.

We'll have to disagree agreeably. :)
And I agree that the gospels sort of stand Judaism on its head. I get that. Matthew's community were Jews living in Gentile territory -- and Judaizers. So Matthew sort of "weasels" his way into Law and Tradition, but takes a great departure, because he sees Jesus as a departure from the norms of Judaic Tradition, yet fulfilling the Messianic requirements -- but on his own terms.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
And I agree that the gospels sort of stand Judaism on its head. I get that. Matthew's community were Jews living in Gentile territory -- and Judaizers. So Matthew sort of "weasels" his way into Law and Tradition, but takes a great departure, because he sees Jesus as a departure from the norms of Judaic Tradition, yet fulfilling the Messianic requirements -- but on his own terms.
I wouldn't be nearly so strong. It's Matthew who has Jesus teaching his disciples to do and observe EVERYTHING the Pharisees teach because they sit on the chair of Moses. Everything would even include Oral Torah.
 

sojourner

Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
I wouldn't be nearly so strong. It's Matthew who has Jesus teaching his disciples to do and observe EVERYTHING the Pharisees teach because they sit on the chair of Moses. Everything would even include Oral Torah.
Yes, that's true. Yet, Matthew advocates the inclusion of those whom Judaism traditionally does not include. At the end of the Gospel, Matthew has Jesus charge his apostles to "go make us out of them." This effectively opens the boundaries of what constitutes Israel from just the Judaic tribes to "all who believe."
 

Mitty

Active Member
probably neither is correct, and Jesus was not even related to Joseph, he was adopted
And Luke 3:23 says that Jesus' biological father was perhaps Heli's son who coincidently was also named Joseph like his adoptive father (Matt 1). But given that maternity is a matter of fact whereas paternity is just a matter of opinion without reliable DNA paternity tests, Jesus' biological father could have been a Roman named Panthera as suggested, or the milkman. But either way the writers of Matthew and Luke wanted to link Jesus to David who was his god's begotten son (Psalm 2:7) and why Jesus was mocked as "The King of the Jews" when he was executed by the Romans for sedition, even though David was an adulterous murderer who said that his love with Jonathon was more wonderful than with any of his wives or concubines (2Sam 1:26).
 
Last edited:

The Anointed

Well-Known Member
.

Boy, I would have thought that by now a side-by-side comparative listing would have been posted. In any case, here it is.

Matthew 1
26
generations between David and Joseph

Luke 3
40
generations between David and Joseph

Boy, aside from different lineages, something's sure not kosher in the deli here.
.

Joseph the son of Jabob, who married the already pregnant Mary and was the step-father to Jesus, is seen to have been a descendant of Solomon through the genetic line of Jehoiachin, of who the Lord says in Jeremiah 22: 30; This is what the LORD says: "Record this man as if childless, a man who will not prosper in his lifetime, for none of his offspring will prosper, none will sit on the throne of David or rule anymore in Judah."

But Salathiel was not of the seed of Jehoiachin. Salathiel was the son of Naria a descendant of Nathan.

The great grandfather of the biblical Jesus, on his mother's side, was Yehoshua/Jesus III, who was the high priest in Jerusalem from 36 to 23 BC and is believed to have been murdered at the orders of Herod the Great. While Heli, was the biological grandfather of Jesus, on his father's side,, and his ancestors, who were born from the genetic line of Nathan ‘the son of King David, were legitimate heirs to King David, but not to the throne of Israel, as the prophesied Messiah had to come through the genetic line of Solomon.

Heli and his descendants only became heirs to the throne of David, through Nathan the son of King David, when Naria, a descendant of Nathan, married Tamar, a female descendant of King Solomon, who bore to Naria a son by the name “Salathiel.” See Luke 3: 27. After the death of Naria, Tamar was taken to wife by King Jehoiachin, whose only son with Tamar, was Zedekiah who died prematurely in Childhood.

According to Torah law, Nathan the son of King David and his descendants, were legitimate heirs of King David, but not in the ancestral line of the promised Messiah, who was to be born of the seed of Solomon, until Naria the descendant of Nathan coupled with Tamah the descendant of Solomon, to produce Salathiel the ancestor of Jesus, who has been made High Priest and King (From the tribe of Judah=Solomon) in the order of Melchizedek.

David Hughes the noted Genealogist of the Ancient World Lineages, states that King Jeconiah’s only son, with Queen Tamar, ‘Prince Zedekiah,’ died prematurely in childhood, and in 586 BCE King Zedekiah, the last king of Israel, whose original name Mattaniah, was the son of Josiah and the uncle of Jehoiachin. King Zedekiah/Mattaniah, was taken prisoner and his sons were executed in front of him, after which, his eyes were gouged out, and there in Babylon, he remained blinded in exile for the rest of his life and it appeared that the entire royal lineage of King David through God’s chosen son, Solomon, had been exterminated.

With all the known direct lineages of male heirs to the lineage of King Solomon the son of King David and Bathsheba now extinct, Queen Tamar II became the dynastic heiress preserving not only the Lineage of King Solomon, but also became the inter-dynastic link, or the vital crossover heiress merging the non-royal Nathan lineage with the royal lineages of King Solomon. With the addition of Tamar representing the mainline descendants of King David, we now can understand the linkage between the two prime royal and non-royal lineages to the ancestry of the Jewish Messiah Yehoshua ben Yosef (Jesus son of Joseph the son of Alexander Helios a descendant of Nathan).

Jesus carried in his genes the potent fusion of Davidian and Zadokian bloodlines. He carried the potent bloodline of the royal mantle as a Priest-King of Israel and the messianic mantle as the Maschiach Yisra’el (Messiah of Israel) of the House of David.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
Joseph the son of Jabob, who married the already pregnant Mary and was the step-father to Jesus, is seen to have been a descendant of Solomon through the genetic line of Jehoiachin, of who the Lord says in Jeremiah 22: 30; This is what the LORD says: "Record this man as if childless, a man who will not prosper in his lifetime, for none of his offspring will prosper, none will sit on the throne of David or rule anymore in Judah."

But Salathiel was not of the seed of Jehoiachin. Salathiel was the son of Naria a descendant of Nathan.

The great grandfather of the biblical Jesus, on his mother's side, was Yehoshua/Jesus III, who was the high priest in Jerusalem from 36 to 23 BC and is believed to have been murdered at the orders of Herod the Great. While Heli, was the biological grandfather of Jesus, on his father's side,, and his ancestors, who were born from the genetic line of Nathan ‘the son of King David, were legitimate heirs to King David, but not to the throne of Israel, as the prophesied Messiah had to come through the genetic line of Solomon.

Heli and his descendants only became heirs to the throne of David, through Nathan the son of King David, when Naria, a descendant of Nathan, married Tamar, a female descendant of King Solomon, who bore to Naria a son by the name “Salathiel.” See Luke 3: 27. After the death of Naria, Tamar was taken to wife by King Jehoiachin, whose only son with Tamar, was Zedekiah who died prematurely in Childhood.

According to Torah law, Nathan the son of King David and his descendants, were legitimate heirs of King David, but not in the ancestral line of the promised Messiah, who was to be born of the seed of Solomon, until Naria the descendant of Nathan coupled with Tamah the descendant of Solomon, to produce Salathiel the ancestor of Jesus, who has been made High Priest and King (From the tribe of Judah=Solomon) in the order of Melchizedek.

David Hughes the noted Genealogist of the Ancient World Lineages, states that King Jeconiah’s only son, with Queen Tamar, ‘Prince Zedekiah,’ died prematurely in childhood, and in 586 BCE King Zedekiah, the last king of Israel, whose original name Mattaniah, was the son of Josiah and the uncle of Jehoiachin. King Zedekiah/Mattaniah, was taken prisoner and his sons were executed in front of him, after which, his eyes were gouged out, and there in Babylon, he remained blinded in exile for the rest of his life and it appeared that the entire royal lineage of King David through God’s chosen son, Solomon, had been exterminated.

With all the known direct lineages of male heirs to the lineage of King Solomon the son of King David and Bathsheba now extinct, Queen Tamar II became the dynastic heiress preserving not only the Lineage of King Solomon, but also became the inter-dynastic link, or the vital crossover heiress merging the non-royal Nathan lineage with the royal lineages of King Solomon. With the addition of Tamar representing the mainline descendants of King David, we now can understand the linkage between the two prime royal and non-royal lineages to the ancestry of the Jewish Messiah Yehoshua ben Yosef (Jesus son of Joseph the son of Alexander Helios a descendant of Nathan).

Jesus carried in his genes the potent fusion of Davidian and Zadokian bloodlines. He carried the potent bloodline of the royal mantle as a Priest-King of Israel and the messianic mantle as the Maschiach Yisra’el (Messiah of Israel) of the House of David.
Sorry, but I'm not that familiar with all the alternate spellings of the names on the list, so I'm not sure whom you're talking about. Moreover, because many Christians claim the Bible was created with the imprimatur of god how does this square with contradictions such as this? If errors like this (both lists can be true) are allowed in the Bible then what other god-created errors may be sitting there as yet undiscovered, and misleading people? And even if god had no hand in the errors the problem of lack of veracity still remains.


.
 
Last edited:

Sp0ckrates

Member
1. Who was the father of Joseph, husband of Mary?
(a) Jacob (Matthew 1:16).
OR
(b) Heli (Luke 3:23).

This so called contradiction was also highlited by Zakir naik in 2000 with his debate against DR Campbell. His question was, If we read "Matthew 1 and Luke 3, we find a contradiction on who the father of Joseph, Jesus's father was. there is not a single person in the namelist the same as the other. How can one trust the Bible if it does not even know the ancerstors of Jesus and gives 2 totally different name lists?"

Well, I learned that naik got his information from the Atheist website, annodated bible.com, where this accusation is used as "evidence" that the Bible is somehow corrupted, incoherrent and not reliable.
I went and read for myself and found the following:

Mat 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.
Luk 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

Yes, a contradiction so it seems does exist in the geneaologies of Jesus.

But one thing caught my eye, this words in brackets: "(as was supposed) ".
Why, I asked myself?
I went to the Greek to see if this word is in the scripture, and I found the following.
Answer:
I found the word, "Nomidzo” to describe that Heli was Joseph’s father by “Custom” or “Regulation”.
Then it hit me!
Heli was Mary's father, and Joseph was his Son in law!
Just shows you how one can miss pure logical practices when we read the Bible.
When I got married, I had a father, AND A FATHER IN LAW.
My grandfathers were now 4, out of who I did not call 2 of them Grand Fathers in law!
Thats silly, they are my grandfathers, and my father in law, is My FATHER BY CUSTOM!

THIS MEAN THAT THE WHOLE LIST OF THE 2 GENEAOLOGIES WHICH THE ATHEIST CALLS A CONTRADICTION, IS ACTUALLY THE NAMELIST OF MARY'S ANCESTRY, AS WELL AS JOSEPH'S ANCESTORS!

I can only say: "WOW"!!!!
Who would have thought that the Bible would contain such a correct and detailed version of events.
and to top it off, If the Atheist and Muslim did not demand this to be a Biblical error, I would never have discovered this nice detail so precious to the history of Jesus Christ.

He was king of 2 lineages, tracked from the first man created by God, and the descendend of the seed of the Woman.
And He is King of everything.
Haven’t read all the comments, so I’m unsure if this has already been said: One is the genealogy from his mother’s side and the other is from his adopted father’s side. Hence the difference.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
Haven’t read all the comments, so I’m unsure if this has already been said: One is the genealogy from his mother’s side and the other is from his adopted father’s side. Hence the difference.
why would the gospel bother giving mary's geneology? it would be irrelevant. In Israel, a person's tribal affiliation passed through the father, not the mother. In fact not even through a foster father or adopted father--a problem for chrisitans who claim Joseph was not Jesus' bio dad.
 

The Anointed

Well-Known Member
Sorry, but I'm not that familiar with all the alternate spellings of the names on the list, so I'm not sure whom you're talking about. Moreover, because many Christians claim the Bible was created with the imprimatur of god how does this square with contradictions such as this? If errors like this (both lists can be true) are allowed in the Bible then what other god-created errors may be sitting there as yet undiscovered, and misleading people? And even if god had no hand in the errors the problem of lack of veracity still remains.


.

And where do you see any contradictions in post #54?
 

The Anointed

Well-Known Member
Haven’t read all the comments, so I’m unsure if this has already been said: One is the genealogy from his mother’s side and the other is from his adopted father’s side. Hence the difference.

The genealogy recorded in Matthew, is that of Joseph the son of Jacob a descendant in the genetic line of Solomon the son of David, who took the already pregnant Mary, as his betrothed and had no sexual contact with her until after she had given birth to Jesus, the first of her sons and daughters. Only then did Joseph the son of Jacob consummate their union and they became man and wife.

The genealogy recorded in Luke, is that of Joseph the son of Alexander Helios, shortened to 'HELI,' the biological father of Jesus, who was a descendant in the genetic line of Nathan the son of King David.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
Skwim said:
Sorry, but I'm not that familiar with all the alternate spellings of the names on the list, so I'm not sure whom you're talking about. Moreover, because many Christians claim the Bible was created with the imprimatur of god how does this square with contradictions such as this? If errors like this (both lists can be true) are allowed in the Bible then what other god-created errors may be sitting there as yet undiscovered, and misleading people? And even if god had no hand in the errors the problem of lack of veracity still remains.

And where do you see any contradictions in post #54?
'T wasn't post 54 but post 41: Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke 3: 23-38 contradict each other.

.
 
Last edited:
Top