Unless you can PROVE that one is of Joseph and the other is of Mary, I have no reason to believe that.
.
2007-05-08 09:46:06 · 6 answers · asked by Weird Darryl 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Because they were written by two different men. Maybe they should have consulted with each other so that they could get their facts straight.
2007-05-08 09:47:39 · answer #1 · answered by Shitface M 1 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Quote: "Unless you can PROVE that one is of Joseph and the other is of Mary, I have no reason to believe that."
Anyone who gives you this answer is giving you historical fact. Are you too lazy to research it yourself? Or are you just looking for a reason to not believe it?
Luke makes it clear that he is tracing Jesus' descent through Joseph. A genealogy traced through the mother would not have been normal at that time and place in history.
For the sake of Matthew's argument, Israel's origin was tribal. The clan leader was, of necessity, a dominant male. The individual's survival depended on being able to claim membership within the tribe.
Since in real life many things could happen to a bloodline, a number of laws and customs developed. A person could become a member of a clan without actually being born into it. One way was by adoption. Another was to be born of a woman who was married to a man of that clan. Even when the husband was not the child's biological father, he was still officially the legal father, simply because he was husband to the child's mother.
Genealogies can serve different purposes. Besides establishing identity, they can also be used to structure history and to authenticate a line of office-holders. That's why an individual can be given two or more genealogies according to the purposes for which they were drawn up. Rarely do ancient biblical genealogies afford us a list of strictly biological ancestry.
Matthew's and Luke's genealogies differ in ancestors but agree totally on the most important fact: Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus.
2007-05-08 16:58:21 · answer #2 · answered by Birdie 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Well, My dad actually has the same relatives (7 and 8 generations back) on three branches of his family tree/pedigree chart. In other words, his greatX5 grandfather & mother was also his greatX5 and greatX4 grandfather/mother on two other branches and through different ancestors. In fact, the majority of people have this situation in their family trees too, especially if they come from small towns or regions. Look at Utah, for example.
That doesn't stop me from believing that my birth records are accurate, even if I can trace my ancestry back to the same people three different ways.
2007-05-08 16:54:28 · answer #3 · answered by James, Pet Guy 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because the bible is fallible and indeed has many errors. Read the accounts about how long Jesus was in the tomb, I think you'll see another discrepancy.
2007-05-08 16:53:52 · answer #4 · answered by Shawn B 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The biblical term "as supposed" means "in-law" or "as joined".
There you go.
2007-05-08 21:05:01 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
o.k don't believe we don't lose anything
2007-05-08 16:51:17 · answer #6 · answered by Not Of This World 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋