Why does Joseph (the husband of Mary) have 2 fathers according to the Bible?

Question

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.

or did 2 men just happen to make a baby?

If you're going to say that it is from Mary's side, use scripture to back up your claims.

Answer 1

Peter was Simon; Paul was Saul; sometimes names are variant.

Answer 2

Yeah, this is a good question. There is much debate over this. The general conclusions are:

1) Somehow Joseph had a double line that could be traced back to King David. Perhaps either Jacob or Heli was a grandparent, instead of a father to Joseph. "Son of" was often used to mean "descendent of" in the Bible.

2)One of the lines, probably the one in Luke, is actually a geneology of Mary, not Joseph. When it gets to the end and says "son of Heli," it actually means "son-in-law." Women did not factor into the geneologies, so Joseph's name was used instead of Mary's.

So, the answer is not 100% clear. I guess we have to make our own conclusions. However, I don't think we need to say that Joseph had two fathers.

Answer 3

What is believed today is that Lukes genealogy of Jesus is from Mary's side, so Eli would be Joseph's father in law, and Jacob his father. Given the historical context, this theory is not far feched (i don't know if that is spelled right). Although, there are several other theories to explain the differences between Mathew's and Luke's genealogy

Answer 4

Heli/Eliakim is a nickname for Joachim/Jehoakim:

And the king of Egypt made Eliakim his brother king over Judah and Jerusalem, and turned his name to Jehoiakim. (2Chron 36:4)

The ancient tradition of Christianity is that Joakim and Anna are the parents of Mary, even without those names directly in the scriptures. But Eliakim *is there, and it's synonymous with Joa[i]kim.

Also look closely (in KJV, at least), where in the Heli genealogy, "son" is in italics. It's not for emphasis, but to indicate that the word was added by the translators. Indeed, "son" is not in the Greek. Joseph of Heli, when Heli is Mary's father, straightens the whole thing out.

Answer 5

Jesus' genealogy is given in two places in Scripture, Matthew chapter 1 and Luke chapter 3, verses 23-38. Matthew traces the genealogy from Jesus to Abraham. Luke traces the genealogy from Jesus to Adam. However, there is good reason to believe that Matthew and Luke are in fact tracing entirely different genealogies. For example, Matthew gives Joseph's father as Jacob (Matthew 1:16), while Luke gives Joseph's father as Heli (Luke 3:23). Matthew traces the line through David's son Solomon (Matthew 1:6), while Luke traces the line through David's son Nathan (Luke 3:31). In fact, between David and Jesus, the only names the genealogies have in common are Shealtiel and Zerubbabel (Matthew 1:12; Luke 3:27). What is the explanation for these differences?

Some point to these differences as evidence of errors in the Bible. However, the Jews were meticulous record keepers, especially in regards to genealogies. It is inconceivable that Matthew and Luke could build two entirely contradictory genealogies of the same lineage. Again, from David through Jesus, the genealogies are completely different. Even the reference to Shealtiel and Zerubbabel likely refer to different individuals of the same names. Matthew gives Shealtiel's father as Jeconiah while Luke gives Shealtiel's father as Neri. It would be normal for a man named Shealtiel to name his son Zerubbabel in light of the famous individuals of those names (see the books of Ezra and Nehemiah).

Another explanation is that Matthew is tracing the primary lineage while Luke is taking into account the occurrences of "levirite marriage." If a man died without having any sons, it was tradition for the man's brother to marry his wife and have a son who would carry on the man's name. While possible, this view is unlikely as every generation from David to Jesus would have had a "levirite marriage" in order to account for the differences in every generation. This is highly unlikely.

With these concepts in view, most conservative Bible scholars assume Luke is recording Mary’s genealogy and Matthew is recording Joseph’s. Matthew is following the line of Joseph (Jesus’ legal father), through David’s son Solomon, while Luke is following the line of Mary (Jesus’ blood relative), though David’s son Nathan. There was no Greek word for "son-in-law," and Joseph would have been considered a son of Heli through marrying Heli's daughter Mary. Through either line, Jesus is a descendant of David and therefore eligible to be the Messiah. Tracing a genealogy through the mother’s side is unusual, but so was the virgin birth. Luke’s explanation is that Jesus was the son of Joseph “so it was thought” (Luke 3:23).

Recommended Resource: Why Believe in Jesus?: Who He Is, What He Did, and His Message for You Today by Tim LaHaye.

Answer 6

There are two different geneologies... Matthew's account is the geneology of Joseph... Luke's account belongs to someone else that was a true parent to Jesus.

Answer 7

First of all, what translation are you using? Second of all, Luke was the writer for the gentiles. He may have translated the NAME to greek. Third of all, you need to give more info about the context. Matthew is the entire geneology of Jesus's family.

Answer 8

Both genealogies were made up.

Genealogy was popular back then. It was the ancient Jewish version of Sudoku, more or less. Plus, the Gospel authors had on their agenda to make it look like Jesus was descended from a famous king (i.e. David). So, why not throw in a genealogy?

However, the two authors did not consult each other, so they came up with different names to fill in the blanks between famous historical and pseudo-historical people. It's not surprising that the two lists are different. Neither author knew Jesus personally, much less knew his family.

Answer 9

Luke replaced into speaking approximately Mary (Joseph grew to grow to be the son of Mary's father while he married her). 2 motives those various (curiously) genealogies are no longer a topic: First, Luke, being a wellbeing care provider, replaced into extra probable to look on the actual info of the case; Matthew, who wrote in general to a Jewish aim audience, replaced into in touch approximately showing that Jesus had a valid declare on the kingly line of David. Mary's kinfolk tree skipped Ahab and Jezebel. It replaced into prophesied that this evil king and queen does not be a factor of Messiah's line. consequently, Mary's line did no longer qualify Jesus to sit down down on David's throne. Joseph, in a international with out the Greeks and Romans, could have been eligible to ascend the throne of David. because of the fact the criminal father of Jesus, he handed this eligibility directly to his Son. as a consequence, Jesus is qualified through inheritance to sit down down on David's throne, yet he's not descended from Ahab and Jezebel. 2d, there are a number of assets you do no longer comprehend approximately Hebrew genealogies, however the suitable one as a consequence is that those genealogical lists continuously skipped generations, even many generations in a row, picking in basic terms to record persons of notice in the kinfolk. as a consequence in case you have been to jot down considered one of those kinfolk tree of your baby, you may desire to comprise your self and your father, yet pass your grand, super grand, and super super grandfathers, then point out your super x3 grandfather because of the fact he replaced right into a typical historic determine. it extremely is the way Jewish genealogies have been written.

Answer 10

Wasn't Heli Joseph's middle name?