Publications
Partners
This article is long, so unless you have an interest in the subject or you read Paulus' Article, this will not be of interest.
I must admit that I am not sure if Paulus was more concerned about the Genealogy or if he was more concerned about Genesis and Adam and Eve. With the little knowledge I have of the Avatar, I think it is a safe assumption that he has issue with all of the above.
With regards to the Genealogy of the Christ: what is imperative to understand is the goal and purpose of the Genealogy. They were written so that the readers could see that Jesus was descended from David which is what is necessary for the Christ. Both Mathew and Luke were trying to communicate that this is God’s promised King, Israel’s Champion and restorer.
Then, each Author had their own purpose and intention and especially audience/readers in writing their gospel. And necessarily, the Genealogy serves that purpose, or fits into that purpose. Not only does it fit into that purpose but it also fits in at the time when each Author decided to record the Genealogy in the gospel account. Luke spends time(3chapters) before He records it, Mathew records it off the bat.
The two Gospels also had two different Authors but both would have had the Gospel of Mark as well as another document called “Document Q”, which all 3 the synoptic gospel authors had when they penned much of their Gospels.
The difference in the Genealogy is true and it is intentional. It is not a mistake or an error. Jewish writers of that day were extremely meticulous and accurate when it came to recording and writing history because it was part of their culture and they knew the gravity and scale of what it was that they were writing and that they could not afford a mistake, especially on something so easy to see a mistake.
Let’s look at a few parallel New testament differences:
The 12 disciples are called out across the spectrum and yet they are different. For example, who on earth is Levi? He is not in Mathew and what happened to Mathew or to Judas(Not Iscariot), the other one. What came of Bartholomew? Why are the names of the 12 disciples not “copy and Paste” in all the gospels? Well, why is Simone called Peter? Why is Saul called Paul? Why is Joseph known as Barnabas in the bible? And the list goes on and on. Let’s not jump to accusations here in 2014 too hastily when it comes to something that has been defended for over 3500 years and stood the test of time. I certainly owe credit to John Piper who is one of my Hero’s and the website www.desiringgod.org for the below caption.
Matthew's genealogy is condensed and divided into three groups of 14, representing a movement through three time periods. The first group lists the patriarchs, the second names the kings, and the third contains private citizens. The intent was not to give a strict record, but rather, present the historical progression.
Reasons For the Differing Accounts:
According to one of the oldest theories, some scholars assign the differences in genealogies to the "Levirate marriage" tradition. This custom said that if a man died without bearing any sons, his brother could then marry his widow, and their sons would carry on the dead man's name. For this theory to hold up, it would mean that Joseph, the father of Jesus, had both a legal father (Heli) and a biological father (Jacob), through a Levirate marriage. The theory suggests that Joseph's grandfathers (Matthan according to Matthew; Matthat according to Luke) were brothers, both married to the same woman, one after the other. This would make Matthan's son (Jacob) Joseph's biological father, and Matthat's son (Heli) Joseph's legal father. Matthew's account would trace Jesus' primary (biological) lineage, and Luke's record would follow Jesus' legal lineage.
One of the most widely held theories suggests that Matthew's account follows the lineage of Joseph, while Luke's genealogy is that of Mary, the mother of Jesus. This interpretation would mean that Jacob was Joseph's biological father, and Heli (Mary's biological father) became Joseph's surrogate father, thus making Joseph Heli's heir through his marriage to Mary. If Heli had no sons, this would have been the normal custom. Also, if Mary and Joseph lived under the same roof with Heli, his "son-in-law" would have been called "son" and considered a descendent. Although it would have been unusual to trace a genealogy from the maternal side, there was nothing usual about the virgin birth. Additionally, if Mary (Jesus' blood relative) was indeed a direct descendant of David, this would make her son "the seed of David" in keeping with Messianic prophecies.
I think that we do ourselves a huge disservice when we do not ask the right questions, for example: Why Does Luke go back to Adam? And Why does his Genealogy appear where it does sandwiched between the temptation of Jesus and the Baptism of Jesus?
About Adam and Eve and Genesis:
Adam and Eve were real people and the creation event is a real and actual occurrence because the Gospel is dependent on it being a real event. Paul compares Adam with Christ in Romans as well as in Corinthians. No Christian with any intellectual integrity can claim that the genesis account is not a real actual event and then claim that Jesus was a real actual person. That makes no sense. They go hand in hand. Adam and the creation account of Genesis is as real and as actual as Jesus and the Gospel Event. If the creation story is a poem with no literal meaning or interpretation, then Jesus too, is a fictional story created to illustrate love and forgiveness and a better way to live, but never really existed. And you might find yourself on the wrong side of not only Christians should you take that stance because all of Islam and Judaism and Hinduism all hold that He was a real human being. But besides that, I do not think that the Creation account and the story of Adam and Eve in the Garden are the most difficult things to believe, or the most unbelievable records in the bible. Try a Fish who ate a man and then shat him out 3 days later. What about a talking donkey rebuking a money loving prophet, or what about Jesus Christ walking on water or walking through a wall? Surely they are more difficult to swallow?
Furthermore, It is 100% true and necessary that the first humans did live to 969 Years of Age which also implies that many of them got killed and drowned in the flood. Why, Because the flood too is and must be a real event, the Author to the Hebrews talks about Noah’s faith. So the New Testament believes that the flood really happened, then for any of it to be true, the flood must also be true because if any of it is untrue, then none of it has any truth. Besides that, where else do Rainbows come from? Did not God promise that he will never again flood the earth and then he set the Rainbow in the sky as a reminder for us to remember his promise. Before the flood, there was no such thing as a rainbow.
With regards to the age of the earth being +/- 6000 years old. This view is not the only view that evangelicals or fundamentalists as we are called on this forum hold to. There are many gaps where the concept of time is not applicable and can have any variety of effects on the age of the earth. Evangelicals have about 3 or 4 explanation for how and why it is perfectly possible for the earth to be as old as what science suggests and likewise our Universe. I have personally written and article on this forum 2 years ago explaining my own personal understanding. (What’s at stake in the age of the earth By “Prime”) The bottom line is that Evangelicals must hold true 2 things in this regard. 1 – Humans did not evolve from anything and everything including King Kong, Ceasar and Koba. The human species is approximately 6000years old. Or to put it more biblically for you: Existence as and of Genesis 3 is 6000 years old. Was the earth created in 6 literal days? Absolutely! But what about “the beginning”? what about the “6 time gaps” in-between the 24hour creation periods? And there are other factors. As for the earth, it is perfectly consistent with scripture that it can be 999 trillion years old or even 170 000 years old, or even 6 000 years old. It does not matter and it does not contradict the text or threaten a literal real interpretation of the book.
The Author of the Article I am responding to tried to use the Genealogy to present a discrepancy or some kind of a conundrum for Christians.
Dear Paulus: You are wrong. Very Wrong. The genealogy was written in each Gospel for a given intention and purpose. The purpose in taking the genealogy back to Adam was to highlight that Jesus was not only descended from Abraham, thus the fulfilment of God’s promise to Israel and the Jewish nation, but precisely to make void his ethnicity and demonstrate that Jesus is a man and saviour of mankind, not only to the Jews. Whereas in Mathew it stops at Abraham precisely because Mathew was writing to Jews, not to Gentiles. There is genius and design and literary brilliance in the bible Paulus, and you will do well to shiver when you read it and to avoid using Google as your source of information. Google is not good enough to interpret the bible, you will always make a bit of a gat of your name if you will rely on Google. Google cannot differentiate for you the difference between a liberal scholar and an evangelical scholar.
Why don’t you start to doubt your doubts Paulus? You are swimming into a tsunami, running a marathon on ice skates…It does not end well.
Make it rain…
