Excellent explanation. Thank you, Professor Mounce. There are so many cultural and linguistic differences between our "modern" world and the ancients. As a disciple (follower) of Christ, I try to focus on the 90~95% of the Bible which is quite straightforward and applicable to our lives today. Blessings, all.
@friendj83
2 жыл бұрын
@Bill Mounce Another explanation is that Matthew records Mary's genealogy and Luke records Joseph's. This would be the case if Matthew 1:16 refers to the Joseph as the father of Mary, not the husband of Mary. This also makes the 14 generations "from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ" work out. It would only be 13 generations if Joseph and Mary are the same generation (husband and wife), but 14 generations if this Joseph and Mary are subsequent generations (father and daughter.) This also explains Bill Mounce's point regarding the word "whom" being feminine, meaning that Christ was not born of Joseph (this Joseph being his grandfather), but of Mary (his mother). This idea is in line with Matthew's emphasis of Jesus as king, with this genealogy showing the genetic and royal line through Mary, while Luke's emphasis on Jesus as the Son of Man would show his legal genealogy through his stepfather Joseph. (As to why there is no genealogy in Mark, Mark emphasizes Jesus as Jehovah's servant and genealogies are not recorded for servants. And the genealogy recorded in John is really short because of John's emphasis: Jesus Christ is the Son of God.)
@jperez7893
2 жыл бұрын
this is correct. there are 2 different josephs. joseph the FATHER of mary (aka the maternal grandfather of Jesus) and joseph the carpenter (husband of mary). there is no implied levirate marriage. the checksum of matthew, encoded as an error correcting code or checksum, failed in the greek transmission. but hebrew matthew preserves the 14 generation checksum validation of the text.
@TaxEvasi0n
8 ай бұрын
@@jperez7893Where are you getting that maternal grandfather of Jesus, Marys father, is names Joseph? I just ask so I can see the methodology and fact check it. I am trying to work this out myself, and I'm not sure where the authority for the correction for 'father of' as opposed to 'husband of'. Thanks.
@jperez7893
8 ай бұрын
@@TaxEvasi0n the manuscript evidence only emerged in the 21st century from oxford and jewish theological seminary in nyc. the matthean genealogy is the bloodline of mary while luke is the bloodline of joseph. the manuscript evidence of hebrew matthew says, "yosef avi miriam", joseph the FATHER of miriam (which got translated into the greek joseph the MAN of mary). the joseph avi miriam in matthew IS NOT joseph the carpenter of luke. mary (the mother of Jesus) was the daughter of a man named joseph (maternal grandfather of jesus). let me repeat: matthew's joseph is a completely different animal from luke's joseph, the carpenter -- they are two different men! we have the misfortune from the late 2nd century of relying on unclear greek translations of matthew that propagated forward in time. why? because hebrew was suppressed after ad 135 and hebrew manuscripts were systematically destroyed by the romans and even by the christians. one of the church fathers named clement (who saw the hebrew matthew but only commented on it, not copied it verbatim) however wrote that there were indeed 14 generations from the exile to the messiah, in matthew, satisfying the error-correction checksum of matthew in the original hebrew. the error-correction checksum of the greek matthew however is 13 generations only. so in the beginning, from the autographs of hebrew matthew, jews were convinced of the indisputable bloodline descent of Jesus of Nazareth as the son of david, and therefore satisfied an essential necessary condition for Jesus of Nazareth to be the Messiah. this is also the reason why jews after the destruction of the temple and especially after AD 135 never accepted Jesus as the promised Messiah because christians could no longer prove that Jesus has the pedigree of the blood of King David flowing in his veins. this one break in the chain has caused the jews to rightfully/justifiably reject Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah. No amount of walking on water, cleaning lepers, giving sight to the blind, raising the dead, resurrecting back from the dead, and the nazi holocaust will convince a jew, that a person is the messiah of Israel, if he cannot be shown to be a direct descendant of king david BY BLOOD. why was this allowed to happen until now? God only knows. bonus: heli is purported to be a contraction of the name heliakim, or the joachim in latin. if this is the case, one of the church tradition that one of the grandparents of jesus was named joachim, would check out. except that joachim is switched to the wrong parent. to give you an idea: lazarus (latin) --> lazar --> eleazar (hebrew)
@briteddy9759
2 жыл бұрын
Excellent information on biblical genealogies. It clearly shows we need to set aside our western family history hat and accept this was done differently in biblical times. Thank you.
@karenmitchell5906
2 жыл бұрын
The reason I have always thought the Mary vs Joseph explanation makes the most sense is the fact that a different son of David us specified. In Matthew the kings are included, but in Luke, no kings and it goes through Nathan.
@pattir8665
2 жыл бұрын
I agree with you, Karen. Matthew, in recording for Jews, seems to be tracing Jesus' claim to David's throne, i.e. Jesus as King thru Solomon. Luke's purpose for a Gentile audience is to show Jesus as Man, and therefore traces a blood line which would not have been thru Joseph's lineage. Additionally, Luke is often admired for inclusion of women's roles in gospel and Acts but it is Matthew who includes the righteous Gentiles, [Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, along with Bathsheba's more righteous husband Uriah], as a reminder to Jews of God's OT promises regarding other nations.
@eileensongs
2 жыл бұрын
I agree with the Mary vs Joseph explaination. They were both in the lineage of David. The OT used genealogy to prove lineage connected to the 12 tribes for their inheritance among the Israelites (distinct and set apart).
@ShaunCKennedyAuthor
2 жыл бұрын
Thank you! This was a very concise but complete explanation.
@davidbergeron78
2 жыл бұрын
I've puzzled over this one for some time. Here is another hypothesis,... Matthew is the genealogy of the males and Luke is the genealogy of the females. Think Female Mitochondrial DNA. Think about tracking female genetics rather than male, but instead of listing the female's name, just list her husband (but only track the Female DNA). I thought about this initially to try to explain why Matthew had 41 names and Luke had 57. If women married younger, then there would be more women in the genealogy. If all the women married at 14 and all the men were 19, this would result in the 41/57 ratio. So Mary's mother provided the mitochondrial DNA to Mary, but her husband's name could be listed,... Heli. I don't know if this is Mary's grandfather or not, it's just my hypothesis. Mary's mother's mother is next up the chain, but rather than listing her name, list her husband’s name, and so on. I know this has trouble too, but it at least explains the longer list in Luke.
@martinkoubek3434
Жыл бұрын
If Luke wanted to write the maternal family line from Mary to Eve, why would he write the names of their husbands or lovers instead of the mothers' names, isn't it a little too absurd? And above all, in such a case, Luke would have to be the prophet who would have obtained this genealogy by direct supernatural revelation from God - these family lines are completely unknown and have never been documented and archived. And actually one more thing.. even if it would be so, how is it that there is an identical line from David to Seth? - for example Šem : did he married his own sister? ,or Rebeka, the daughter of Laban&wife :did she have some daughter, who then married her brother Juda...?
@richardtarr8145
4 ай бұрын
John summarizes his gospel in chapter 20:31 "these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ". Yet he does not touch on the most important aspect which was discussed by Jesus' enemies in chapter 7:42 "Has not the Scripture said that the Christ comes from the offspring of David?". Why? Possibly because Jesus was being identified as a descendant of David; everyone believing that Joseph (not his mother) was his biological father (Matt 13:55; Luke 3:23, etc.). The Church Father's struggled with the dual ancestry of Joseph. Augustine almost lost his faith. And a "theory" was developed using the Luke account. But there are some anomalies in Matthew I think they overlooked. Matthew added 4 women in the genealogy who were not from the Tribe of Judah. And Mary was number five. The Peshiita's version of Matthew 1:16 is: "Yaqob begot Yoseph the guardian of Maryam, her from whom was begotten Yeshua, who is called The Messiah". Was Mary a Levite brought up in the home of a descendant of David? With the absence of any definitive information about Mary's lineage, the Rabbi's have every reason to doubt the claim that Jesus is the Messiah, that is IF God is the father. But the prophecy said the promised son of David would proceed out of his bowels (his own reproductive organ). Peter verifies that Jesus is the fruit of David's loins (his reproductive organ) in Acts 2:30. Paul is confident that Jesus is of David's seed (not someone else) in Romans 1:3. Today, a virgin becoming pregnant without intercourse is not a "miracle". It is a valid medical procedure (howbeit unethical). The miracle of Jesus' birth is that David (who died 1000 years earlier) fathered Jesus.
@fluffysheap
2 ай бұрын
I find Matthew being the natural genealogy while Luke is the legal one to be implausible. The reason is that Luke was a gentile, and his gospel was addressed to Gentiles. He assumes his readers very little knowledge of Jewish traditions and laws. Whenever they are important, he explains them. Levirate marriage was not practiced in the Roman Empire. Luke would not have included a genealogy including levirate marriage without an explanation. The reverse, however, is possible. Matthew not only easily includes Jewish traditions, he includes genealogical irregularities known in the Old Testament. Levirate marriage wouldn't bother him.
@heavymuseum
2 жыл бұрын
Would the best answer be that the geneologies are compiled from different sources? The sources would be the different city records or different people.
@jknight714forCHRIST
2 жыл бұрын
This guy went too far. Luke is Mary’s genealogy and Matthew is Joseph’s
@gancholambev4691
Жыл бұрын
It helped a lot. Thank you!
@heavymuseum
2 жыл бұрын
Would the best answer be that the genealogies have info from different sources, meaning different people or the different city records?
@Nivalian
8 ай бұрын
Hi, thank you for this very informative video. I think Africanius did get it right. I looked up the online version of Eusebius and he recorded the 3rd generation but got the name wrong. So instead it would have been Matthan and Matthatt, not Melki.
@Hubbs3of6
2 жыл бұрын
I once had someone tell me that all OT laws that have not been specifically canceled are still in force for us today. Then I brought up levirate marriage.
@eileensongs
2 жыл бұрын
You could also point out in scripture where it says that Jesus fulfilled the law and that we are under grace not law and if we were to live under the law and we broke one we would break them all which would keep us separated from God. Romans 6:14 For sin shall no longer be your master, because you are not under the law, but under grace. It didn't mean that the law was not perfect. What the law set out to do was to point to us how much we need a savior because we cannot live up to the law and in that it rendered it useless. Hebrews 8:6-13 and Matthew 9:16-17. In Matthew 5:17-18 Romans 8:3-4 New International Version 3 For what the law was powerlessto do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. The Bible even mentions that it's not just actions that causes us to sin it is also our thoughts 1 John 3:20 If our hearts condemn us, we know that God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything. Romans 6:1-4 New International Version Dead to Sin, Alive in Christ 6 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? 2 By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? 3 Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. If after all this scripture in the New Testament you may also like to remind your friend of King David. He had sinned with Bathsheba. Not only did he commit adultery but he committed murder when he had her husband killed to cover up the pregnancy. Yet King David was still called the anointed one and a man after God's own Heart. The law also said thou shalt not commit adultery and yet many patriarchs in the Bible had not one life but wives and some had concubines too. Rehab the prostitute is in the lineage right down to Jesus and so is Ruth the moabite in whom the moabites were not entitled to any inheritance given to Israel but she too is in that lineage through marriage to Boaz.
@dunk_law
Жыл бұрын
Why is Matthew so occupied with 14?
@cuentas217
Жыл бұрын
Wait... What is the answer for common sense? You don't explain how it's not a mistake?
@nsp74
Жыл бұрын
the solution is Bible came from God but written by erring people, so if however there is an error here, it does not affect the reliability of the Bible as God's word because this "error" does not destroy the main theological theme of the bible
@marquesdevalera7403
2 жыл бұрын
It is completely possible for friends to not know the names of someones grandparents my closest friend for 20 years told me many stories about her dead grandparents without ever mentioning their names and it was only recently that I actually asked her what their names were. Also Mark, Matthew and John were likely anonymous and given there names after the fact while the Bible might have been obsessed with genealogies the average Jew in 1st century Israel was not and likely did not know their own family trees past grandparents or great-grandparents while some families might has exaggerated their linage to make themselves descendants of famous Jewish people. Also many people such as Abraham which is also known as Israel is a mythical personification of the nation itself, much like Columbia is the female personification of the United States or Britannia is the female personification of Great Britain or Marianne is the female personification of France. Much of the Bible is allegory used to convey a theological message and is not meant to be taken literally, a simple story to explain complicated events. Apologetics is the sign of a weak faith that cannot withstand criticism or contradiction. Belief in Christ is a matter of faith alone and not based on belief in words in a book. By making bad attempts to explain away contradictions and justify factual inerrancy the Apologist prove they think people are stupid, talks down to them (like children) and when their explanations fail to prove something it destroys the Apologists credibility. Sometimes it is better to admit their are factual and historical errors and contradictions that can not be reconciled while still maintaining the theological message is valid.
@lrcavalli290
Жыл бұрын
There has been more theories about this, then there are names in both genealogies
@robertwilliams8364
2 жыл бұрын
Maybe the gospels written by Matthew and Luke weren't actually written by them... but we're written a long time after by somebody else.
@jknight714forCHRIST
2 жыл бұрын
Not a bad idea, but unfortunately it doesnt match any historical records. All books of The Bible were written before 90ad.
@monkeybznzz
7 ай бұрын
Talk to Biblical Scholars. This does not rectify anything.
@peteryoung4974
6 ай бұрын
Gee this kinda messed me up!.
@elestir
9 ай бұрын
You missed the explanation that's based on the common sense the most. Two different genealogies of Jesus means there were two different Jesuses. If you analyze other differences in Matthew and Luke, you will realize it is more likely than you realized at first. Then if you also read Rudolf Steiner's lectures on this topic, you will get full explanation how this is actually the case.
@SNour-vr4vx
3 ай бұрын
This is a lie, nonsense and absurdity. How can a book that fails to convey information like this be trusted!!! The most important question is: How can Jesus be the son of God, as you claim, when he has a lineage that is all human?! Do you not have minds to think with? You are worshiping a human being and this is polytheism and idolatry
Пікірлер: 35