How do you harmonize the two accounts of Jesus' Genealogy?
The issue of the two genealogies takes some harmonizing. At first glance, they both appear to the genealogy of Joseph. Yet the wording in Luke’s Gospel has some wiggle room.
How do you harmonize the two? Bible-believing Christians have gravitated to three choices, but perhaps there are more? If so, please share your thoughts!
Poll Results
How do you harmonize the two accounts of Jesus’ Genealogy?
Matthew documents Joseph’s genealogy, Luke Mary’s (or perhaps vice-versa). Votes: 7
Matthew traces the royal line; Joseph, while not in direct descent, is related. Luke’s is his actual genealogy.. Votes: 2
Joseph had two fathers, perhaps due to being adopted or a levirate marriage. Votes: 0
Other Votes: 3
- 14 views
I haven’t tried to harmonize them, and don’t really care. If someone asks me, I’ll care then and find an answer. I’ve found the answer before, but always delete it from my memory once I give the answer. It’s just meaningless and unimportant, to me.
It reminds me of how I once did an introduction to the book of Hebrews. I said, “Everybody wants to know who wrote it. I don’t know. I don’t care, and neither should you. It changes nothing and does nothing for you to think about this information or seek it out. Think about it if you want, but you don’t need to.”
Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.
Matthew and Luke are making two different points with their genealogies. Matthew wants to highlight the Jewish and Royal lineage of Jesus, tracing back to David and Abraham. Matthew doesn’t seem to care about the curse of Jeconiah. Luke traces the lineage of Jesus all the way back to Adam, which makes me think Luke is concerned to show the solidarity of Jesus with mankind (maybe, haven’t really studied Luke’s purposes that much). It could be that Luke is tracing Mary’s heritage, but if so, he doesn’t say anything about it, and it’s not clear what Mary has to do with it at all.
The odd thing is that the genealogies converge at Zerubbabel and Shealtiel, and since you can evidently get there two different ways (through either of Joseph’s “fathers”), the starting point (i.e., Joseph or Mary, legal or blood) doesn’t seem to be the issue. Matthew gets to David via Solomon and Luke gets to David via Nathan, splitting at Shealtiel (Luke bypassing Jeconiah). It may be that Luke for some reason is bypassing the line of kings descending from David (because he is concerned with the curse of Jeconiah, or maybe he just doesn’t want to showcase the royal heritage of Jesus other than David?).
The curse of Jeconiah could have applied, as it says in Jer 22:30, “in his day”, meaning while Jeconiah was living and thus only applicable during his lifetime. Zerubbabel is made a signet in Judah after the exile according to Haggai 2:23, and so there is some thought that either the curse was reversed or never applied past the lifetime of Jeconiah.
Long and short, I think it is best to treat the genealogies as independent and used for the author’s specific purposes. And if you are not convinced that the curse has been reversed or not longer applies, well you have a way around that to David via Luke’s genealogy.
Thanks, Andy, for your thoughtful response. Yes, the curse of Jeconiah can be ongoing, or it could possibly relate to his generation.
I tend to think that Luke’s Gospel is Mary’s line, but is also interested in tracing Jesus human line. So here is how I understand it with my interpretation/additions put in italics (Luke 3:23):
Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, but his actual nearest male forefather made him the son of Heli…
"The Midrash Detective"
Discussion