The genealogy of Jesus conflict.

Post Reply New Topic

Here is the genealogy of Jesus according to the books of Matthew and Luke in the King James Bible. For reference, see Matthew ch. 1 and Luke ch. 3 starting at verse 23. I listed the genealogies starting at Jesus' father Joseph and worked backward to joseph's father and so on. They are, according to the Bible, as follows:

Matthew--------- Luke

1 Joseph ---------- 1 Joseph
2 Jacob ---------- 2 Heli
3 Mattan --------- 3 Matthat
4 Eleazar ---------- 4 Levi
5 Eliud ---------- 5 Melchi
6 Achim ---------- 6 Janna
7 Sadoc -------- 7 Joseph
8 Azor --------------- 8 Matathias
9 Eliakim --------- 9 Amos
10 Abiud ----------- 10 Naum
11 Zorababel --------- 11 Esli
12 Salathiel --------- 12 Nagge
13 Jechonias --------------- 13 Maath
14 Josias --------- 14 Matathias
15 Amon ---------- 15 Semei
16 Manases ---------- 16 Joseph
17 Ezekias ---------- 17 Juda
18 Achaz ---------- 18 Joanna
19 Joatham ---------- 19 Rhesa
20 Ozias ---------- 20 Zorobabel
21 Joram --------- 21 Salathiel
22 Josaphat --------- 22 Neri
23 Asa ------------------ 23 Melchi
24 Abia ------------ 24 Addi
25 Roboam ------------- 25 Cosam
26 Solomon ----------- 26 Elmodam
27 David ----------- 27 Er
-------------------------- 28 Jose
--------------------------- 29 Eliezer
----------------------------- 30 Jorim
--------------------------- 31 Matthat
------------------------- 32 Levi
---------------------------- 33 Simeon
------------------------------- 34 Juda
---------------------------- 35 Joseph
--------------------------- 36 Jonan
-------------------------- 37 Eliakim
-------------------------- 38 Melea
--------------------------- 39 Menan
-------------------------- 40 Mattatha
-------------------------- 41 Nathan
-------------------------- 42 David


What do the people who believe in Christianity think about this? Not only are the genealogies completely different, Luke's is almost twice as long as Matthew's. If nothing else, why would Joseph's father be different?

Last edited by Isthisreal on 05 Dec 2008, 12:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

That spending time sifting through geneaology lists is a good way to kill time?

No way, there are much more interesting uses of excess free time.

I'm not an expert on Biblical scholarship and don't pretend to be. For any such questions, it might be best to consult a local clergyman/woman. I would recommend talking to a pastor from a mainstream Protestant denomination (Lutheran, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, or Methodist) personally, but you may be interested in other views as well. However, I suspect that your question was less one of trying to understand Scripture and more an attempt to make Christians and Christianity appear foolish.

Actually, I've read through the Bible twice. So there's no need for me to consult a clergyman. (I used to be a die-hard Christian). Second, it is not my intension to make anyone feel foolish.
Third, I believe that showing two things in the Bible that directly contradict each other is a good use of time.

If these two things do not contradict each other, please show me if I am wrong.

Last edited by Isthisreal on 05 Dec 2008, 12:57 pm, edited 2 times in total.

well, obviously it has been pointed out as a contradiction in the Bible, given the difference, it is something that seems to be still under debate to explain why that difference, it has been suggested, from what I read, that one of them, Luke, was portraying Mary's geneology while the other (Mathew) Joseph's, although I think this seems to be unlikely.

Something interesting which I wonder in both geneologies is that Joseph is seen here to be a descendant of King David, and well, as I don't know about how the geneology of the kings in Israel exactly worked, it kinda begs the question on how they would keep track of the bloodline, given that at the time they were under roman rule, and Joseph doesn't seem to stand out in history other than Jesus' father?

I agree with you on that one. It was always the men that were listed in genealogies in the Bible.

There are a lot of inconsistencies in the New Testament. My opinion is that Catholicism is a mafia type religion. They used religion to control people and gain wealth. However, I know that Jesus was the embodiment of the Christ, or Christ consciousness.

http://www.thenazareneway.com/new_testa ... encies.htm

Luke wrote for the Greeks. Back then it was somewhat of a matriarchal society. You will see how he often gears the writing to convince the Greeks into believing Jesus was the son of God.

Matthew wrote for the Jews. He adhered to what they believed their Messiah's lineage would be. They believed their prophet would be from a royal family and be rich. Jesus was from Essenes. I think Matthew had to lie to coerce the Jews.

I'm not sure about any of this, it's just an opinion.

Last edited by Magnus on 05 Dec 2008, 3:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Thank you Magnus. That website looks very interesting. I will have to check it out.

Everyone is aware that King David was a homosexual right? I wonder if that might have something to do with this.
David adopted Jonathan's son.

http://www.wouldjesusdiscriminate.org/b ... athan.html

I don't think it does. Johnathan's son's name was Mephibosheth and he is not listed in the genealogies.

Merely reading the Bible through does not make you an expert in theology, especially if you have not studied the ancient languages and the historical context of the Bible. A trained theologian could still probably give a better answer to such a question. Well, if you don't want to make anyone look foolish, you are at least attempting to discredit Christianity.

I don't know how those two things don't contradict each other. Perhaps it is as simple as it looks and they do contradict each other. I never paid much attention to the lineage thing because it didn't seem to matter to me much anyways. Besides, if you accept the virgin birth, what is the relevance of Joseph's ancestry?

Other than making the prophecy that the Messiah will descend from King David impossible for Jesus, suggesting that those prophecies weren't talking about Jesus and that Jesus is not the true Messiah but a false one, nothing.

Mikebw is quite right. The genealogy of Jesus is very important.

I found some more contradictions in genealogy. Comparing Matthew's genealogy with the one in 1 Chronicles ch. 3, Matthew is missing 3 people between Ozias and Joram (Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah) and 1 person between Jechonias and Josias (Jehoiakim).

I think the virgin birth is the missing link. It would make sense to propagate the idea of a virgin birth now that I think about it more. This has always seemed very peculiar to me.

Yes I think I may be related to Jesus but only by Virgin Mary's side of the family.

“…you might command certain ones not to teach different doctrine, nor to pay attention to false stories and to genealogies, which end up in nothing, but which furnish questions for research rather than a dispensing of anything by God in connection with faith.

Really the objective of this mandate is love out of a clean heart and out of a good conscience and out of faith without hypocrisy.

By deviating from these things certain ones have been turned
aside into idle talk, wanting to be teachers of law, but not perceiving either the things they are saying or the things about which they are making strong assertions.”

1Timothy 1:3

-