Genealogy Of Jesus

[jazzytakara]

Why does the New Testament provide two different genealogies for Jesus? The scriptural reference being Matthew 16:6-16 and Luke 3:23-31. I will also provide the link that details both genealogies in picture form that resulted in me asking this question.

 

 http://sphotos-a.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/375526_446517035408865_1662927450_n.jpg

[qfnol31]

First I'll make several general comments, and then I'll address your question.

 

When reading the Bible we have to be careful not to equate everything we read with literal history. In the case of the Gospels, Matthew's genealogy isn't necessarily supposed to be 100% historically accurate, and I'll explain exactly why below. Even if these two accounts are entirely historical, it's possible for a person to be related back to a common ancestor through two different people. In modern day, it's unusual (but not impossible) that second cousins will marry and their children will relate back to the same set of great-great-grandparents. It's even more common to have more than two family lines extending back to the same person, if that person was many generations back. In addition, sometimes Biblical figures are called by two different names in the Scriptures (like St. Nathaniel or Bartholomew), though I know very little about this practice. Finally, both genealogies are interested in demonstrating how Jesus fulfills the Covenant made with David (cf. 2 Samuel 7), though both go about it in different ways.

 

Now for the most likely reasons behind their differences. St. Matthew's Gospel is very interested in the kings of Israel (and the Son of David theme, prominent in his Gospel bears this out). His genealogy looks at important kings and their relationship in the line from David to Jesus. Also St. Matthew's interested in the number fourteen as well. There are fourteen generations between Abraham and David, fourteen from David to the Babylonian Exile, and fourteen between the Babylonian Exile and Jesus. In Hebrew, the name David is constructed with the Hebrew letters DVD (no vowels), which also served as the numbers 4, 6, 4 when Jews wrote down numbers. Add those numbers together and you get fourteen. It's a very clever way of St. Matthew speaking to the Hebrews to tell of Jesus' divinity.

 

St. Luke's Gospel may or may not be more historically accurate than St. Matthew's. No one really knows for sure. There are various theories about Mary's influence in the genealogy, though St. Luke still traces the genealogy through St. Joseph, not Mary. In the end we see several sets of seven appearing, which is most often considered a perfect number (cf. seven days of creation, Jesus' command to forgive seventy times seven times, etc.). St. Luke is saying that Jesus descends from David, again fulfilling the Covenant (and like St. Matthew's Gospel, fulfilling the prophecy from Isaiah 7:14), but here he's adding in that the whole birth and Incarnation was entirely planned by God throughout history, just as God planned the creation of the world and is involved in its direction.

 

Again, all this rests on us not reading the Gospels as a purely historical textbook. I don't want to come across as saying that St. Matthew or St. Luke lied at all, or that they weren't divinely inspired. On the contrary, I think their ingenious use of such historical types of writing (the way they construct their genealogies) are very strong proofs that they were inspired and that Jesus is who they say He is, even without the need for strict historical accuracy when tracing the line from David to Jesus.

[Theoketos]

Q gives an excellent answer above. I would also like to point you to the Pope's lastest book. 

 

http://www.ignatius.com/Products/JNSET-X/jesus-of-nazareth-3-volume-set.aspx

 

He gives an excellent exegesis on the genealogies. It is possibly the very best exposition on them that I have ever seen.