It bugs me when things don’t add up properly. As I revisit the gospels, the family history of Jesus in Matthew and Luke don’t fit. And it was bugging me. I figure I’m not the only one. It seems odd for the gospel writers to leave such an obvious difference that could poke a hole in the overall story – unless there was an accepted reasons. For is, it is worth working out wrinkles in the micro-narrative, so we can feel comfortable with the meta-narrative so we can be confident in our faith.
In the gospel of Matthew it opens with “This is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham.” (Matthew 1:1) and ending the genealogy with “Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah.” (v16).
In the gospel of Luke, Jesus’ genealogy Luke states that Jesus “was the son, as was thought, of Joseph” (Luke 3:23) and then proceeds to give an entirely different lineage to the one presented in the gospel of Matthew.
The gospels sometimes do have some inconsistencies, which would be expected in different accounts of the same events. Partially that is to do with the aim of the writer in how he wants to reach his reader, and sometimes it is just differences in what or how eyewitnesses remember things(just like there are differences in eyewitness statements that the police might take after an incident). But sometimes the differences are too great to reveal differences in people’s memories. The genealogies in Luke and Matthew are so different, they seem to be describing two completely different people.
In essence, they are. But not the person we think.
The gospel of Matthew describes the biological lineage of Joseph. Yes, I know that sounds weird, but we need to bear in mind how the ancient world of adoption worked. Matthew states that Joseph was the husband of Mary who was the mother of Jesus. This is a tacit acknowledgement of Jesus’ miraculous birth. This Matthew expands on in 1:18-25 so he is not trying to hide that, or draw a veil over it to make it work. When, in v24, Joseph takes Mary as his wife, Jesus because Joseph’s adopted son. Adoption gave the child, in this ancient context, full rights and status as a son. This means that the genealogy of Joseph, who is not Jesus’ actual biological line, would not appear strange. Jesus was adopted into Joseph’s line and so that lineage becomes his also. This would be, to an ancient Jewish audience, completely normal and acceptable.
As a side note, when the Bible talks about us being adopted as God’s children (eg Romans 8:15 “the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship.”) this is why we have such confidence. Because adoption as described (but which may differ from our modern understanding) is complete and perfect. If you are adopted, you are that persons child in every sense of the word. That lineage becomes our lineage. We are God’s children.
And what the lineage shows is that Jesus is descended from Abraham (who was the first of the Patriarchs and descended from Adam and God himself) and a line of kings, starting from David.
But why is the genealogy in Luke so different? Like, totally different. I’ve written them out below so you can see. While there are shared points, the majority is completely different.
Matthew was writing to Jews and wanted to emphasise (within the bounds of genealogical accuracy), 14 generations: “Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah” (Matthew 1:17). Numbers in the Jewish world were significant and 14, as double 7 (the number of perfection) was emphasising the perfection and completeness of the line from Abraham to Jesus.
Luke, on the other hand, is recording his gospel for historical accuracy. He had stated in Luke 1:3 “I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account.” His genealogy is longer, including more generations for his gentile audience’s understanding. The way things are written also makes things confusing. While he begins the account with Jesus “the son, as was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli” a modern reader runs these facts together – Joseph the son of Heli – which leads us to a confusingly different lineage.
But again, marriage and adoption worked differently in the ancient world. By his marriage to Mary, Mary’s line became Joseph’s. The gospel of Luke is outlining Mary’s lineage, which is why it is so obviously different. What lends weight to this is the focus on Mary from the start of the gospel, suggesting that Mary was Luke’s primary eyewitness for these opening sections. Further, the start of Luke’s gospel outlines the birth of John the Baptist, to Mary’s cousin Elizabeth who is from the priestly line of Aaron. Mary’s direct line comes from Judah and David, but it is of note that in her line there are several priestly names (eg Levi). This suggests a line that includes both kings and priests, which in itself lays a foundation for the fulfillment of scripture in the person of Jesus. Hebrew 7 gives us the clearest example. Here, the writer tells us that Jesus was a priest in the line of Melchizedek. Melchizedek was king of Salem and priest of God Most High who appeared in Genesis 14 to bless Abraham. The name Melchizedek, the writer of Hebrews tells us, means “king of righteousness”. As King of Salem, this also means then “king of peace.”
All these things are brought together in Jesus. And the twin genealogies of Joseph in Matthew 1 and Mary in Luke 3 bring these aspects together as well. It is extraordinary that Jesus is our king and our priest, who can forever intercede for us.
For us. For me. For you. He has the power as king and the compassion as priest to know us, intercede for us and save us.
So while both genealogies are about Jesus, they describe two different lines of two different people. The line of Joseph, and the line if Mary.
I needed to get into why they were different but I also don’t want to get too lost in the details. While I needed to get to the bottom of why they are different, the mechanics of the lineages then become less important than what they communicate. It is important that, once confident of the details, that we lift our heads again to see then that overall, these lineages show us the direct human line (apart from Jesus’ direct patronage via the Holy Spirit) from God, through Abraham and David, to Jesus.
These genealogies remind me how so many different strands are brought together in Jesus. So many prophecies, so many threads, so many promises – all fulfilled in him.
“For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.” (Colossians 1:16-17)
