ABC:Matthew 1

From BibleStrength
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Verse 15, Different Genealogies of Jesus?[edit]

Patheos' Bob Seidensticker claims there is a contradiction here and makes the following comments (italicized):[1]

The different genealogies of Jesus

The Messiah had to be of the line of David (Jeremiah 33:15–17; Isaiah 9:7), so two gospels provide genealogies of Jesus to validate this requirement. The problem is that we only need to go back one generation, to Joseph’s father, to find a problem.

Matthew 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,

There is just one unique male biological line that would terminate in Joseph, so at least one of these genealogies is wrong. And it’s hard to imagine that an ordinary Joe like Joseph would have a reliable record of his genealogy going back generations. Worse, Joseph wasn’t the biological father of Jesus, so his genealogy is irrelevant. If being in the line of David is a requirement, then having a god for a father makes you ineligible.

The most common rebuttal is to say that the Luke genealogy is for Mary, but the text makes clear that it’s for Joseph. Anyway, why would you provide the genealogy of the parent from whom descent from David wouldn’t count? We’re seeing the incompatible clash of two ideas: Jesus inherits David’s throne and Jesus was the son of God.

Every person has two genealogies, one through their father, and one through their mother. As Halley's Bible Handbook points out:

"The commonly accepted view is that Matthew gives Joseph's line, showing Jesus to be legal heir to the promises given to Abraham and David, and that Luke gives Mary's line, showing Jesus' blood descent: 'who as to his human nature was a descendant of David' (Romans 1:3). Mary's genealogy, in accordance with Jewish usage, was in her husband's name. Joseph was the son of Heli (Luke 3:23)-that is, Heli's son-in-law. Jacob was Joseph's father (Matthew 1:16)."
-Halley's Bible Handbook[2]

This has been recognized since at least 1917 when the Scofield Reference Bible printed a similar explanation:

"In Matthew, where unquestionably we have the genealogy of Joseph, we are told Matthew 1:16, that Joseph was the son of Jacob. In what sense, then, could he be called in Luke 'the son of Heli'? He could not be by natural generation the son both of Jacob and of Heli. But in Luke it is not said that Heli begat Joseph, so that the natural explanation is that Joseph was the son-in-law of Heli, who was, like himself, a descendant of David. That he should in that case be called 'son of Heli' ('son' is not in the Greek, but rightly supplied by the translators) would be in accord with Jewish usage.(CF) 1 Samuel 24:16 The conclusion is therefore inevitable that in Luke we have Mary's genealogy; and Joseph was 'son of Heli' because espoused to Heli's daughter. The genealogy in Luke is Mary's, whose father, Heli, was descended from David."
-Scofield Reference Bible[3]

Per the Scofield, it accords with Jewish usage to present the mother's genealogy in the father's name, thus the confusion over two seemingly differing genealogies. It also explains why the Luke account begins with a focus on Mary, giving detail only she would know, detail specific to her life. Luke ch. 1 delves into the history of Mary's cousin Elisabeth and Elisabeth's child, John the Baptist, the angel's greeting of Mary, Mary's thanksgiving to God, and how Mary stayed with Elisabeth afterward. Luke 2:19 says, "But Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart." Luke 2:34 records Simeon speaking to Mary specifically, while Luke 2:48 records her conversation with Jesus.

In short, a logical reading of Luke shows the narrator of the early chapters appears to be Mary, not Joseph, and seems to be written from her point of view distinctly. Matthew 1, on the other hand, tells a more matter-of-fact account from Joseph's point of view, telling detail from his vantage point and only that pertaining to him. Just as Luke relates Mary's feelings and thoughts, so does Matthew's early account with Joseph. Matthew 1:19-20 describes Joseph's thought process to send Mary away privately, and his discussion with the angel that persuades him otherwise. Matthew 2:19-23 describe the angel's message to Joseph specifically that it's alright to return to Israel.

Just as the early chapters of Matthew appear written from Joseph's view, so the early chapters of Luke appear clearly written from Mary's, and the genealogies in Matthew those of Joseph's while Luke records Mary's genealogy.

Verse 16, Father of Joseph[edit]

Infidels.org calls this a contradiction and asks the question, "Who is the father of Joseph?"[4]

Matthew 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

Luke 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.

That Matthew 1 and Luke 3 differ in their genealogies is a well-known fact. As observed by the Halley's Bible Handbook note for Matthew 1:1-17, the Matthew genealogy goes back to Abraham and Luke to Adam, Matthew starts at the beginning and Luke at the end, and from David to Jesus they present different lines of descent. As Halley's further notes:

"The commonly accepted view is that Matthew gives Joseph's line, showing Jesus to be legal heir to the promises given to Abraham and David, and that Luke gives Mary's line, showing Jesus' blood descent: 'who as to his human nature was a descendant of David' (Romans 1:3). Mary's genealogy, in accordance with Jewish usage, was in her husband's name. Joseph was the son of Heli (Luke 3:23)-that is, Heli's son-in-law. Jacob was Joseph's father (Matthew 1:16)."
-Halley's Bible Handbook[5]

This has been recognized since at least 1917 when the Scofield Reference Bible printed a similar explanation:

"In Matthew, where unquestionably we have the genealogy of Joseph, we are told Matthew 1:16, that Joseph was the son of Jacob. In what sense, then, could he be called in Luke 'the son of Heli'? He could not be by natural generation the son both of Jacob and of Heli. But in Luke it is not said that Heli begat Joseph, so that the natural explanation is that Joseph was the son-in-law of Heli, who was, like himself, a descendant of David. That he should in that case be called 'son of Heli' ('son' is not in the Greek, but rightly supplied by the translators) would be in accord with Jewish usage.(CF) 1 Samuel 24:16 The conclusion is therefore inevitable that in Luke we have Mary's genealogy; and Joseph was 'son of Heli' because espoused to Heli's daughter. The genealogy in Luke is Mary's, whose father, Heli, was descended from David."
-Scofield Reference Bible[6]

Again, it accords with Jewish usage to present the mother's genealogy in the father's name, thus the confusion over two seemingly differing genealogies. It also explains why the Luke account begins with a focus on Mary, giving detail only she would know, detail specific to her life. Luke ch. 1 delves into the history of Mary's cousin Elisabeth and Elisabeth's child, John the Baptist, the angel's greeting of Mary, Mary's thanksgiving to God, and how Mary stayed with Elisabeth afterward. Luke 2:19 says, "But Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart." Luke 2:34 records Simeon speaking to Mary specifically, while Luke 2:48 records her conversation with Jesus.

In short, a logical reading of Luke shows the narrator of the early chapters appears to be Mary, not Joseph, and seems to be written from her point of view distinctly. Matthew 1, on the other hand, tells a more matter-of-fact account from Joseph's point of view, telling detail from his vantage point and only that pertaining to him. Just as Luke relates Mary's feelings and thoughts, so does Matthew's early account with Joseph. Matthew 1:19-20 describes Joseph's thought process to send Mary away privately, and his discussion with the angel that persuades him otherwise. Matthew 2:19-23 describe the angel's message to Joseph specifically that it's alright to return to Israel.

Just as the early chapters of Matthew appear written from Joseph's view, so the early chapters of Luke appear clearly written from Mary's, and the genealogies in Matthew those of Joseph's while Luke records Mary's genealogy.

Furthermore, it should be pointed out that the Greek word huios translated "son" can simply mean descendant, so Jesus was called the descendant of Heli, not Joseph.[7] The following are examples where the same word translated "son" in Luke 3:23 is used in a broader sense to refer to descendants:

Luke 3:23 And <kai> Jesus <Iesous> himself <autos> began <archomai> to be <en> about <hosei> thirty <triakonta> years of age, <etos> being <on> (as <hos> was supposed <nomizo>) the son <huios> of Joseph, <Ioseph> which was the son of Heli, <Heli>

Matthew 1:1 ¶ The book <biblos> of the generation <genesis> of Jesus <Iesous> Christ <Christos>, the son <huios> of David <Dabid>, the son <huios> of Abraham <Abraam>.

Matthew 1:20 But <de> while he <autos> thought on <enthumeomai> these things <tauta>, behold <idou>, the angel <aggelos> of the Lord <kurios> appeared <phaino> unto him <autos> in <kata> a dream <onar>, saying <lego>, Joseph <Ioseph>, thou son <huios> of David <Dabid>, fear <phobeo> not <me> to take <paralambano> unto thee <sou> Mary <Maria> thy wife <gune>: for <gar> that which is conceived <gennao> in <en> her <autos> is <esti> of <ek> the Holy <hagios> Ghost <pneuma>.

Matthew 9:27 ¶ And <kai> when Jesus <Iesous> departed <parago> thence <ekeithen>, two <duo> blind men <tuphlos> followed <akoloutheo> him <autos>, crying <krazo>, and <kai> saying <lego>, Thou Son <huios> of David <Dabid>, have mercy <eleeo> on us <hemas>.

Matthew 27:9 Then <tote> was fulfilled <pleroo> that which <ho> was spoken <rheo> by <dia> Jeremy <Ieremias> the prophet <prophetes>, saying <lego>, And <kai> they took <lambano> the thirty <triakonta> pieces of silver <argurion>, the price

Verse 20[edit]

TheThinkingAtheist.com claims a contradiction here, asking "Who Did the Angel Speak to Regarding the Birth of Jesus? [Mary or Joseph]"[8]

Matthew 1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.

The angel appeared to Joseph.

Luke 1:28 And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favoured, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

The angel spoke to Mary.

Obviously an angel spoke to both of them. As pointed out in the note for Matthew 1:16 the genealogy provided in Matthew is for Joseph while the genealogy in Luke is for Mary. The detail given in the early chapters of Matthew appears to be from Joseph's perspective whereas the detail given in the chapters of Luke from Mary's perspective. Thus, Joseph in the book of Matthew relates his experience with an angel, while Mary in the book of Luke relates her experience. Whether it was the same angel or different angels is uncertain.

Verse 23[edit]

TheThinkingAtheist.com claims a contradiction here, asking "Was Mary a Virgin?" TheThinkingAtheist.com claims "The Greek Septuagint which Matthew used translates it as 'a virgin shall conceive and bear a son,' but the Hebrew word 'almah' means 'young woman of marriageable age,' not a virgin."[8]

Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Matthew 1:23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

This is addressed in the note for 1 Corinthians 7 and in Virgin Birth and Priestly Celibacy. The simple answer is that neither the Old or New Testaments claim Mary was a virgin, the word translated "virgin" in the New Testament (Greek parthenos) means widow, not virgin, and was wrongly translated by the KJV. Likewise the Old Testament Hebrew word translated virgin resembles the word "almanah" meaning widow. A reading of 1 Corinthians 7 shows the chapter cannot be talking about virgins but is talking about widows.

Sources[edit]

  1. Seidensticker, P. (2018, October 20). "Top 20 Most Damning Bible Contradictions." Patheos.
  2. Halley, H.H. (1984). Halley's Bible handbook with the New International Version. Zondervan Publishing House.
  3. Scofield, C.I. (1917). Scofield Reference Notes.
  4. Meritt, Jim (1992). A list of Biblical contradictions. Retrieved from http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html.
  5. Halley, H.H. (1984). Halley's Bible handbook with the New International Version. Zondervan Publishing House.
  6. Scofield, C.I. (1917). Scofield Reference Notes.
  7. Thayer and Smith. Huios. The New Testament Greek Lexicon.
  8. 8.0 8.1 TheThinkingAtheist. Bible Contradictions. Retrieved from http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/page/bible-contradictions.