Genealogy of Jesus

However, some modern critical scholars like Marcus Borg and John Dominic Crossan state that both genealogies are inventions, constructed to bring the Messianic claim into conformity with Jewish criteria.

[24] Luke's qualification "as was supposed" (ἐνομίζετο) avoids stating that Jesus was actually a son of Joseph, since his virgin birth is affirmed in the same gospel.

Eusebius of Cesarea, in his Church history, dedicates the 7th chapter of the first book to that issue, arguing that the divergences are based on whether one is considered as being father by nature or by law.

Similarly, in his book An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, John Damascene argues that Heli of the tribe of Nathan died childless, and Jacob of the tribe of Solomon took his wife and raised up seed to his brother and begat Joseph, in accordance with scripture, namely, yibbum (the mitzvah that a man must marry his brother's childless widow); Joseph, therefore, is by nature the son of Jacob, of the line of Solomon, but by law he is the son of Heli of the line of Nathan.

Augustine, for example, attempted on several occasions to refute every criticism, not only because the Manichaeans in his day were using the differences to attack Christianity,[36] but also because he himself had seen them in his youth as cause for doubting the veracity of the Gospels.

[40][41] Commenting on Africanus's explanation, Christian author Valeriy Sterkh writes: It must be added that the levirate links between the two genealogies are found not only at the end, but also in the beginning.

Nathan was the older brother; Solomon was younger, next in line after him (see 2 Sam 5:14–16; 1 Chron 3:5), therefore he was the first candidate to a levirate marriage (compare Ruth 3–4; Lk 20:27–33).

[42]It has been questioned, however, whether levirate marriages actually occurred among uterine brothers;[43] they are expressly excluded in the Halakhah Beth Hillel but permitted by Shammai.

[44] According to Jesuit theologian Anthony Maas, the question proposed to Jesus by the Sadducees in all three Synoptic Gospels[45] regarding a woman with seven levirate husbands suggests that this law was observed at the time of Christ.

[46] Luke's text says that Jesus was "a son, as was supposed, of Joseph, of Eli" (υἱός, ὡς ἐνομίζετο, Ἰωσὴφ, τοῦ Ἠλὶ.

)[47] The qualification has traditionally been understood as acknowledgment of the virgin birth, but some instead see a parenthetical expression: "a son (as was supposed of Joseph) of Eli.

[59] The claim that Luke gives Mary's genealogy is mentioned in a single extant 5th century text, in which pseudo-Hilary cites it as an opinion held by many, though not himself.

Modern scholars discount this approach: Raymond E. Brown called it a "pious deduction"; and Joachim Gnilka "the desperation of embarrassment".

It differs radically on such issues from Roman law, but is what applied within Jewish society and the state of Judea, and was the only one that Jesus himself explicitly acknowledged as binding and authoritative, as recorded in Matt.

[12] Others, including Victor Paul Wierwille,[65] argue that here the Aramaic original of Matthew used the word gowra (which could mean father), which, in the absence of vowel markings, was read by the Greek translator as gura (husband).

"But let us now return to where the Jew is introduced, speaking of the mother of Jesus, and saying that "when she was pregnant she was turned out of doors by the carpenter to whom she had been betrothed, as having been guilty of adultery, and that she bore a child to a certain soldier named Panthera.

One of the traditional explanations is that Matthew traces not a genealogy in the modern biological sense, but a record of legal inheritance showing the succession of Jesus in the royal line.

According to this theory, Matthew's immediate goal is therefore not David, but Jeconiah, and in his final group of fourteen, he may freely jump to a maternal grandfather, skip generations, or perhaps even follow an adoptive lineage in order to get there.

Under the Jewish law (Levirate marriage, Deuteronomy 25:5–10), it was legally propper, to call st. Joseph "son of Heli" - albeit his biological father was Jacob.

[77] On the other hand, the resemblance between Matthan and Matthat suggests they are the same man (in which case Jacob and Eli are either identical or full brothers involved in a levirate marriage), and Matthew's departure from Luke at that point can only be to follow legal line of inheritance, perhaps through a maternal grandfather.

Furthermore, interpolation between known dates would put the birth of Luke's Shealtiel at the very time when the celebrated Zerubbabel led the Jews back from Babylon.

In this view, the genealogy in Chronicles is a late addition grafting Zerubbabel onto the lineage of his predecessors, and Matthew has simply followed the royal succession.

The prophecy of Nathan[86]—understood as foretelling a son of God who would inherit the throne of his ancestor David and reign forever—is quoted in Hebrews[87] and strongly alluded to in Luke's account of the Annunciation.

[93] More controversial are the prophecies on the Messiah's relation, or lack thereof, to certain of David's descendants: The promise to Solomon and Jeconiah's curse, if applicable, argue against Matthew.

[103] Matthew apparently quotes the ancient Septuagint translation of the verse, which renders the Hebrew word "almah" as "virgin" in Greek.

He sees God working through Tamar's seduction of her father-in-law, through the collusion of Rahab the harlot with Joshua's spies, through Ruth the Moabite's unexpected marriage with Boaz, and through David and Bathsheba's adultery.

[109] Modern scholars like Raymond Brown (1973) and Géza Vermes (2005) suggest that the relationship between Mary and Elizabeth is simply an invention of Luke.

[116] The Ebionites, a sect who denied the virgin birth, used a gospel which, according to Epiphanius, was a recension of Matthew that omitted the genealogy and infancy narrative.

[117] These differences reflect the Ebionites' awareness of Jewish law (halakhah) relating to lineage inheritance, adoption, and the status of ancestry claims through the mother.

[citation needed] The Qurʼan upholds the virgin birth of Jesus (ʻĪsā)[118] and thus considers his genealogy only through Mary (Maryam), without mentioning Joseph.