The Genealogies of Matthew and Luke
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 июн 2021
- Dr. Brant Pitre discusses the genealogies of Matthew and Luke. What solutions have been proposed for the fact that each Gospel gives a different name for the father of Joseph? This was taken from Dr. Pitre's The Hidden King: The Jewish Roots of St. Joseph
For more Bible studies by Dr. Pitre, visit:
catholicproductions.com/colle...
Commons Images used:
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi...
Matthias Stom, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
Agree with J R. This just blew my mind as well. First time I’ve heard of St. Joseph being adopted.
Yea man what a dad He had while on earth.
But if jesus is the son of a virgin birth, how is geneology even relevant lol.
The mental math people do to try to make this bit of the bible work is priceless.
@@jessicamessica2271Because it was relevent in the Jewish tradition of the time that the messiah be born into the house of David. Adopted parentage was taken seriously and as legitimate in the ancient world. Augustus was the grand nephew of Gaius Julius Caesar and postumously adopted and nobody disregarded it among the Romans. To this day and age we would consider an adopted son to have his adopted fathers last name generally and wouldn't dare question that legitimacy. So it's throughout time and culture that such is such. Of course if the "biological" father in the case of Jesus is God the Father it creates a unique circumstance that scholars are going to have to wrestle with from Matthiew to Luke to Augustine. How would have you delt with the geneiology if you were a gospel writer dealing with such a topic?
@davidodoherty8494 well firstly, I would probably be bothered that matter and luke give totally different geneologys for Joseph.
Man oh man! Just goes to show what giving up a sinful life and loving Jesus faithfully can do one, the treasures of the the kingdom are revealed ! Thanks for blowing me away with this piece of treasure St Augustine please continue to pray for us and by and by we'll get there too. Thank you so much Dr Pitre for bringing that piece of treasure through the digital age to us all, may God our father continue to bless you and your family abundantly.
@JR, very well stated🙏
From Saint Joseph the Hidden King. I strongly recommend purchasing it on their website. It is one great talk on Saint Joseph.
logical interpretation by dr.pitre.any commentary,teachings from saint augustine is believable,inspired by the holy spirit.🙏.thanks for sharing our faith.👍
Wow! blown away man. Thanks Doc!!!
This just blew my mind for sure, it makes so much sense. St. Augustine at it again.
That was so beautiful. God's ways are perfect. Thank you for this. 🙏
I love this.... revelation....specially in the year of st. Joseph
Matthew writing for the Jews - Geneology from Abraham.
Luke writing for the Gentiles - Geneology from Adam.
We are all connected to God - the Lord Jesus Christ.
St. Agustín for the win.!
I encourage everyone to purchase the full talks Dr. Pitre did on Saint Joseph.
uff.. praise God for your knowledge and efforts❤❤
Beautiful. From an adoptive father.
I knew Eusebius solution, but never knew about Augustine's! Thank You Dr Pitre! I'll check It !
Dr. Brant Pitre clarifies so great!
Biy! Thank you, Dr Pitre. Blessed be God forever 🙏
Augustine got it right again 😂👍🏼. Pitre rocks
❤Super explanation❤
I also lean to the 3rd option, which would explain the difference of the grammar used, and doesn't seem to be sleight of hand.
Saint Joseph ❤❤❤❤
In all of the 3 hypotheses regarding the discrepancies between the 2 genealogies, there’s the common theme of St. Joseph being adopted. If Heli and St. Joachim are the same person as the 1st hypothesis suggests, then, St. Joseph received adoption through his marriage with the Blessed Virgin Mary since tradition suggests that she has no brothers to inherit their lineage.
That's incredible!
Wow!!!!!!
Dang brother, that's awesome...
Wow!
The genealogies in Matthew & Luke do not conflict or contradict They are of 2 people, Mary & Joseph. The genealogies in Matthew from David to Jacob-Heli (spanning about 1000 years), contains 27 generations of 40 years each so as to comply with the 40-year royal generational standard. Luke, on the other hand, gives 40 generations of a more comprehensible 25 years each. Hence, Luke places Jesus in the 20th generation from Zerubbabel, whereas Matthew places him in the 11th generation from Zerubbabel. SUMMARY: Matthew-- 27 generarions of 40 years from Solomon. Patriarchal--Zerubbabel's father's line. Luke-- 40 generations of 25 years from Nathan. Matriarchal--Zerubbabel's mother's line. Both Solomon and Nathan are sons of David. Their lines converge at Zerubbabel, then diverge. Zerubbabel had 2 sons, Abiud and Rhesa. Matthew goes from Abiud, Mary's line. Luke goes from Rhesa, Joseph's line. Also, Mary and Joseph are related. Joseph was Mary's great-aunt Gadat's son. Mary's mother is Hannah/Anna. Her father is Joachim (Yonakhir) the Elias Patriarch. Joseph's mother was Gadat. His father was Heli, the Jacob Patriarch. Hiscommunity distinction was 'Jacob': it was a title. He would be called Jacob-Heli. Joachim's mother was Sabrath (Sabartia). His father was Matthat the Zadok. Heli's father was Matthan (descended from Mattathias (Tobias) the Temple governor.).
First time hearing this. 🤗🥰😎
Wow
I'll take the first explanation, that its Joseph and Mary's line because this will clearly explain Mary's bloodline. Without Joseph' blood running in Jesus' vein, the prophecy was fulfilled still, because Mary's blood is of David's line, and the best way to explain this is by presenting her as the daughter of Eli, a short of Eliachim = Joachim.
The problem is in Jewish culture, a person's tribal affiliation comes from their father, not their mother. It makes no difference that Mary was from tribe of Judah. Christ's tribal affiliation must come from his father.
@@brackguthrie9470 I found this article interesting
jewsforjesus.org/publications/issues/issues-v05-n06/the-genealogy-of-the-messiah
@@brackguthrie9470 that is why joseph was identified as the son of eli. He became the son of eli by virtue of his marriage to mary. Mary was the biological bloodline of eli and thus, the davidic bloodline flows in jesus' veins because of His mother, the blessed virgin.
@@cathylabourer4993 There is no grounds for listing a wife's father as the one who generated the husband (unless they are brother and sister which is another problem). That is really grasping at straws.
@@brackguthrie9470 there is. If the authors intent is to present Mary's bloodline.
Both of the genealogies are of Joseph and although they differ, they are at the same time both correct. How is that possible you ask? Answer is simple, yet shocking. There were two different Josephs (and also two different Marys and Jesus children). This explanation also solves many other seeming discrepancies between Matthew and Luke (such as only Matthew speaking about flight to Egypt, and only Luke speaking about census taking place, but there are more).
Which sermon of Augustine is it exactly? I mean nr of Sermon and verses. Thanks in advance.
What about the possibility that the genealogy description in Luke is in facts from Mary's lineage?
No because in jewish tradition kingship couldn't be passed down through the mother. There is no point to female genealogy since women can't pass down anything.
All speculations.
Brief and lucid as always
What about the geneaology of Paul? He seems like a Kenite.
It would be pretty compelling to have testimony that Jesus' only biological parent was a descendant of David so Jesus would also be a biological descendant of David. If he weren't, it would require a lot of re-examination of the Old Testament in the context of the Messiah not being a biological descendant of David.
It makes no difference that Mary was from the line of David. The Jewish tribal affiliation comes from the father, not the mother. This is huge stumbling block.
Tribe of Judah is another story. I think everybody would rightfully think they got scammed if God meant that somebody would become the Son of David by adoption. Jesus could reasonably be considered the seed of The Woman and the seed of her father, and it would be nice to have written confirmation that her father was a biological descendant of David, since in that context everything adds up.
@@LarryRiedel But it makes no difference if Mary's father was a descendant of David as far as tribe is concerned.
@@brackguthrie9470 Tribe is another story. I don't disagree about tribe or that legally Jesus was the son of Joseph.
@@LarryRiedel "Tribe of Judah" and "Descendant of David" are the same thing. Jesus' biological father's line is the only qualifier for his being a descendant of David. Also, to be the Messiah, Jesus must be a descendant of David through Solomon. I feel this is a huge error in Matthew which is insurmountable for a religious Jew.
The 1st option presented by Mr. Pitre is supported by Church tradition being Mother Mary's father as Joachim (Heli).
Reference to Church Source (Pre-Internet Era Source, as Previously this was only available through Catholic Academic Libraries): www.newadvent.org/cathen/06410a.htm
Additional Note:
A comment here seems there is a note about this in the Jerusalem Talmud, if anybody can help with a uncensored source thanks in advance.
That source at the end actually also gives the solution that both genealogies are Joseph's but Mary also descended from David and Nathan according to tradition. St. John Damascene states that her grandfather Barpanther, father of Joachim (not Heli), is Heli's cousin and that she married within the family in accordance to Numbers stating an only daughter would do so to secure right of inheritance.
This guy's dismissal of the explanation offered by Eusibius and Julius Africanus is wrong. First, Julius Africanus said that he saw family records of Jesus' extended family. That was either true or this ancient Christian brother was a liar.
Every other explanation of the dual genealogy is the result of conjecture by well meaning Christian brethern. I think evidence and testimony beats conjecture.
Also this guy's contention that it was improbable that there would be two Leverite marriages back to back is somewhat fallacious. I thank God for YourTuber NathanH83 and his videos "The two Genealogies of Jesus: According to Eusibius" and "The Curse of Jeconiah" Those two videos provide a more biblical and God glorifying answer to the mystery of the dual Genealogies of Jesus.
I believe in the miraculous birth of Jesus through the virgin Mary. But does that miracle mean: 1, God introduced His seed (?) into the ovum. 2. God created a fetus in Mary and added her DNA. 3. Or God seeded the ovum with David's seed. If it is #3, then the adoptionist Christology (i.e. God adopted Jesus at his baptism (see 1 Chr 22:9-10) would make Jesus the Son of God (or Messiah). And with #3, Mary's questionable genealogy is irrelevant.
It's not "lineage" per se that qualifies a contender to claim Messiahship, but Royal Lineage. In 2 Kings 11:1-3 the daughters of the King were not threatened by Athaliah because only males are Royal Seed (therefore Mary is excluded). Jesus' father would have to be a direct descendant of David's to be "Son of David". Don't get me wrong, I believe Jesus is the Messiah, but the NT genealogies are bogus in making that determination. I believe what Peter believed in Acts 2:30, that Jesus is the fruit of David's loins (not from someone else - see Rom 1:3 "Jesus the Messiah our lord was conceived of the sperm of David").
ERIC LUDY AND CHUCK MISSLER ALL NAMES HAVE MEANINGS FROM ADAM to NOAH, ABRAHAM TO YESHUA(JESUS)
THE LINEAGE OF MAJESTY..
WHEN 12 TRIBES OF JACOB(ISRAEL) HAD THE LINEAGE OF ROYALTY AND
GOD HIDDEN HIS ROYAL LINEAGE... NOT TO BE DESTROYED BY THE SATAN AND FORCES OF DARKNESS..
JOSEPH AND MARY WAS FROM DAVID LINEAGE😊🙏🙏🙏
GOD BLESS
I find it awkward though, like you make a girl pregnant, leave and somebody stand for you. He adopted your child and then you showed up and still claims to be the biological father and the legal father accepted you, even the girl you impregnated still loves u, and you live happily ever after. Isn't that called adultery or bigamy or something??? I don't know. Up to you guys...❤️😂❤️😅
I don't know if you would call God Jesus' natural father...God is not natural..he's God and he doesn't live in the natural
Natural does not imply biological or physical. Whether something is natural or ‘super’natural both are still natural-one is merely superior to the other.
Speculation. This is one great problem why the Jews do not accept Jesus as the Messiah. The Messiah must have a genealogy traceable to King David. The solution was presented by Nehemia Gordon, a Hebrew scholar specializing in ancient Hebrew manuscripts. It was only in recent decades that manuscripts of Matthew in Hebrew were discovered that were not derived from the Greek. The Hebrew Matthew manuscripts clearly state “…Joseph THE HUSBAND of Mary…” so even the number of generations, which is an error correction condition is satisfied.
Listen for yourself to the manuscript evidence presented by the scholarly researcher of ancient Hebrew manuscripts, Nehemia Gordon. All doubts and contradictions disappear because of the manuscript evidence (27 Hebrew manuscripts and counting)
This still does not get around the problem of tribal affiliation. Tribal affiliation comes from the father's line only. Plus, how does one get around the fact that Jesus' line does not come from line of Solomon--from which the Messiah will come?
@@brackguthrie9470 Both genealogies of Matthew and Luke descend from the tribe of Judah and King David; this is uncontested. The line of Joseph, husband of Mary, descends from Solomon; and the line of Mary, mother of Jesus, descends from the prophet Nathan, both of whom are sons of King David. It is sufficient to show that as long as there is manuscript evidence that Joseph, the husband of Mary, descends from King David, by blood, then the law of inheritance, according to Mosaic Law, is satisfied; and therefore, the precondition for messiahship, from the line of David is satisfied. Therefore, the question or objection you raised, disappears.
@@jperez7893 Whether Joseph's line matters is highly contested in Jewish circles as there were no law's regarding adoption. In addition, our tradition holds that Joseph was NOT Jesus' father. His line irrelevant on that front as well. That fact along with many other errors in the Matthew should call into question the canonicity of Matthew. There are numerous errors in the genealogy itself.
@@brackguthrie9470 ha. Try convincing Jews with that line of reasoning
@@jperez7893 are there laws regarding inheritance regarding adoption? Roman Catholic here seeking the truth.