Why are Christ's genealogies different in Matthew and Luke?

Answer 1

The Bible is not a work of historical fact, there are discrepancies. According to current Christian canon the bible is alegorical and not meant to be taken literally. When the Romans adopted Christianity as their official religion they picked through the gospels and decided what to put in what to take out and what to change. Different Answer: The Bible is indeed a work of historical fact. Not sure what canon the above author is talking about, but the Word of God has always been accepted by general acceptance by people of faith. The canon came later to officiate what is generally accepted. The canon was made to exclude certain false Gospels - ex those featured in "The Da Vinci Code". The reason there are different numbers of "generations" is a generation is not a father -son generation but more of a "legacy" of biblical significance in faith. The dates would not add up using the regular meaning of the word "generation".

Answer 2

A:Simply put, both evangelists wanted Jesus to be descended from King David and from the great Zorobabel, son of Salathiel, but neither knew what the other wrote. Matthew draws comparisons between Moses and Jesus in his nativity account, so begins by listing the father of Joseph as Jacob, just as the father of Joseph was Jacob in the Old Testament. Matthew also sets out to have Jesus descended from all the kings of Judah prior to the Babylonian Exile. Luke does not have Moses in mind, so does not call Joseph's father Jacob, choosing Neri instead. Its author was more concerned with the poor and common citizens, so traces the line back through commoners rather than kings.

Both evangelists used numerology to prove that Jesus was destined for greatness. Matthew 1:17 tells us that there were 14 generations from Abraham to David, David to the Babylonian Exile and from that time to Jesus. To do this, the evangelist had to ignore 3 kings in the Old Testament and have David in the preceding (as 14) and following (as 1) groups, but not so Josiah. Luke also had great men occur in multiples of 7 generations starting from Adam, with: Enoch at 7; Abraham at 21; David at 35; Jesus at 77, as well as other people called Joseph at 42 and 70. To do this, he had to insert his own fictitious people into the Old Testament list: Kainan at 13; Admin at 28.

Raymond E. Brown (An Introduction to the New Testament) says there is little likelihood that either genealogy is strictly historical.

Answer 3

The Gospels of Matthew and Luke provide genealogies of Jesus, back through Joseph to the legendary King David, both using multiple of 7 or 14 generations, but neither claimed that there were only 14 generations from David to Jesus. The numbers 7 and 14 were thought to be auspicious in ancient Jewish belief, and either of these accounts would have impressed potential converts.

• Matthew demonstrated that there were 14 generations: from Abraham to David; from David to Josiah; from Josiah to Jesus. To do this, he had to ignore 3 kings in the Old Testament and have David in the preceding (as 14) and following (as 1) groups, but not so Josiah. Then, we have no possible way of verifying Matthew's list of Jesus' ancestors from the time of the Exile.
• Luke had great men occur in multiples of 7 generations starting from Adam, with: Enoch at 7; Abraham at 21; David at 35; Jesus at 77. He also had: Joseph at 42 and 70; Jesus (Jose) at 49. To do this, he had to insert his own fictitious people into the Old Testament list: Kainan at 13; Admin at 28. Once again, we have no possible way of verifying Luke's list of Jesus' ancestors after King David.

So, Matthew says that there were 28 (2 X 14) generations from David to Jesus, while Luke says that there were 42 (6 X 7) generations from David to Jesus. Needless to say, neither account is likely to be historically accurate.

Answer #2:

The significance of 14 might be that 'David' in Hebrew is spelled Daleth-Vav-Daleth. These letters have the numerical values 4+6+4 (=14).