Modern Americans aren’t as fascinated with genealogies as ancient Jewish people. It’s true that many have done ancestry research. My Grammy Smith did some pretty extensive research into our family’s ancestry, and I learned some cool things about my ancestors from her. But the majority of Americans can’t even name all of their great-grandparents.

Ancient Jewish people, by contrast, kept meticulous records of ancestry. Part of this has to do with the laws regarding tribal distinctions and inheritance (Leviticus 25:23; Numbers 36:7).

Many Christians are tempted to skip right past the genealogies when they come to them in their Bible reading. After all, we figure, what could all these hard to pronounce names have to do with me? That’s a fair question. However, every word of Scripture is God-breathed and recorded for a purpose (2 Timothy 3:16-17). So, even if there is no apparent reason for a particular passage in Scripture, it’s good for Christians to assume that there is a less obvious reason for it that might require some investigation. 

For one thing, Jesus’ genealogies demonstrate He was a real man in history and that His contemporaries could even trace His lineage back thousands of years. Just imagine if you could trace back your ancestry that far. Suddenly, those unknown names might carry more significance for you!

Careful readers of the Bible have noted discrepancies between Matthew’s genealogy for Jesus and Luke’s. Some have wondered, Why do they seem to contradict each other? Did one of them make a mistake?

Matthew was a former tax collector who was accustomed to keeping careful records of names and dates. We shouldn’t assume he blundered in his genealogical research. And Luke was a medical doctor and careful historian. When put to the test, even skeptics have been brought to faith through their historical inquiries of Luke.

The one-time skeptic, Sir William Ramsay, a highly decorated historian in his own right, was originally skeptical of Luke. He thought the miracles recorded in Luke’s Gospel ruled it out from being true history. But then he investigated all the people, places, and events in Luke and Acts (the two books penned by Luke). It slowly dawned on Ramsay that Luke was no amateur historian.  

On every point, Ramsay found Luke to be completely accurate. Even in the areas where he initially doubted Luke’s accuracy, he later found that it was him not Luke who was mistaken. Ramsay eventually concluded: “Luke’s history is unsurpassed in regard to its trustworthiness.” This led Ramsay to give his life to Jesus. 

But is it possible Luke fouled up Jesus’ genealogy? For many reasons, the answer must be no. First of all, the discrepancies between Matthew and Luke primarily come between David and Joseph. The differences are too vast to attribute to a scribal error or minor mistake. For example, they even list a different father for Joseph, something that would have been very easy to track down (Matthew 1:16; Luke 3:23). In his genealogy, Luke works backwards, beginning with Jesus (a practice common with ancient Greeks like Luke). Matthew, a Jew chronicles his genealogy beginning with Abraham, the first Jew, and ends with Jesus (the common practice for Jewish people).

Luke makes it clear that he was aware of previous records of the life of Jesus, and he’s likely including the Gospels of Matthew and Mark in that reference (Luke 1:1-4). So, let’s give Luke the benefit of the doubt that he wasn’t a complete buffoon who couldn’t spot the differences between his genealogy and Matthew’s that modern day reader spot right away.

Furthermore, Luke had his own reasons for creating a more expanded genealogy, not just a facsimile of Matthew’s genealogy. He wanted to trace Jesus’ genealogy not just back through David and Abraham, like Matthew did, but all the way back to the very beginning. To Adam. And that’s Luke reminding us that Jesus came for the whole human race, not just descendants of Abraham. Jesus came for you! 

The genealogies especially diverge between David and Joseph. Biblical scholars have come up with all kinds of possible reasons for the differences.

Some have argued that Matthew gives the physical descent for Joseph and Luke gives the royal descent for Joseph. On this view, the discrepancies are due to the fact that Joseph was a legal descendant of Heli, but a physical descendant of Jacob. This view invokes the law of Levirate marriage, that allows for a deceased man’s brother to father children for him through his brother’s widow (Deut. 25:5-10).

While possible, it should be noted that Levirate marriages were somewhat uncommon based on historical records, and it would seem odd for this to be the explanation for so many generations, and for these to all happen between David and Joseph.

I think a better explanation is found in the more traditional understanding that Matthew provides Jesus’ royal ancestry through Joseph, and Luke provides Jesus’ physical ancestry through Mary. By adoption, a more common method of becoming someone’s father, Joseph became the legal father of Jesus. Thus, the royal line was continued through Jesus, the firstborn of Mary, his wife. This fits with Matthew’s emphasis on Joseph in his birth narrative. 

On this view, Luke, who has been focusing on Mary, is giving us Mary’s ancestry through her father, Heli. Luke can call Joseph “the son of Heli,” because if a father had no sons of his own, he would often adopt his son-in-law as his own son. Alternatively, Luke could be just calling Joseph the “son-in-law” of Heli, because genealogies typically focused on the males only (Matthew’s genealogy is an exception for including several names of women). This makes sense, too, because there was no Koine Greek term for “son-in-law,” so this would have been the best way for Luke to record Mary’s ancestry while only including male names. 

Interestingly, this conclusion fits with other historical records, as even the Talmud mentions that Mary’s father was Heli. So Matthew traces Joseph’s royal ancestry, and Luke traces Mary’s royal ancestry. Either way, Jesus is the Son of David, both biologically and by royal adoption. 

Jesus was the head of a new humanity, redeemed by God, set free from the curse pronounced on Adam, the former head of the human race.In this way, Jesus fulfilled every promise of a coming Messiah.  Jesus came as the descendant of David who will sit on his throne, the Ruler promised to Judah, the Seed of blessing promised to Abraham, and the Snake-crusher promised to Adam (2 Samuel 7: 12-13; Genesis 49:10; Genesis 17:7; Genesis 3:15). 

Have thoughts on this post? I’d love to hear from you!