Atheists question

[bytor2112]

A friend and atheist emailed the following:

 

I have a Christmas related bible question. If Jesus is the son of God and not Joseph, why does the bible make a big deal out of tracing Joseph's lineage back to Abraham instead of Mary's?

 

Looking for easily understood doctrinal explanations without writing a book...

 

 

Thanks.

[Windseeker]

I found these

 

http://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/4297/why-is-jesus-genealogy-traced-through-joseph

 

https://bible.org/question/mary%E2%80%99s-lineage-one-gospels

[zil]

I was taught that Joseph and Mary were cousins of some sort, so that his genealogy is her genealogy (but I think if that were well established the manual I'm about to quote would mention it, and I find no evidence of it there...).

 

See the New Testament Student Manual for Matthew 1:1–17. The Genealogy of Jesus Christ.

[kapikui]

I'm not in the mood to look it up, and it's been more than 20 years,  but if I recall, Talmage explains it in Jesus the Christ. The genealogy was given twice. One is effectively the genealogy of Joseph, the other of Mary.  Also note that Joseph and Mary were cousins thus had very similar genealogy, and that Joseph was indeed Christ's LEGAL father according to Jewish law

 

The Genealogy is given because part of Christ's claim to being the Messiah also rests on his claim of being a Son (descendant) of David, and having the legal right to (or at least a strong claim to) the throne of David. Even if Joseph did not father Jesus Christ by Mary, he had married her and claimed her son as his heir giving Christ the birthright to everything Joseph had birthright to under Jewish law, including apparently the true right to David's throne. 

[Anddenex]

"Jesus the Christ" answers this question, both genealogies are mentioned. 

[Guest]

Ugh... I can write a book for the answer to this one... this can get quite complex.  I'll try to summarize it best as I can here.

 

First, we have 2 accounts of Jesus' genealogy:  Matthew 1 and Luke 3.  Of all the 4 gospels, only these 2 talk about Jesus' as a baby.  The other 2 start out with Jesus as an adult.  Matthew's gospel focuses on Joseph's experience surrounding the birth of Christ (Angelic visitations to Joseph, etc.) whereas Luke's gospel focuses on Mary and her being a virgin during Christ's birth.

 

In Matthew's genealogy, he traces Jesus' line through Joseph to Jeconiah to Solomon to David.  His account also breaks from Jewish tradition, skipping generations, and adding women to the line.  Note that Matthew is a Jew and is writing for a Jewish audience.  It is quite puzzling to not follow strict Jewish tradition in his genealogy.  This genealogy, therefore, has a specific purpose that is not meant to act as proof of royal lineage.  Studying the generations Matthew does mention, we see as follows:

1.)  Tracing the line through Jeconiah established that Joseph, although of the House of David, falls under the Jeconiah curse (stated in Jeremiah) that none of his blood will sit on the throne as King which would include Joseph and by legal tradition - Jesus.  At the time of Jesus' birth, a foreign king ruled over the land.  If the Jews would reclaim the throne, Joseph, as the heir apparent would sit on the throne.  But he never did.  So, it could be assumed that the curse of Jeconiah would extend to Jesus as well if Jesus was of Joseph's blood, therefore, Jesus would not sit on the throne.  This genealogy that Matthew presented is, therefore, putting enough of a trace (skipping generations that can be skipped) to show Jesus' disqualification from the Messianic prophecy if he was descended from Joseph.

2.)  Matthew bothers to qualify Joseph as the husband of Mary that gives birth to Christ in the genealogy and then later on presents Mary's virgin birth.  This part of the genealogy establishes how Jesus, although heir apparent to the throne through the Jeconiah's curse, is not affected by the curse.

2.)  The women stated in the genealogy were all gentiles.  The purpose of including these women in the genealogy is to establish that Jesus will not only gather the House of Israel, gentiles will also benefit from it.

 

In Luke's account, he starts with Mary's virgin birth before he presents the genealogy.  The genealogy is presented following strict Jewish tradition and traces Joseph's line to Nathan to David.  This genealogy then is a trace of the bloodline of Jesus as a descendant of the House of David.  Studying this genealogy shows:

1.) Nathan is the brother of Solomon, so this line within the House of David did not get the curse that Jeconiah, a descendant of Solomon, was subjected to.

2.) Joseph is listed as the son of Heli as opposed to Jacob presented in Matthew.  Now, since women are not listed in genealogy following strict Jewish tradition, how then do you present the genealogy of the maternal line?  Well, by Jewish tradition, you list their husband on the line.  It can then be said that Heli is the father of Mary who is the wife of Joseph from whence Jesus came.  Jesus is then descended from the House of David through this genealogy which is Mary's line.

3.) But in Jewish tradition, you don't really need to bother to trace the maternal lineage unless you want to prove you're a Jew.  By Jewish tradition, if the mother is a Gentile, the children are Gentiles - even if the father is a Jew.  But, as there's no question that Mary is a Jew, there was really no need to trace her line.  That's why Luke did not present the genealogy until after he firmly established that Jesus was from a virgin birth.  Jesus then has no other bloodline except her mother's.  This presents a fulfillment of the prophecy in Genesis that states that the woman will bruise the head of the serpent.  Therefore, in this case, it became relevant to present Mary's line to establish Jesus' kinship to the House of David and by prophecy reign as the King of the Jews by divine appointment.