Yahusha's 2 Lineages Part 1
Yahusha's lineage is traced in two different books of the Bible: Matthew 1 and Luke 3. If you write the names down of each lineage you will quickly see that the two lineages are completely different. For one, the book of Luke traces the lineage from Yahusha all the way back to Adam and God. The book of Matthew starts with Abraham. If this was the only difference then most people would overlook it, but it's not. The two lineages diverge from each other starting with the seed of David. David had many sons from many wives and concubines, but both Matthew and Luke trace the lineage of the Messiah through the children David had with Bathsheba, namely Solomon and Nathan. We read about David's children with Bathsheba in 1 Chronicles 3:4-5.
.....And David reigned in Jerusalem thirty-three years, 5and these sons were born to him in Jerusalem:
Shimea,a Shobab, Nathan, and Solomon. These four were born to him by Bathsheba daughter of Ammiel.
The book of Matthew traces the lineage from David through his son Solomon, where the book of Luke traces the lineage from David through his son Nathan. Because the lineage is being traced through two different sons, it shouldn't surprise you that the two lineages disagree.
Please look at the two lineages below. I have listed the names as well as listed the generational numbers. The highlighted green portion is where the lineages agree, the highlighted red portion is where the lineages disagree. As you will see, the lineages disagree more than they agree. (If you are reading on a mobile device the highlighted portion may be slightly off)
As you see, the two lineages are very different, not only in the names listed, but also in the number of names listed. Beginning with Abraham, the book of Matthew records 41 generations and the book of Luke records 56 generations.
Now I would say most unbiased observers, or maybe I should say "non-christian oberservers" would state that both lineages could not be correct because they contradict one another. But many people believe that the Bible is inerrant, meaning the Bible does not contain any mistakes. The following definition comes from Google.
incapable of being wrong.
"they believed in an inerrant scripture"
Now, although I believe inspired men wrote the Bible, I do not believe every word is inspired. Some people probably just spit out their coffee after reading that. I understand that is hard for some people to digest, but we will be looking at many contradictions in the Bible... but, make no mistake, that does not mean I do not believe in the Bible. I do, but I also know man has tried very hard, and often successfuly corrupted the Bible.
The book of Matthew and the book of Luke clearly have different lineages. But if you believe the Bible is inerrant, how can you resolve this discrepancy? Well, it's simple (to them).
They state one lineage is Joseph's and the other lineage is Mary's. Well that would be cool and all but the Bible doesn't say that one of the lineages is Joseph's and the other is Mary's. The Bible states they are both Joseph's.
Two Different Lineages?
Many people believe the Bible to be inerrant, therefore when you show them that the two lineages differ, they don't have many options to take if they want to maintain that the Bible is inerrant. The most common take on it is that one lineage is Joseph's and the other is Mary's. But the Bible doesn't say that. Let's look at Matthew and Luke:
And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. (Matthew 1:16)
And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli, (Luke 3:23)
Now we may get into why "as was supposed" is in parenthesis in Luke 3:23 later, but for now take notice whos lineage this was. Both the book of Matthew and Luke show this was clearly Joseph's lineage. Neither lineage gives a hint that it may actually be Mary's. Simple reading of the text show both are Joseph's.
But people have to make one of the lineages Mary's. Why? Because, otherwise the Bible would contradict itself. Now we can't have that now can we? No! Let's simply make the contradiction go away by claiming one is Mary's.
Although I believe the book of Luke has discrepancies, I believe the book of Luke has the correct lineage of Joseph, and therefore the correct lineage of Yahusha. But before we get to "my" belief, let's look at the common christian belief.
The common christian belief is that the book of Matthew contains Joseph's lineage and the book of Luke contains Mary's lineage. But why do people say this? I mean, the word Mary isn't even used in the third Chapter of Luke. Well just like people presume the Bible is inerrant, they also presume that Yahusha is god; Therefore; the Matthew lineage fits the "god narrative" the best.
Well if you scroll up and look at the 28th recorded generation in the book of Matthew, you will see the name Jechonias. And if you remember from Matthew 1:17 there was something important that happened at the 28th generation from Abraham.
Matthew 1:17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.
The 28th generation is the generation that got led captive to Babylon.
So 14 generations took us from Abraham to David, and 14 more generations, or the 28th generation, took us from David to the carrying away into Babylon, which is when Jechonias was king. If you look at the Matthew lineage above you will see Jechonias, or King Jechonias was the 28th generation from Abraham.
If you don't know much about Jechonias, that is okay, but Jechonias was notably an evil king that inherited a curse. Let's read a solemn judgement about King Jechonias and his curse in the book of Jerimiah 22:
A Warning about Jehoiakim
13Woe unto him that buildeth his house by unrighteousness, and his chambers by wrong; that useth his neighbour's service without wages, and giveth him not for his work;
14That saith, I will build me a wide house and large chambers, and cutteth him out windows; and it is cieled with cedar, and painted with vermilion.
15Shalt thou reign, because thou closest thyself in cedar? did not thy father eat and drink, and do judgment and justice, and then it was well with him?
16He judged the cause of the poor and needy; then it was well with him: was not this to know me? saith the LORD.
17But thine eyes and thine heart are not but for thy covetousness, and for to shed innocent blood, and for oppression, and for violence, to do it.
18Therefore thus saith the LORD concerning Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah; They shall not lament for him, saying, Ah my brother! or, Ah sister! they shall not lament for him, saying, Ah lord! or, Ah his glory!
19He shall be buried with the burial of an ass, drawn and cast forth beyond the gates of Jerusalem.
20Go up to Lebanon, and cry; and lift up thy voice in Bashan, and cry from the passages: for all thy lovers are destroyed.
21I spake unto thee in thy prosperity; but thou saidst, I will not hear. This hath been thy manner from thy youth, that thou obeyedst not my voice.
22The wind shall eat up all thy pastors, and thy lovers shall go into captivity: surely then shalt thou be ashamed and confounded for all thy wickedness.
23O inhabitant of Lebanon, that makest thy nest in the cedars, how gracious shalt thou be when pangs come upon thee, the pain as of a woman in travail!
A Warning for Jehoiachin
24As I live, saith the LORD, though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah were the signet upon my right hand, yet would I pluck thee thence; 25And I will give thee into the hand of them that seek thy life, and into the hand of them whose face thou fearest, even into the hand of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, and into the hand of the Chaldeans.
26And I will cast thee out, and thy mother that bare thee, into another country, where ye were not born; and there shall ye die. 27But to the land whereunto they desire to return, thither shall they not return.
28Is this man Coniah a despised broken idol? is he a vessel wherein is no pleasure? wherefore are they cast out, he and his seed, and are cast into a land which they know not?
29O earth, earth, earth, hear the word of the LORD.
30Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.
So we see that Jechonias was an evil man and Yahuah said "Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.".
Some people believe this curse was temporary because it says "a man that shall not prosper in his days " meaning the curse applied only for the duration of Jechonias' life.
But many christians believe this curse was eternal because it says "for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.".
The common "christian" belief is that the curse was eternal, not just a curse that existed during Jechonias' life.
So the belief goes.
1. Jesus is God
2. Jesus is a descendant of Jechonias (from the book of Matthew)
3. Jechonias' descendants are cursed and can't sit on David's throne
4. Therefore, since Jechonias is cursed and Joseph descended from Jechonias, Joseph is also cursed and his son Jesus can't sit on David's throne.
5. Unless, of course, Jesus can sit on David's throne because Joseph isn't Jesus' real father, God is his father, meaning the curse doesn't apply to him
This is how the Matthew line or the Solomon line (since the lineage is traced from David through Solomon), fits the "god narrative" better.
Because if Joseph descended from Jechoniah, remember Jechoniah was a descendent of Solomon, then Joseph was cursed and so long as Yahusha was Joseph's son, then he would inherit the curse and not be allowed to sit on the throne of David. Unless of course he wasn't Joseph's son, and thereby would not have inherited the curse of Jechoniah. Insert the Virgin birth story here. This is how many christians would explain how Yahusha could come from the line of Jechoniah and still become king.
Now, to be clear, for any readers that do not know me or my beliefs up until now, please know, I do not believe Yahusha is god. Remember, there are two lineages, which both claim to be Joseph's. I believe one is right, and the other is wrong and I understand the attempt to make the Matthew lineage, Joseph's lineage because the thinking goes, if Luke's lineage is the correct one then if I said Joseph was Yahusha's father, and a christian stated "no, he wasn't Yahusha's real father", then we could argue all day. Because based on the lineage in Luke, there is no reason from the text in chapter 3, that Joseph couldn't be Yahusha's father. In fact the exact opposite is true, because Luke says that Joseph WAS Yahusha's father.
But if Yahusha came from Solomon and Jechoniah, then someone could say:
Someone: Do you believe Yahusha is the Messiah?
Someone: Do you believe Yahusha is god?
Someone: Well did you know Yahusha descended from Jechoniah?
Me: (me being ignorant) No, does that mattter?
Someone: Yes, in Jeremiah 22 king Jechoniah was cursed. No descendant of Jeconiah was allowed to sit on David's throne.
Someone: Well you believe Yahusha will sit on the throne of David right?
Me: Well yeah...
Someone: Well if the curse of Jechoniah prevented his descendents from sitting on the throne of David, how is Yahusha going to sit on it? You're belief that Yahusha isn't god doesn't answer this. But mine does.
Me: How so?
Someone: Well since Yahusha is the son of god, and he was miraculously concepted, then he was never truly the son of Joseph, therefore the curse didn't apply to him.
Me: Hold on, I think my mom is calling me..... (runs away quickly)
Now that was a made up conversation hoping to allow readers to understand how the lineages can be used to support the "god narrative". Please read one more pretend conversation to hopefully drive the point home even more.
Christian: The bible is inerrant
Atheist: But the Bible contradicts itself
Christian: How so?
Atheist: Well the Lineage of Jesus in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 contradict each other.
Christian: No they don't
Atheist: Have you read it?
Christian: Yes, one lineage is Joseph's and the other is Mary's.
Atheist: But the Bible says they are both Joseph's.
Christian: They can't be.
Atheist: Why not?
Christian: Because the Bible is inerrant, and if both lineages were Joseph's then the Bible would contradict itself.
Christian: Luke's lineage is obviously Mary's
Atheist: How do you know?
Christian: Because it's obvious Mathew's lineage is Joseph's lineage. So that means the other lineage must be Mary's.
Atheist: So how do we know that the book of Matthew is Joseph's lineage?
Christian: Because the book of Matthew states that David begot Solomon, who many generations down the line begot Jechonias. Jechonias and his descendants were cursed and not allowed to sit on the throne of David.
Atheist: So Jesus was cursed...
Christian: No, he's not cursed because he is god AND the son of god.
Atheist: But the Bible says Jesus was the son of Joseph and of the seed of David.
Christian: He's not. He's the son of god.
Atheist: And of Joseph...
Christian: No, if he were Jospeh's son then he would be cursed, so that can't be true.
Atheist: But that's only if you believe the lineage according to Matthew is correct instead of Luke's.
Christian: Well the book of Luke is clearly Mary's lineage.
Atheist: But it doesn't say the word "Mary" anywhere. Like, in the entire third chapter of Luke. The word Mary is not used.
Christian: Even though the word Mary isn't used, we know it's Mary's lineage by reason of deduction.
Atheist: Deduction of what.
Christian: Well Mary couldn't come from Solomon and Jechonias.
Atheist: Why not?
Christian: Because then she would come from Jechonias and would be cursed. Since Jesus would inherit the throne from Mary, Mary couldn't be cursed. Therefore Luke's lineage must be Mary's, so it is an uncursed lineage that Jesus could inherit the throne from her.
Atheist: But kings inherit the throne through their fathers.
Christian: Or mother.
Atheist: The bible doesn't mention one king inheriting the throne from their mother, only their father.
Christian: But it does.
Christian: I just told you where. Where Jesus inherits the throne from his mother.
Atheist: So let me get this straight.....
Christian: un huh
Atheist: Solomon's line is cursed
Atheist: Nathan's line is uncursed
Atheist: Joseph isn't Jesus' father, therefore he must be from the cursed line, because it doesn't matter if he is cursed, because he isn't Jesus' father in the first place.
Christian: That's right
Atheist: And mary must be from the uncursed line, because she passed the throne down to Yahusha, even though King's only inheritted the throne from their father, there was this "one time"
Christian: Yeah! (starts slobbering)
Atheist: And even though the book of Luke never mentions the word Mary, it must be Mary's because the bible is inerrant and doesn't contradict itself:
Christian: Amen brotha.
Atheist: I wasn't praying. But you should be an artist.
Atheist: Because you are creative as hell.
Atheist: Admit it. Inventing hell was pretty creative.
Part 1 Conclusion
Hopefully by now you understand that the lineages of Yahusha in the books of Matthew and Luke both claim to represent Joseph's lineage and contradict each other.
In an effort to maintain the Bible is inerrant, people ascribe one lineage to Joseph and the other Mary. With ZERO scriptural proof that either lineages is Mary's.
Part 2 will discuss Luke's lineage, and I will present my case as to why I believe it is Yahusah's true lineage.
To Yahuah be the glory, forever and ever. Amen.