Evangelicals wrote their texts to prove that Jesus of Nazareth was the expected savior. A biography has been preserved with a diagram of the genealogy of Jesus Christ. Moreover, in different Gospels the data differ. And this is a big mystery to many.
Luke's Gospel
Luke belonged to a generation of disciples of Jesus who were not his contemporaries. He wrote the gospel in about the year 80 of the 1st century. He was educated, lived in Greece or Syria, did not know the geography of Palestine. He based the story on the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. The gospel is written on the basis of the Markov gospel, collections of sayings of Jesus and other oral traditions. From his writings it becomes clear that his scheme of the genealogy of Jesus Christ from Adam is not entirely accurate. Today, most experts believe that this pedigree is a theological work, not a historical one. The genealogical tree of Jesus Christ served a theological purpose and was designed to support readers of their faith in Jesus, a necessary condition for messianism.
It descends to the first man - Adam and even to God, Jesus showed God's plan for the salvation of all mankind.
Pedigree appearance
The evangelist, therefore, had to create a pedigree of Jesus Christ from Adam with descriptions in which Jesus would be a descendant of a certain kind. In total, it consisted of 77 characters. Famous ancestors are present in the genealogy of almost every seventh generation: Enoch (7), Abraham (3 x 7), David (5 x 7). On a very significant position, Luke placed the figure of Joseph (7 x 7).
According to some experts, Luke had an error in the data from which he created the family tree. For the most part, he obtained information about entire generations between Adam and Jesus from oral sources. However, he changed some data so that his genealogy of Jesus Christ would satisfy traditions. Significant characters alternate in a cycle of seven generations.
The genealogy says a lot about the religious moods of people of the 1st century. But practically does not shed light on information about the real origin of Jesus.
Who was Jesus Christ?
Was he one of the prophets of God? No, much more - Jesus Christ is considered the eternal God, God and man, God, who was sacrificed on the cross and resurrected for our salvation, is the last incarnation of the Lord. It is believed that no one else has salvation except him.
Jesus in the gospel of John
Jesus Christ is the face of the eternal God who came to people through humanity, he was received in the bosom of the virgin Mother: "God sent his Son, born of a woman ...". God, the Creator of everything, became a man, one of us, so that each of us, thanks to him, could become his “brother”, experience his eternal joy and bliss. And the Virgin Mary is the most important woman in the genealogy of Jesus Christ.
Although we were all immersed in the darkness of ignorance and sin, God pityed us. God took the “parchment” of the virgin girl Mary and “inked” the Holy Spirit in her “wrote out” his word, which we could read through the actions of this word: his every movement, every breath in and out, every word he said, even silence, every moment of his of life, he certainly told us about God and announced his mercy and eternal love. Moreover, this God, the Creator of everything, has forever become a man, one of us.
In the end, God’s incarnation, the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross and his resurrection, opened the door to eternal bliss and salvation from our sins, which otherwise lead to the death of a person. He is the path to the Eternal Kingdom, he is the shepherd of all people, he is the door to eternal bliss. He, the King and the Lord, who became our servant for us. And the interpretation of the genealogy of Jesus Christ is considered in the Gospel from this point of view.
Questions
Until now, many are wondering: Jesus Christ is just a myth and in fact no one like that ever lived? There are people who still think so. Many simply repeat what they heard, or what they taught at school a few decades ago ...
Conversely, someone calls the myth that Jesus Christ never lived a myth. Interestingly, the first surviving statement that Jesus did not live at all was created less than two centuries ago. Bruno Bauer spoke with him in his book, which he published between 1841 and 1842 in Leipzig.
From the first century after Christ, enemies prescribed many things to Christians: alleged vices, hatred of the human tribe, even the fact that they allegedly set fire to the city of Rome (in the year 64, it was under Emperor Nero), that they eat human meat ( those who heard about the Eucharist - "about eating the body of Christ and drinking his blood" said that Christians are atheists (because they did not believe in the Roman gods), that Jesus was not born of a virgin, but no one ever claimed that their founder - Jesus Christ is a fictional figure! Their enemies have never declared this.
Historical sources
The death and resurrection of Jesus Christ occurred around the 30s of the 1st century. From the first and second Christian centuries, many historical sources have come down to our days that testify to his life. These are not only sources based on the Christian environment - there are, of course, more of these, but even several sources of the Gentiles! And there is reason to believe that the genealogies of Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ, as well as himself, are based on data from precisely those ancient times.
Women
In general, the women in this family tree were full of grace and morality - they could see it quite clearly. Being full of grace does not mean that a person manages to better control himself in matters of morality, but that a person works out his mistakes better and that he works to improve himself.
Evidence from Jewish sources
We are fortunate that the most ancient Jewish historian Josephus Flavius was born in the year 37 - thus, just a few years after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In his extensive historical work of Jewish antiquities, although the whole history of the Jews is described there, there is an era in which Jesus and the apostles lived, and he was very close to it. Thanks to him, we know very precisely what looked like Jerusalem in his time and how the Jews lived then. King Herod is described in great detail, during the reign of which Jesus, according to the Gospel of Matthew, was born. Other characters, Pilate, are also described. And what is most important for us: the author writes very convincingly about Jesus Christ.
He once mentions Jesus when he speaks of the murder of Jacob, "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ." These are just brief references. But in itself, this was enough not to doubt the historical existence of Christ. It should be added that the Jews used the word "brother" for relatives, and even for the most distant relatives, just as it did for the word "sister." Jacob is a relative of Jesus, who was the face of the first Christian church community in Jerusalem. This is a character well known not only from the writings of Josephus, but also from the Bible. Tales with “James, the brother of the Lord” are found in the texts of the New Testament, for example, in the epistle of the Apostle Paul. Thus, this character was clearly related to the genealogy of the Lord Jesus Christ in the flesh.
In the writings of James, Flavius occurs, however, another place where he writes about Jesus. Historians gave him the Latin name Testimonium Flavianum, i.e. literally Flavian testimony. It describes that in those days, "Jesus lived, a wise man, if we can call him a man at all ... He was Christ (" Christ "in Greek means the same as in Hebrew" messiah "). And when Pilate, on the advice of our leading men, condemned him to the cross, those who first loved him left him. Again he appeared alive on the third day, about him and thousands of other amazing things the prophets of God predicted about him. ”
This text is very strange. It looks as if Josephus Flavius was a Christian, he himself believed in the divinity of Christ and in his resurrection. But he was not a Christian ... Other ancient Christian publications testify to this.
Or was this place edited later? This theory is also supported by facts that there are many contradictions in the genealogy of Jesus Christ.
Some historians believed that it was enough to write off a few words while cheating, and the text changed dramatically. And probably it was not done with bad intentions. Just the scribes gave the text a new, improved meaning.
The study of the works of Josephus Flavius is really of great interest to Israeli researchers - his texts are one of the main sources for the history of their nation.
Recent finds of Arabic texts have confirmed: we can be almost sure that the original text is called "Flavian Testimony". The facts in it are the same as in the Arabic texts. But they are expressed with a certain interval - exactly as we can observe in the Jewish author, who never believed in Jesus Christ.
The testimony of Jesus Christ was left to us by some of the Roman historians. One of them is Cornelius. He was born around the year 55 of the 1st century AD. In his Latin script, he writes very colorfully about the fire of Rome in the year 64 and how the emperor Nero set the community on Christians in order to divert attention from himself.
The author then describes the torture methods that Christians were subjected to, including the "night garden", a holiday in which Christians served as living torches! Emperor Nero for this holiday organized the conditions in the garden.
Another Roman historian says that the suffering of Christians finally began to arouse sympathy among the people. These events even became a topic for world famous historical novels written by Henrik, Nobel Prize winner in literature. For history, Cornelius made an important contribution - one of the oldest testimonies of Christ.
Family Tree Problems
As you can see, the Gospel genealogies posted by Luke and Matthew seem contradictory at first glance. Not surprisingly, many opponents of the Bible quickly took advantage of this situation, and many began to attack these two passages of Scripture, especially pointing out their differences. The first question regarding the veracity of the tree is related to what place Joseph occupies in the genealogy of Jesus Christ. If the son of God was a descendant of David from Joseph, then he must be the biological son of Joseph, but this is not so (because of the miraculous conception and birth from the Virgin). The solution of the difficulty using the theory of adoption is unreasonable, because the Jewish law did not know such a concept. This is because the concept of adoption was not recognized by Jews. In addition, real blood bonds were recognized in Jewish culture, which, according to the Jews, could not erase any conditions aimed at transferring the father's right to someone else.
Also, the solution to this difficulty by referring to the levirate does not make sense, since the levirate suggested that the marriage could be “inherited” (referring to the wife and her new child (which will legally be considered the child of the deceased). This should have been after the appearance of from whom to “inherit.” In the case of Jesus, this would have been a problem, because Joseph did not “inherit” Mary after her dead brother, and even if that were the case, Mary would have to give her a baby by natural conception.
Information about the genealogy of Jesus Christ on Sunday before Christmas contradict each other from different authors of the same era. Matthew and Luke mention various ancestors of the son of God.
Luke lists the names of the ancestors of the tribes of Israel (Joseph, Judah, Simeon, Levi) in the context of the Jewish monarchy, although the custom of using these names as proper names was adopted from a later period when the monarchy was not already in Judea. This makes his description not true.
Speaking about the genealogy of Jesus Christ and his relatives in the flesh, Matthew mentions four women who “spoil” the genealogy from an ethical point of view: Tamar (committed the sin of incest), Rahab (the harlot), Ruth, wife of Uriah.
David "left neither man nor woman alive." He took the lives of others, including Uriah, and seduced his wife. From this union was born Solomon. It is not clear what Matthew wanted to say about the genealogy of Jesus Christ, but the origin of the Messiah from one of these personalities is questionable from an ethical point of view. In addition, God cursed David and his descendants. And based on his point of view, this applies to the genealogy of the descendants of Jesus Christ.
Solution of problems
So, the first problem (Jesus was supposed to be a descendant of David, and therefore, the son of Joseph) is solved this way. Researchers published a lot of different versions on the topic of this tree; they are also in the interpretation of the Gospel of Parkhomenko about the genealogy of Jesus Christ.
In ancient scrolls, it is alleged that Jesus was not, however, the biological son of Joseph, but he was, in the most literal sense, the son of Joseph by right of adoption. Critics are aware of this argument and that is why they are warning the statement about it with the descriptions in the next section.
However, it is worth recalling first the Heinemann accusations related to this paragraph regarding the exposure of the authenticity of the genealogy of Jesus Christ. Heinemann argues that in the case of the Jews it was very important to have a “crystal clear” pedigree from the point of view of racism, both on the part of the mother and father (the ancestors of the son of God must be Jews).
Based on these data, Heineman concludes that "Jesus by Jewish law does not have an exact origin, since in any case, subject to the virgin conception, his father was not his father, and the genealogy of his mother was unknown." However, other researchers believe that this issue of the pedigree is related to the performance in the 1st century BC. e. specific public office and did not affect the messianic origin of Jesus. The Jewish family tree should not have been "crystal clear" from the point of view of racism, which means that the genealogy of Jesus Christ could well have been such. Let it be imperfect.
Students of the genealogy of Jesus Christ note that "his family tree on the mother’s side was unknown." The transfer of the genealogy of a woman was necessary only for the wives of Jewish priests (and this is also a maximum of four to eight last generations).
Heinemann’s claim that Jesus was not a descendant of David because we don’t know his mother’s pedigree is based on a rather mistaken perception of that culture. According to the legends of those times, if a father does not leave behind a male heir, but only a daughter (or daughters), then she becomes after him a full-fledged heiress who, in order to maintain kinship, can only marry someone of the same kind, like her.
From this point of view, Maria was the heiress, for it is believed that her father did not have a male heir. In this case Mary would have to proceed from the same kind as Joseph, that is, from the messianic kind of David. Among the first Christians, it was actually believed that Mary came from the family of David. What really happened was indicated by the fact that when the Jews were to go to their places of origin, it was Mary who went to David the city of Bethlehem. Thus, one can cope with the important problem of the genealogy of Jesus Christ - ignorance of the origin of the mother of Jesus and, in addition, further explain that the origin of Jesus from David "in the flesh", as Paul wrote, is based on direct biological kinship with his mother.
It is also believed that Eli, the father of Mary, adopted Joseph, a son, because he only has a daughter. Similar situations existed earlier, for example, Jacob adopted the sons of Joseph. In this situation, in the New Testament, Joseph would be a member of the clan of Mary, receiving full rights as his heir. This further strengthens the bond between Mary and Joseph. Those who study the Bible allude to this in their sermons on the genealogy of Jesus Christ. And thanks to challenging another prejudice that the father of Mother Jesus adopted Joseph, it once again becomes possible to understand that in reality humanity knows what its genealogical line was. In this case, Jesus comes from David on the basis of biological kinship with his mother and on the basis of the entry into the family of Joseph, who becomes at the same time the David's genealogy of Jesus. Of course, such information has no historical evidence. Just from the point of view of that culture, only such a hypothesis solves the problems mentioned. Sermons on the genealogy of Jesus Christ also solve another problem - that adoption was impossible in those conditions. - .
In Jewish traditions, sources say since 1982, it is argued that the concept of adoption was unknown in Jewish law. An amateur who reads such a quote in the context of Heinemann’s words will immediately understand - this is only a confirmation of Heinemann’s words: adoption did not exist in ancient Israel. However, the fact that in ancient Israel there was no clearly defined legal terminology regarding the adoption did not mean that they did not use such practice at all.
On the contrary, as one of the bibliographers reports: "Adoption was known during the Old Testament period, despite the fact that there was no special technical term." There are even concrete examples of adoption in the Old Testament. For Esther, for example, it is written that "she had neither a father nor a mother, and when her father and mother died, Mordecai took her for her daughter." As you can see, adoption took place in ancient Israel, despite the absence of strict legal definitions in this area.
In Antiquity, adoption was not alien to the peoples among whom the Jews were to live. Used by the Romans, who were calm about this procedure. An example of such a situation can be found on the boards that have come down to our days from the famous Roman families.
Also, the Arab tribes inhabiting the region, not only adopted their descendants, but, on the contrary, considered them as sons of blood, who were considered full members of the next generation in the family tree. Arabs interacted with the Jews, which is important, because, of course, these cultures developed in close mutual connection.
Contrary to popular belief, the explanation of the difficulty associated with the contradictions in the description of the genealogy of Christ is direct and simple, although this seems impossible in this puzzle. In order for the gospel genealogies of Jesus not to be contradictory, the following circumstances should arise:
- both genealogies of Jesus must be "rigid", that is, "act" only and exclusively along the line "father - son";
- the line from David to Jesus, which was drawn in both genealogies, should be straight, and in one direction, like a ladder, i.e., each of the fathers in both of these chains should have only one son, which would mean that no one of the members of both of these genealogies he could not have brothers and sisters;
- the names in that world should always have been the same, they could not be of different variations, individual people within the tree could always bear only the same names.
Thus, in matters of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, controversy has not subsided to this day.