Zerubbabel. The question is, What is the significance of Luke’s genealogy? The Ebionites, a sect who denied the virgin birth, used a gospel which, according to Epiphanius, was a recension of Matthew that omitted the genealogy and infancy narrative. [2], Traditional Christian scholars (starting with Africanus and Eusebius[3]) have put forward various theories that seek to explain why the lineages are so different,[4] such as that Matthew's account follows the lineage of Joseph, while Luke's follows the lineage of Mary. For the article about claims to a genealogical descent from the, Lukan version of Levirate marriage theory. Eusebius of Caesarea, on the other hand, affirmed the interpretation of Africanus that Luke's genealogy is of Joseph (not of Mary), who was the natural son of Jacob, though legally of Eli who was the uterine brother of Jacob. This conclusion is obvious because both genealogies intersect in the middle at Zerubbabel, son of Shealtiel (see Mt 1:12–13; Lk 3:27). It is consistent with the early tradition ascribing a Davidic ancestry to Mary. Robertson notes that, in the Greek, "Luke has the article tou repeating uiou (Son) except before Joseph". After the Babylonian exile: Jehoiachin was the father of Shealtiel. Abiud became the father of Eliakim, Eliakim the father of Azor, Azor the father of Zadok. Converging sections are shown with a green background, and diverging sections are shown with a red background. In the Old Testament, Zerubbabel was a hero who led the Jews back from Babylon about 520 BC, governed Judah, and rebuilt the temple. This is also the point where Matthew departs from the Old Testament record. [81][82] Thus, in tracing the Davidic ancestry of Jesus, the Gospels aim to show that these messianic prophecies are fulfilled in him. [53] Patristic tradition, on the contrary, consistently identifies Mary's father as Joachim. ), Vol. We know that all things work for good for those who love God, It must be added that the levirate links between the two genealogies are found not only at the end, but also in the beginning. The Greek text is explicit in making Jesus born to Mary, rather than to Joseph. Thus, in mainstream Christianity, Jesus is regarded as being literally the "only begotten son" of God, while Joseph is regarded as his adoptive father. More controversial are the prophecies on the Messiah's relation, or lack thereof, to certain of David's descendants: The promise to Solomon and Jeconiah's curse, if applicable, argue against Matthew. [citation needed]. [46] The qualification has traditionally been understood as acknowledgment of the virgin birth, but some instead see a parenthetical expression: "a son (as was supposed of Joseph) of Eli. Augustine considers it a sufficient answer that Joseph was the father of Jesus by adoption, his legal father, through whom he could rightfully claim descent from David.