Replies

There is no error. This is the earthly genealogy of Jesus. Jesus has a connection to David through both Joseph and Mary. Matthew 1 shows the legal descent of Jesus as heir to the throne of David. This is the royal line through David's son Solomon. Luke's gospel presents the bloodline through David's other son Nathan, whose descendant is Mary. In Luke 3:23, Joseph is Eli's son through marriage.

God had made a promise to His servant David of a kingdom that would last forever, and a perpetual ruling line. To fulfill this covenant, Jesus had to be in the royal line. However, there was a problem with the royal line, because God had cursed the line with Jeconiah, in Jeremiah 22:30, and none of Jeconiah's descendants would prosper on the throne of David. If Jesus had been the real son of Joseph, He would have come under this curse- the curse that the descendants of Jeconiah would not sit on the throne of David. But for Jesus to inherit the rights to the throne of David, he had to be the legal son of Joseph. This problem was solved through the virgin birth of Jesus, and since Joseph married Mary, Jesus became the adopted son of Joseph and inherited the rights to the throne. At the same time, in Jesus God’s promise to David was fulfilled in that he is the actual seed of David through Mary.

You agree thar Jesus is God’s son. He is not of David. Mary is not mentioned
In Luke 3:23. That linage is from David to Joseph. Not Mary. Either the linage in Matthew 1 is wrong or the linage in Luke is wrong and both are erroneous assertions that Jesus was related to David who violated all 10 of the commandments of God given to Moses and could never have entered the Kingdom of heaven because he did not have Christ.

Good insight.. You explain how the Luke genealogy is from May's line (vs. Matthew's genealogy from Joseph's line) and Luke 3:23 very well. However, I can't find any direct scriptural reference to Jeconiah being the cause of God's curse. I thought the curse issue with Joseph's line came before Jeconiah. The two lines diverge with Solomon (Joseph's line) and Nathan (Mary's line), both sons of David. I actually thought that it might have been something to do with Solomon but I'm not sure (more research when I have time). Anyway, a wonderful explanation.

A couple of interesting notes on this:

Apparently a baby's blood comes only from the father and not the mother. Apparently food and waste is transferred in the placenta but no blood from the mother. The blood of Christ was purely from the Father and not from Mary.

Also, as you may know, the four beasts in Revelation 4:7 are the revelation of the four pictures of who Jesus is and corresponds to the four gospels. Matthew reveals Jesus as the Lion of the Tribe of Judah, in Mark he is the working ox or calf, in Luke he is revealed as the Son of man, and in John he is the Son of God who will return as a flying eagle. So Jesus, as the Lion of the Tribe of Judah in Matthew, is shown though Joseph's line of kings as you point out. In Luke, Jesus, as the Son of man, is shown through Mary's line from which which Jesus' actual human flesh came. How wonderful is our God!