Commentary from Douhay-Rheims (an "authorized" translation)
23 "Who was of Heli"... St. Joseph, who by nature was the son of Jacob, (St. Matt. 1. 16,) in the account of the law, was son of Heli. For Heli and Jacob were brothers, by the same mother; and Heli, who was the elder, dying without issue, Jacob, as the law directed, married his widow: in consequence of such marriage, his son Joseph was reputed in the law the son of Heli.
See how that works? We see genealogies of two lines of the Stepparents of Jesus, while there is none given for his maternal line (you'd think these Marialogists would be falling all over a lineage of Mary). IMO, distancing Jesus from his Jewish roots must have been important to someone, somewhere along the line. A child is Jewish based on his mother, not his father.
Elizabeth was married to a Priest. Were Levites allowed to marry outside of their line? See Levi in Heli's line? Would Heli's "legal adoption" of Joseph have any possible connection, be something needed for a Levite to marry out of the line? I don't know very much about Jewish law & tradition, but I know that a child's mother is the one that determines whether or not a child is Jewish.
Mary was also of the House of David as a descendant of Nathan.
My understanding is that Matthew gives the lineage of Joseph, the legal lineage, while Luke gives that of Mary.
The wording in Luke is, (as was supposed) the Son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli. As was supposed means according to the law, or, as we now call it, in-law.
Joseph was begotten by Jacob, and was his natural son (Matt.1:16). He could be the legal son of Heli, therefore, only by marriage with Heli's daughter (Mary), and be reckoned so according to law (Gr.nomizo). It does not say "begat" in the case of Heli. - E.W. Bullinger
So Luke's account is that of Mary, given through Joseph, the son-in-law of Heli.
GoLightly stated- Who was of Heli"... St. Joseph, who by nature was the son of Jacob, (St. Matt. 1. 16,) in the account of the law, was son of Heli. For Heli and Jacob were brothers, by the same mother; and Heli, who was the elder, dying without issue, Jacob, as the law directed, married his widow: in consequence of such marriage, his son Joseph was reputed in the law the son of Heli.
I must question that. How does the writer know they were brothers? How does he know Heli was older and died without a child? It sounds as if he is simply trying to make it fit. He does get to the fact that Joseph was the son-in-law of Heli, as stated in Luke.
We see genealogies of two lines of the Stepparents of Jesus, while there is none given for his maternal line.
The Matthew account is that of his step-father but the one in Luke is that of Mary given in a very male oriented way, through Joseph, son-in-law to Heli.
distancing Jesus from his Jewish roots must have been important to someone, somewhere along the line. A child is Jewish based on his mother, not his father.
I agree that in a mixed marriage the child is considered a Jew only through the mother being Jewish. I don't believe anyone was trying to distance Him from being Jewish however as the Messiah must be born from the tribe of Judah, the King line. His mother Mary was of Judah and Levi, making Him King of Kings and Lord of Lords.
Elizabeth was married to a Priest. Were Levites allowed to marry outside of their line?
No, they weren't. Elizabeth was full blood Levite.
Diego1618 discussed this issue not long ago with me and stated:
Matthew shows the legal lineage (always down through the father) and the Jews saw Our Saviour as Joseph's son (John 6:42). This lineage is also used to prove that Jesus was born of a virgin. Joseph's lineage had a curse (Jeconiah) (Matthew 1:1-12) and (Jeremiah 22:30) confirms this.
Luke's genealogy compliments the Matthew account because Mary's line had no curse. Her line came down through Nathan, not Soloman...but still through King David (Luke 3:31). According to the Law, if a daughter were the only heir she would inherit all her father's possessions, rights and inheritances...but only if she married within her tribe (Numbers 27:1-8). Mary had no brothers so she was able to transfer David's royal lineage and inheritance to her husband upon marriage. This made Joseph an heir to Heli and thus the right to David's throne...which was then passed on to Our Saviour......
It's fairly clearly laid out but there is no mention of Joachim and Anna in this. That lineage is given in The Infancy Gospel of James.
Thank you both for your replies...Ping
Elizabeth was married to a Priest. Were Levites allowed to marry outside of their line?
I answered "No, they weren't. Elizabeth was full blood Levite." - I should have said that in order to be a Levitical priest you must be a full blood Levite.
Sorry.........Ping