The contradiction challenge

[DavidGYoung]

Putting forward something which you reckon might work if it's true doesn't mean the text actually says it.

If you need the back story in order to get the meaning from the text, I can do that with any other part of the Bible to make it say anything I want.

[ProDeo]

Here is the most blatant contradiction in the entire New Testament.

Exciting, I can't wait.........

The genealogies of Matthew and Luke cannot both be true.

Peanuts.

I am so disappointed....

Sarcasm aside, we don't have the original manuscripts, we do have copies from copies. Surely typos and small errors slipped in, but NOT in the MAIN message the Scriptures are telling us.

And that's not peanuts.

[Athanasius]

Putting forward something which you reckon might work if it's true doesn't mean the text actually says it.

If you need the back story in order to get the meaning from the text, I can do that with any other part of the Bible to make it say anything I want.

No, you can't, not without descending into eisegesis or just flat out ignoring the text. You would have to ignore context, audience, the author's assumed/proposed intention in writing (if not given to us), and so on. It's to engage in the reverse of the farcical 'not married to' example. So yes, you need the 'back story', also known as context.

As was once sung

[DavidGYoung]

I can explain the genealogies without having to pour Tipp-ex on the New Testament and rewrite parts of it with a biro.

You can't.

[Athanasius]

I can explain the genealogies without having to pour Tipp-ex on the New Testament and rewrite parts of it with a biro.

You can't.

Telling me you can explain is boring. Giving the explanation is interesting. So, as the person who saw this coming from the first reply, please do share your explanation.

[Fenris]

It's often suggested that the difference in Joseph's father (Matthew 1:16, Luke 3:23) comes down to how the lineage is traced.

The bigger issue for me is that Jesus can't be a descendant of king David because his father isn't Joseph. Mary's ancestry isn't relevant because that's not how tribal affiliation is traced in Judaism.

[Athanasius]

It's often suggested that the difference in Joseph's father (Matthew 1:16, Luke 3:23) comes down to how the lineage is traced.

The bigger issue for me is that Jesus can't be a descendant of king David because his father isn't Joseph. Mary's ancestry isn't relevant because that's not how tribal affiliation is traced in Judaism.

The even bigger issue for me is that I don't see how it matters if the two accounts are contradictory if the intent was effectively rhetorical vs. a literal factual genealogical attempt.

[Fenris]

The even bigger issue for me is that I don't see how it matters if the two accounts are contradictory if the intent was effectively rhetorical vs. a literal factual genealogical attempt.

I mean, the author is trying to prove a point.

[RabbiKnife]

Does levarite marriage or adoption impact the historic Jewish use of genealogy,

For instance, could Obed be legitimately considered a son of Boaz  and also a son of Mahon since Obed would inherit from both?

Same question for adoptions…

Just thinking out loud…

[Fenris]

Does levarite marriage

Levirate marriage involves a close male relative carrying on the family through biological children.

or adoption impact the historic Jewish use of genealogy,

There is no legality to adoption under Jewish law. It's a big mitzvah, but the adopted children do not assume the tribal affiliation of the adopted father. 

Just thinking out loud…

Who's being legalistic now? 

[Athanasius]

The even bigger issue for me is that I don't see how it matters if the two accounts are contradictory if the intent was effectively rhetorical vs. a literal factual genealogical attempt.

I mean, the author is trying to prove a point.

Yeah but Shaka, when the walls fell?

[Fenris]

Yeah but Shaka, when the walls fell?

Depends on the target audience I think. A Greek listener might be more interested in prose and poetry. A Jewish listener wants the facts.

[RabbiKnife]

The even bigger issue for me is that I don't see how it matters if the two accounts are contradictory if the intent was effectively rhetorical vs. a literal factual genealogical attempt.

I mean, the author is trying to prove a point.

Yeah but Shaka, when the walls fell?

RabbiKnife, his eyes wet and his wings unfurled.

[Athanasius]

Yeah but Shaka, when the walls fell?

Depends on the target audience I think. A Greek listener might be more interested in prose and poetry. A Jewish listener wants the facts.

What's your view on the genealogies? (Or if you gave it already just say so, I'm too lazy to open a new tab.)

[Fenris]

What's your view on the genealogies? (Or if you gave it already just say so, I'm too lazy to open a new tab.)

Irrelevant because Joseph isn't Jesus's father and Mary can't provide tribal affiliation or royal lineage.

A Jewish reader would have dismissed it out of hand.

Greek readers were more familiar with the idea of gods impregnating mortal women (Achilles, for example) and it would have been a strong point for them I suppose.