Commenting on the perspective that Matthew's genealogy focuses upon Joseph's lineage and Luke focuses on Mary's, Putman wrote:
There are also good contextual reasons for considering
this traditional position. After all, Luke recounts Mary’s side of the story,
and Matthew provides Joseph’s. If Luke’s genealogy is Mary‘s genealogy, then
Jesus did physically descend from David on his mother’s side. Many have argued
that Jesus could not physically come from Solomon’s line because of the judgment
pronounced on the descendants of Jehoiakim (Jer 36:30) and Jehoiachin (Jer
22:24-30). Both kings were told that none of their descendants would sit on the
throne of David. If Matthew and Luke represent two lines from David that lead
to Joseph and Mary, then Jesus can be the rightful heir to David’s throne (via
Joseph’s line) and still be the virgin-born physical descendant of David
through Mary’s line (see Rom 1:3; Ascension of Isaiah 11.2). One Syriac
manuscript for Luke 2:5 suggests that Joseph and Mary both belonged to the
house of David.
Matthew emphasizes a royal line whereas Luke does not.
This fits with Matthew’s emphasis on Jesus as the Messianic King. Luke’s
genealogy is traced back to Adam, which means that Jesus belongs not only to
the sons of Abraham but also to the whole world. This fits well with his
emphasis on God’s inclusion of the Gentiles in his plan for salvation. Matthew
puts his genealogy at the beginning of his Gospel because he wants his readers
to see that Jesus provides us with a “new genesis,” a new beginning. Luke
places his genealogy after God the Father declares Jesus to be his “beloved Son”
(Luke 3:22) because Jesus is the “son of God” in his list. (Rhyne R. Putman, Conceived
by the Holy Spirit: The Virgin Birth in Scripture and Theology [Brentwood,
Tenn.: B&H Academic, 2024], 42)
To Support this Blog: