Luke 3 Genealogies

The Gospel of Luke was also written around eighty CE, written somewhere outside of Palestine (Tatum, 1999, p.34). The author may have been Luke the Gentile Christian, writing to another Gentile, Theophilus. Like Matthew, Luke is strongly believed to be written after Mark, with references from him, “Q” and “L” if following the Two (Four)-Document Hypothesis. The authors of Luke and Matthew are believed to be written during the same time without the knowledge of knowing. As mentioned before, Luke is about fifty percent longer than Mark is, making it important source since it contains more information about the historic life of Jesus. There is also a second part to Luke which is the book Acts, but is separate in Bible. Both include the beginnings

Matthew and Luke each contain short but elaborate birth narratives concerning Jesus’. Within each of their narratives,both Matthew and Luke mention the genealogies of Jesus which when compared to each other are quite different. In Matthews gospel he traces Jesus’ ancestry back to that “of Jesus the Messiah, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham” (Matt 1:1). While in Luke’s gospel, Jesus is traced back through David and Abraham to Adam and God. Now, even though both Matthew and Luke’s genealogies are not the same, what is even more concerning is that neither is overly correct. In regards to Matthews take on Jesus’ genealogy, one can see that his “genealogy suggests — indeed, it almost demonstrates— that the entire course of Israel’s history has proceed according to divine providence” (116). However, historians today know about two thirds of

Matthew begins with the genealogy of Jesus Christ the Son of David, the Son of Abraham." He makes it clear that Jesus is the,"the Son of David".

Logically it would make sense to start off with the introduction of each book. Notice how in Matthew the first event mentioned is the birth of Jesus and his genealogy while John begins with the creation of the world. The first sentence, “An account of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham” (M 1:1) ultimately gives Jesus credibility. This credibility is something Matthew views as important because

This process helps substantiate the claim of Jesus being the Messiah, foretold in the Old Testament. In both Gospels, Jesus lineage goes back to King David (Matthew. 1.6; Luke. 2.4). Jesus is born in Bethlehem, a town of great prophetic importance (Matthew. 2.5-2.6; Luke. 2.4). Another key element is the virgin birth of Jesus (Matthew. 1.23; Luke. 1.27). The birth to a virgin in the town of Bethlehem with linage back to King David is evidence for Jesus being the Messiah. Another geographic similarity is that Joseph, Mary, and the child settle in

The gospel of Luke is an in-depth story of Jesus life, his purpose, his vision and his sacrifice; from birth to death Luke does an amazing job painting a beautiful picture of Jesus, showing his ancestry, portraying him as a human just like you and I. Luke does tell a lot of the same things as Matthew and Mark but a much more in depth description and explains Jesus identity, his journey, the religious leaders of the time, and his resurrection and crucifixion.

Compare and contrast the birth stories in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. How do the differences set up distinct theological emphases in each Gospel?

Some people think these differences are wrong in the New Testament. However, I believe that Jews were meticulous recorders, especially for genealogy. It is inconceivable that Matthew and Luke created two entirely contradictory genealogies of the same lineage. Again, from David to Jesus, these genealogies are completely different, even Shealtiel and Zerubbabel might also refer to other people with the same names. Moreover, Matthew was tracing the original genealogy, while Luke put “widow

The question as to why they are alike is called the Synoptic Problem. This attempts to explain how the Synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are related compositionally and literarily. There are many solutions to this problem but three well-known solutions are the Two-Source Theory,

There are many different gospels that tell a similar story. Matthew and Mark are two Gospels written in a similar way but have different audiences. The story is the Last Supper and is about the last meal that Jesus experienced with his Apostles before his Sacrifice. There are many similarities, but not very many differences. Overall, the same story is told, but from two different perspectives.

The Gospel of Matthew, being primarily written to the Jewish community, was very much focused on the fact that Jesus was the Messiah that the Jews had been waiting for, but not in the way they were expecting. Matthew 1:1-16 lists out the genealogy of Jesus stating that he was indeed a descendant of David. David

The gospel of Luke and John are gospels about Jesus and John the Baptist. They have several differences and similarities. The Gospel of Luke describes the conception and birth of John the Baptist and Jesus while the gospel of Luke describes their life after birth. Summaries, variances, and connections of these two gospels are discussed below.

The book of Luke is the third gospel book in the New Testament. Luke was the Author as well as a Physician, the only Greek writer of the four Gospels. The theme in Luke is centered around the perfect man Jesus, as being Holy and Righteous. Jesus was also referred to as the Son of Man. The book of Luke speaks about the birth of Jesus to a Virgin Mary and how Joseph wanted to put her away for being pregnant before marriage to him.

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are all different stories on the life of Jesus. They all tell the same story just in different aspects. The reason that they all tell the story in different aspects to show the different events in Jesus life. One writer might focus on the legend of Jesus and another writer might focus on the being on Jesus. Some might focus on the beginning stages of the life of Jesus.

It can be argued that the similarities and differences of the Gospels of Matthew and Luke can cause the reader to either see both of these accounts to complement one another with their different perspectives or that they contradict one another by certain events being mentioned in one birth narrative but not the other. Different aspects of both of these birth narratives such as the way Matthew and Luke treat Mary, the extent to which they use the Old Testament and the audience to whom they are writing to reveals the authors’ agenda as they allow their culture and own personal beliefs to influence what they write. These factors could be argued to have an effect on the historical authenticity of these texts as it could be possible that they could have caused the authors to twist the truth to fit in with their own beliefs.