Mark carries no genealogy. Luke does not mention the women, which is normal. The ”women mentioned in the Matthew genealogy are rather questionable. An unusual group ”to bring forward and Luke didn’t.
the women matthew mentions are tamar, rahab, ruth, and uriah's wife -- harlots and adulterers, basically. these women are specifically and conspicuously mentioned.
We also find that the genealogy doesn’t stack up to what is written in Kings and ”Chronicles. Four generations seem to be omitted.
matthew omites the cursed king jehoiakim, but curiously includes
his son who should not be in the royal lineage. we had a whole thread on this,
here is the important post where i lay out what exactly is wrong with the genealogy:
quote:
when josiah dies, jehoahaz takes the throne. but he's taken off to egypt, so jehoiakim his brother takes the throne. when he dies, jeconiah his son takes the trone -- but when he's carried off, the next son of josiah takes his place. so maybe there's your answer -- maybe the line of kings has to read:and not- josiah
- (jehoiakim)
- jeconiah
...
- jesus
curiously, matthew leaves out jehoahaz too -- why leave out the brother, but not go through the father's brother like the line of kings actually went through? the presence of jeconiah is incredibly conspicuous.
jaywill also brings up a curious point in reply: matthew
counts david twice to get to his magic number. more subtlety.
Mark (5:9) has one demon possessed man named Legion and Matthew has two (8:28-34). ”Now Luke (8:30) who claimed to investigate for his writing agrees with Mark and not ”Matthew. So the author of Luke does not support Matthew’s rendition.
[edit] nevermind, found it. this wasn't very clear -- the demons are named "legion" not the man. mark as one man, matthew has two men.
This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 02-12-2006 10:41 AM
™ Version 4.2
