It is written in Matthew 1:17 “So all the generations from Abraham to David are 14 generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are 14 generation; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are 14 generation”.
However, when we count the generations written in Matthew 1:2 – 16, the above verses in Matthew seems to be wrong. For instance, from the carrying away into Babylon to Christ could be only 10 generations etc. It should be 14 generation as it is mentioned.
Luke, on the other hand, traced the genealogy of Jesus that which is completely different from Matthew. Let’s say, according to Luke, the generation from Jesse to the generation of Christ could be counted 43 generations (Luke 3:23 – 32) while Matthew counted only 24 generations from Jesse to Christ (Matthew 1:6 – 16). Moreover, the names stated in the count in between Matthew and Luke was not at all the same too.
Therefore, according to the analyses being conducted we have doubt whether the words in the New Testament are trustworthy or not. Or is it Matthew and Luke were talking about two Jesus who were born in different generations from different genealogical lineage at different intervals…
So please solved these problems so that people can belief and trust in the New Testament. Or is it the New Testament talking about two Jesus? Please explain and solve the problem.
Similar Posts:
- Father’s Love Letter
- My Generation
- Is Christianity based on Buddhism?
- Jesus did not die on cross, says scholar
- Some Questions You Might Want To Ask
October 11th, 2009 at 5:28 pm
Haokip, I’m not a theologian but lemme give you an advice. Read ‘em all not just some verses that you like or you can make controversy about. Unless you read ‘em all from the 1st page to the last, you will never know.
From my side, you are an absolute fool, because you have decided not to believe. And i also believe you were a Christian which makes you a traitor to Christ, the Savior.
Thank you.
Report this comment
October 11th, 2009 at 5:29 pm
mkima leh chawnghilh te sawi fiah a tan dah phawt teng…
Report this comment
October 11th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Jews (and the stiff-necked proselytes) are especially particular and critical in this first book of the first chapter of the New Testament.
Well, 14 + 14 + 14 = 42, but only 41 names so far could be kept abreast of.
To make the story short, the mathematical calculation had mishaps and led many Jews to not believe the New Testament. Only the Holy Spirit intervention in the reader could discern the truth embedded here.
Many Christians do believe in the Virgin birth as I do, the Holy Spirit played the greatest role —to make the forty two right, the Holy Spirit is in Matthew 1:18.
SHALOM ALEIKUM, Peace be unto YOU! Haokip
I am on trip, when I am back —I shall resume to feed you back.
Report this comment
October 11th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
chawnghilh, i tho hma ka ti reng a ni
Report this comment
October 11th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Mr Barlev Haokip, Let me innumerate them to you: (From after the exile to Christ):
1.Jeconiah
2.Shealtiel
3.Zerubbabel
4.Abiud
5.Eliakim
6.Azor
7.Zadok
8.Akim
9.Eliud
10.Eleazar
11.Matthan
12.Jacob
13.Joseph
14.Jesus, who is called Christ.
That is 14, dude!
According to some scholars, the genealogy of Jesus in Matthew is mainly the line of Joseph,father of Jesus), whereas that in Luke is the line of Mary. After David, Luke takes the line of Nathan instead of Solomon. Matthew’s genealogy starts with Abraham whereas Luke’s goes back up to Adam.
Mr Barlev, Unless you are really willing to know Christ Himself personally, no amount of argument will convince you of the truth about the Bible, including both the Old and New Testaments. I am so sorry for you because you are so confused, and seem to be trying your best to deny Jesus the MESSIAH! I am praying for the likes of you so that you will not end up like those Pharisees and Jewish people who crucified the Son of God more than 2000 years ago! Don’t waste your time trying to justify your ignorance, because the JESUS, whom you are denying now is coming back soon, and you may end up being a JEW, but a Jew in hell!
Report this comment
October 11th, 2009 at 6:09 pm
Can anyone solve this problem?
Inti-Juda ho hi India Citizen-ah kan la chhiar tho dawn em? India dan ang thlapa Dual Citizenship nei engzatnge awm? India Citizen nih duh lova, Israel Citizen (ni tawha insawi) ho hi an duh duhin India ramchhung Mizoram-ah te, Manipur-ah te hian an rawn luh vel hi danin a phalsak em? Nge, khulamah an inti Juda em em a (Juda pangngai aia inti Juda fir te pawh an awm zuk ti a!), helamah an rawn inti Mizo (Indian) leh em em ringawt mai em ni — Manipur a duh hun huna inti Mizo Hnahthlak tute emaw ang deuhvin?
Report this comment
October 11th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Dan an bawhchhia anih chuan dan ang thlapa hrem turin thuneitute hnenah kan lo hriattir dawn e. Chu chu PROBLEM SOLVE na tha ber anih ka ring.
Inti sakhaw mite chuan dan hi pawisak viau tur a ni ngai e!
Report this comment
October 11th, 2009 at 6:13 pm
Mizoram Laiking ang mawle. Engpawh nise, Mizo in Bnei Maneseh! hnam kan neilo.
Eng sakhua pawh zawm se tupawn freedom kan nei ah ka ngai. Mahse, hnam phatsan ( Bnei Maneseh! intihna) tel kher erawh hi chu a tenawm ka ti hluah hluah. Sawi ngaihna pawh ka hrelo.
Report this comment
October 11th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
HV, kei pawh
Report this comment
October 11th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
Please explain and solve the problem ! >> :))
Report this comment
October 11th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Israel Passport an ken chuan visa leh ILP neih a ngai, foreigner dang an thovin. Israel te chu Mizo an ni thei nang, engti pawn tribal hmel pu ve mah se.
Report this comment
October 11th, 2009 at 7:10 pm
Borat, Indian passport kha an submit kher lo a ni awm e, Israeli anga an pawm hnu khan
Ram tam takin dual citizenship neih hi phal mahse, India hi chuan a remti thin miahlo thung. Tun ah hian dual citizen nih theih tir dan hi nawr mek a ni awm e.
Tichuan, tun dinhmun ah hrih chuan ram 16, Australia, Canada, Finland, France, Greece, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, Republic of Cyprus, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, and United States of America te chauh hi a la phal hrih a ni. Israel tel lovin
https://www.indiadualcitizenship.com/
India chuan dual citizenship ni lovin, OCI (Overseas citizenship of India)a tih mai erawh chu Israeli citizen, born Indian te chu heihi a theih dan ber ni hrih turah ka ngai . Mahse, right to vote, Right to hold Indian passport te an neilo thung. Website thenkhat ah chuan In leh lo pawh an hmingin an nei thianglo(a dik em ka hrelo) Tin, an citizen nihna (foreign) passport ah khan OCI stamp a in chhu kalh bawk ang. Chu chuan visa dil buai ngai lovin a luh tir thei dawn a ni.
Report this comment
October 11th, 2009 at 7:37 pm
mihring tehna a lo tih dik ve vak tum chu a dik hlel deuh lo mo(?)… om lo poh om a siam thei engkim ti thei a nih a vangin…mihring tak a problem lo solve tm ai chuan tongtai chungin han chhiar kim dap i la… a tul chuan PATHIAN in hna chu a lo thok mai don lo mi te ka tia…
Report this comment
October 11th, 2009 at 9:05 pm
An vai mistiri chhawr pawh kha a inti Mizo khawp a, ” Keichu Israel thlah ka ni ” te ati vel !
Report this comment
October 11th, 2009 at 9:08 pm
seki leh hairehai :))
Report this comment
October 11th, 2009 at 9:11 pm
Its the language used here which seems to be the key. I queried this same problem and a friend of mine told me that the word “SON of” as used in the English Bible is actually a translation of the Hebrew word which actually means “descendant of”…so there problem solved.
Moreover, I believe if you really have a problem with this dilema , a simple google search can clear it up, I think i myself shall google it…Hope this helps…good luck
Report this comment
October 12th, 2009 at 12:11 am
Khawngaih deuh ka nei! :mrgreen:
Report this comment
October 12th, 2009 at 12:37 am
@Keimah,
From Luke 3:23 – 32 we can count 43 generations from Jesse to the generation of Jesus. If some scholars said that Luke is tracing the genealogy of Mary, logically they are wrong because in this chapter 3 where Luke traced the genealogy of Jesus he doesn’t mention the name Mary at all. This shows that he is undoubtedly tracing the genealogy of Jesus and his father Joseph. On the other hand, if you said Matthew discuss about Joseph and Luke about Mary, this doesn’t make sense, because Joseph will be born probably at the 29th generations from Jesse and Mary will be born at the 43rd generation from Jesse. How can this people who are supposedly born at different generations got married?
Matthew said (1:16) Jacob begat Joseph, Joseph begat Jesus who is called Christ, meanwhile Luke said (3:23) Jesus the son of Joseph, which is the son of Heli. If so they are talking about two different people who are born from different people sharing/having one common name. This you can proof it from the above verses, according to Matthew the grandfather of Jesus was Jacob and according to Luke the grandfather of Jesus was Heli. The Jesus, whom Matthew discussed, would be much older than the Jesus, which Luke is talking about because one was born at the 29th generation from Jesse and the other was born at the 43rd generation from Jesse. This how I understand from the actual text. I think your explanation can’t solved the problem.
My dear comrades I tell you, if you are to belief something, never take it their words, works etc. for granted. Inquire the matter as deeply as possible and also know what other people think and know about it. At this time I should say your knowledge on what you belief is not satisfactory.
Report this comment
October 12th, 2009 at 12:52 am
I hardly pray, but what @haokip, i’ll pray for you, I promise u that!!
Report this comment
October 12th, 2009 at 1:58 am
I am sure you guys can count ‘em down from Adam to present. what a drag
Report this comment
October 12th, 2009 at 3:28 am
@Haokip, as opahmar advised you, you may google and find out more information about this topic. Anyway, let me requote one explanation for you from google:
REASONS FOR DIFFERING ACCOUNTS:
“According to one of the oldest theories, some scholars assign the differences in genealogies to the “Levirate marriage” tradition. This custom said that if a man died without bearing any sons, his brother could then marry his widow, and their sons would carry on the dead man’s name. For this theory to hold up, it would mean that Joseph, the father of Jesus, had both a legal father (Heli) and a biological father (Jacob), through a Levirate marriage. The theory suggests that Joseph’s grandfathers (Matthan according to Matthew; Matthat according to Luke) were brothers, both married to the same woman, one after the other. This would make Matthan’s son (Jacob) Joseph’s biological father, and Matthat’s son (Heli) Joseph’s legal father. Matthew’s account would trace Jesus’ primary (biological) lineage, and Luke’s record would follow Jesus’ legal lineage.
An alternative theory with very little acceptance among theologians and historians alike, proposes that Jacob and Heli are actually one and the same.
One of the most widely held theories suggests that Matthew’s account follows the lineage of Joseph, while Luke’s genealogy is that of Mary, the mother of Jesus. This interpretation would mean that Jacob was Joseph’s biological father, and Heli (Mary’s biological father) became Joseph’s surrogate father, thus making Joseph Heli’s heir through his marriage to Mary. If Heli had no sons, this would have been the normal custom. Also, if Mary and Joseph lived under the same roof with Heli, his “son-in-law” would have been called “son” and considered a descendent. Although it would have been unusual to trace a genealogy from the maternal side, there was nothing usual about the virgin birth. Additionally, if Mary (Jesus’ blood relative) was indeed a direct descendant of David, this would make her son “the seed of David” in keeping with Messianic prophecies.
There are other more complicated theories, and with each there seems to remain an unresolvable problem. Yet in both genealogies we do see that Jesus is a descendant of King David, qualifying him, according to Messianic prophecies, as the Messiah.
One interesting commentary points out that by beginning with Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, Matthew’s genealogy shows the relationship of Jesus to all Jews—he is their Messiah. This coincides with the overarching theme and purpose of the book of Matthew—to prove that Jesus is the Messiah. On the other hand, the overriding purpose of the book of Luke is to give a precise record of the life of Christ as the perfect human Savior. Therefore, the genealogy of Luke traces all the way back to Adam, demonstrating the relationship of Jesus to all of mankind—he is the Savior of the world”.
Thank you.
Report this comment
October 12th, 2009 at 10:20 am
Bible thu a ni emaw nilo emaw inhnial hrim hrim hi chu a sawt teh chiam lo. A tu amah hi kan inhmin lemin ka hre lo. Kan hlaah khan “Aw ring mai rawh, Aw ring mai rawh…..” tih a awm kha. I sa tlang phawt mai teh ang un.
@opahmar: Hman deuh khan i blog a ‘how to become a south Indian tih kha ka chhiar a, ka neuih a za teh a sin. A dik riau lehnghal. Ka kan South Indian thiante ho ka chhiar tir a, an nuih a za teh a sin. Anni paw’n dik an ti khawp mai.
Report this comment
October 13th, 2009 at 2:20 am
@Keimah,
It’s been nice discussing with you. No matter whether we accept each other’s opinion or not but it’s interesting to know more about these theory from our discussions.
The first theory you suggest from ancient scholars is new to me. All other theories have been studied and no satisfactory or appropriate answers could be found out till today. I will elaborate some of the problems here in brief.
The Levirate Marriage law is permitted only to people who are born from one mother. This Law is forbidden to people who are born from one father but two mothers although they are considered from one family. Now, the theory you suggest to me said that Mathan and Matthat were brothers and got married to the same woman according to the Law of Levirate Marriage (keeping in mine that one of them died without a son, if not Levirate Marriage would be forbidden to them). If Mathan begat Jacob (according to Matthew) and Matthat begat Heli (according to Luke) they both have got a son. Now, who died without a son and who got married to the dead brother’s wife? If you said Mathan he begat a son Jacob, if you said Matthat he begat Heli. So non of them died without a son. And Levirate Marriage is not possible here. So the theory is disproved/wrong. Even if you said Jacob and Heli are one and the same, tracing the genealogy from Jesse into two separate family lieage by Matthew and Luke makes no sense at all.
Furthermore, those of whom that held Jacob and Heli are one and the same (one person) they too are wrong because Mathan and Matthat, their father, are not one person, they descended from two different people Eleazar and Levi (from different family lineage). They can’t be brothers.
As I have stated earlier Luke and Matthew were tracing the paternal lineage of Jesus as we can proved it from the verses: … Mathan begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Joseph, of whom was born Jesus, who was called Christ (Matthew 1:15 – 16). And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli. Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi (Luke 3:23 – 24). Luke doesn’t make mention of the name Mary at all when tracing the genealogy of Jesus in chapter 3.
Another theory like “virgin birth” etc. are only ancient theory which had no proof in the Bible. The new translation of the Old Testament by the catholic church had corrected the verse in Isaiah 7:14. Here is the verse in Hebrew: … hine ha’alma hara veyoledet ben … English: … behold the maiden will conceive and bear a son… The Hebrew word for “Alma” is a woman who got married but was still young. So it should be translated as “a Maiden” and not a virgin. Hebrew word for “virgin” is “Betula”. Isaiah did not use the word BETULA instead he used the word “alma’ meaning Maiden. Therefore the translation of the Bible by our Christian brothers was wrong and the theory of Virgin Birth too was wrong. The Catholic Church had corrected the word virgin to maiden, today. But the question is when are they trying to correct the theory of Virgin Birth?
My dear friends, Christianity is a religion with which the western conquerors used to win the heart of many innocent people around the world. Be very diligent in following their way of life physically and spiritually.
Report this comment
October 13th, 2009 at 4:19 pm
Well, Haokip before i gave you the answer of your question—- can you tell me. How did Moses struck a rock to bring forth water?
What ever that come on your wit is the answer to your question.
Do not try to resolve ‘God’ Scientifically. he is Almighty.
Report this comment
October 13th, 2009 at 5:44 pm
@Barlev Haokip, you do have a valid point.
As per my experience in following and trusting my life with this Nazarene “Jesus Christ”, i have experience His Grace in my personal life each day, and that is one great proof that i can firmly say that He lives, Jesus lives. All other bantering seems hollow and insignificant if you can’t say that u too experience it in your personal life.
And btw, i’m not some fanatic christian, i’ve read many non-christian books which many christians will loathe and condemn even before they know the contents (like the Da Vinci Code). My views are quite open and i’m mature to know what is fiction and what is true.
But regarding this issue, it’s better one does a profound soul-searching and see what to really believe in your heart and trust someone your life in this earth..and till eternity. God bless you and remember He loves everyone.
Report this comment
October 14th, 2009 at 2:48 pm
DOTEA-nu poh khan Mizoram chu ala vei khap kha, Nihna chianglo tak ho hi chu ooo ! !
Report this comment