I'm confused while I am reading the gospels again,especially concerning Jesus's birth,It frightens me to think either Mathew or Luke can be wrong,or making up some details.Then how can I trust its credibility ..Why are there differences?Doesnt God think the details important? Sorry but I am a new believer and these are the questions in my mind now.Can anyone explain something?I really want to believe with all my heart.This is really important to me.
contradiction concerning Jesus's birth in Mathew and Luke ?
- Thread starter Sweet_
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
actually if all of the gospels were identical would be more suspect. These accounts were written long after the events. As they said
2 Peter 1:16
For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty
if they had been faked they would have taken greater care to make sure it all matched. Instead they were relying on their own memories which definitely would have varied on tiny details over the years and from different perspectives.
2 Peter 1:16
For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty
if they had been faked they would have taken greater care to make sure it all matched. Instead they were relying on their own memories which definitely would have varied on tiny details over the years and from different perspectives.
Last edited:
In Matthew,there's murder of babies,the rest didn't mention it at all.Is it historically true? Mattew mentioned that Jesus's family fleed to Egypt and lived there till Herod was dead and moved to Nazareth.But Luke gives me the impression that baby Jesus always lived in Bethlehem except when they visited Jerusalem.Then they moved to Nazareth.
yeah I concur
MATTHEW 1
18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily.
20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins.
22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus.
[h=3]Matthew 2[/h]King James Version (KJV)
2 Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,
2 Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.
3 When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.
4 And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born.
it doesn't say anything contradictory it just leaves out details Luke covers
MATTHEW 1
18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily.
20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people from their sins.
22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name Jesus.
[h=3]Matthew 2[/h]King James Version (KJV)
2 Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,
2 Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.
3 When Herod the king had heard these things, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him.
4 And when he had gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the people together, he demanded of them where Christ should be born.
it doesn't say anything contradictory it just leaves out details Luke covers
Jesus addressed this................
John 21:20) Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee? 21 .) Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? 22 .) Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me. 23 .) Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? 24 .) This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true. 25 .) And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.
Hey, works for me!
John 21:20) Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee? 21 .) Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? 22 .) Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me. 23 .) Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? 24 .) This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true. 25 .) And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.
Hey, works for me!
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself" (Matthew 27:5)
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out" (Acts 1:18).
[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Ancient terminology did not recognize “hanging” just as hanging from a rope, but as hanging on anything. For instance, it is said accurately that Jesus was “hung” on a tree, even though he was nailed there. I believe Judas hung himself not with a rope around his neck, but by impaling himself on a pike causing his intestines to spill-out which in ancient terminology would have been referred to as “Judas hanging himself.” The bible isn't specific, but it says Judas fell headlong, not as a person falling feet-first from a rope. So its likely he secured a spear into the ground, piled up some stones, and jumped/fell headfirst, thus making Matthew and Acts correct.
http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/649434
[/FONT]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out" (Acts 1:18).
[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Ancient terminology did not recognize “hanging” just as hanging from a rope, but as hanging on anything. For instance, it is said accurately that Jesus was “hung” on a tree, even though he was nailed there. I believe Judas hung himself not with a rope around his neck, but by impaling himself on a pike causing his intestines to spill-out which in ancient terminology would have been referred to as “Judas hanging himself.” The bible isn't specific, but it says Judas fell headlong, not as a person falling feet-first from a rope. So its likely he secured a spear into the ground, piled up some stones, and jumped/fell headfirst, thus making Matthew and Acts correct.
http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/649434
[/FONT]
[/FONT]
Yes, and acctually when hebrew man (even king) had died without childreen a brother (or closest relative) of him, entered in intercources with his wife to restore a seed - and a heir counted to be an offspring of a died man.
So, written genealogy (existed in times of Jesus) included both definitions (of the formal and real ancestors).
So, written genealogy (existed in times of Jesus) included both definitions (of the formal and real ancestors).
It is most reasonable to consider that both of these genealogies are very likely taken from the already recorded genealogical registers then in use and fully accepted by the Jews. Although there are differences, they are nevertheless ingeniously accurate.
Considering Matthew’s account, this record considers the paternal linage from Solomon to Joseph (Jesus’ foster father) to identify Jesus as a legal heir. Luke’s account considers the maternal linage from Nathan (David’s other son) to Heli (Mary’s father) to identify Jesus’ blood line. Ancient sentiment/traditions did not reconcile the mention of mothers as a genealogical link. Fathers without sons would consider a son-in-law as a “son” for the purposes as a legal heir. Therefore, Joseph was considered the son of Heli since he was married to Mary. Compare Matthew 1:16 and Luke 3:23. This in no way invalidates the prophecy that Jesus would come from the linage of David and most important being the son of Almighty God.
Considering Matthew’s account, this record considers the paternal linage from Solomon to Joseph (Jesus’ foster father) to identify Jesus as a legal heir. Luke’s account considers the maternal linage from Nathan (David’s other son) to Heli (Mary’s father) to identify Jesus’ blood line. Ancient sentiment/traditions did not reconcile the mention of mothers as a genealogical link. Fathers without sons would consider a son-in-law as a “son” for the purposes as a legal heir. Therefore, Joseph was considered the son of Heli since he was married to Mary. Compare Matthew 1:16 and Luke 3:23. This in no way invalidates the prophecy that Jesus would come from the linage of David and most important being the son of Almighty God.
Jesus was descended from the house of Levi through Mary's mother, Anne. We know this through the fact that Elizabeth's son, John is truly of the tribe of Levi through Aaron the first High Priest. Jesus was descended from King Solomon through Mary's father. We know this because God promised that Jesus would be truly descended from King David's royal line. Jesus is adoptively descended from Nathan through Joseph. We know this because Joseph is a descendant of King David, but there is never an allusion that he is of royal lineage.