A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE GENEALOGIES OF JESUS (Matt 1.1-17 and Luke 3.23-38) Espaços -Revista de Teologia e Cultura (ITESP) 27 n. 2 (2019) 271-299 (original) (raw)
Related papers
Abstract: throughout time the genealogies of Jesus (Matt 1.1-17 and Luke 3.23-38) have been interpreted specifically through harmonization theses and theses that include Mary. However, these theses possess a conjectural and artificial basis that creates unconvincing and unacceptable complications to a critical study. This article reviews those theses, pointing out their errors and incongruities. Subsequently, the author engages in a minute analysis of the genealogies. The result of the analysis is the revelation of new details and observations that lead to more logical, appropriate and enlightening solutions.
The Genealogies of Jesus: a complementation
Abstract: this article is a complementation to the article “The Genealogies of Jesus”, published in Revista Bíblica 71/3-4 (2009) 193-218. This complementation has been done visually through four tables that provide enhanced clarification of the theses presented in the preceding article. It also contains explanations to a few minor questions, such as that of the two possible gaps found in Matt 1.1-17 and that of the observation of constant significant numerical intervals between the initial letter subgroups found in Luke 3.23-28, which may reveal the method used by Luke to assemble his genealogy.
Jesus’ Genealogies: Coherence in Content
Summary: Jesus’ genealogies in Matthew and Luke are frequently dismissed as ‘irreconciliable’. Such claims, however, like certain defences of Jesus’ genealogies, are too quick. Matthew and Luke differ from one another, not because they are poor historians, nor because one of them provides Joseph’s genealogy while the other provides Mary’s, nor even because they are ‘theological genealogies’ (whatever such things might be), but because two individuals in Joseph’s ancestry (viz. Shealtiel and Matthan/Matthat) chose to be adopted/grafted into different family lines within their clan. Keywords: Matthew 1, Luke 3, genealogies, Jesus, Jehoiachin, Messiah, adoption. Date: Nov. 2019.
The Role of Mary in the Infancy Narrative of Luke
Only in the infancy narrative of Luke, Mary emerges in the canonical writings of the New Testament with a literary voice of her own and an extensive role to play. The Pauline corpus does not even mention her by her name and Mark, being first to provide her name, does not speak of her much more. 1 Even though Matthew's gospel contains its own infancy narrative, the mother of Jesus plays there only a role of the virginal fulfilment of Isaiah's prophecy and is more of an object than an actor. 2 In comparison with that, the first two chapters of Luke provide us with an abundance of material for study. Approaching this richness, I would like to focus on the specific question of the role which Mary plays in the infancy story in the context of the overall narrative of Luke-Acts and on how this bears upon the shaping of the early tradition regarding Mary.
Kingdom and Family in Conflict. A Contribution to the Study of the Historical Jesus
J. J. Pilch (ed.), Social Scientific Models for Interpreting the Bible. Essays by the Context Group in Honor of Bruce J. Malina, Leiden 2001, 210-238, 2001
The Synoptic gospels have preserved some sayings and pronouncements (Bultmannian apophthegms) in which Jesus asks his followers to neglect important family obligations (Luke 9:57-62 par. and 14:26 par.). In other cases, following Jesus means leaving home (Mark 1:16-20 par. and 10:28-30 par.), while fidelity to him provokes strong tensions among members of the same family (Mark 13:12 par. and Luke 12:51-53 par.). These saying and pronouncements which reflect a conflict between the disciples and their families have not received the attention they deserve in the research of recent years (Barton 1994:220; Jacobson 1995:376). Doubtless the most comprehensive study is the monograph by S. Barton on Mark and Matthew (Barton 1994). In a brief article A. Jacobson has studied the sayings in Q, suggesting leads to follow in subsequent research (jacobson 1995). P. Kristen has published (1995) a monograph in which he studies the relationships between discipleship and family in Mark and Q, and J. Neyrey an article (1995) which situates the original macarisms of Q in the context of the disruption of the family to which the texts quoted above refer. These publications and older ones which had addressed this subject in the context of a wider research (Schussler Fiorenza 1989; Theissen 1979) have studied these passages at the level of the redaction of the gospels (Barton; Kristen), of Q (Iacobson; Kristen) or in the Jesus movement (Schussler Fiorenza; Theissen), but not in the context of Jesus and his disciples, which is where most of them had their origin. The recent studies on the historical Jesus deal with these passages in a brief and incomplete way (Crossan 1991:299-302; Theissen and Mertz
Harvard Theological Review, 2005
In 1986, Michel van Esbroeck published a remarkable new Life of the Virgin that not only is among the most profound and eloquent Mariological writings of early Byzantium but also presents a useful compendium of early apocryphal traditions about Mary. 1 Some of the Life's episodes are already well known from their original sources, such as the Protevangelium of James and the early dormition apocrypha, but many other extrabiblical traditions appearing in this Life of the Virgin are not otherwise attested in early Christian literature. This is true especially of the section that overlaps with the gospels, where the Life expands the canonical narratives in ways unprecedented (to my knowledge) in Christian apocryphal literature. By writing Mary into the story at key points and augmenting several of her more minor appearances, the Life portrays Mary as a central fi gure in her son's ministry and also as a leader of the nascent church. The result is a veritable "Gospel of Mary" in *I would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers at the Harvard Theological Review for their helpful comments and suggestions.
THE FOUR OT WOMEN IN MATTHEW'S GENEALOGY OF JESUS
Matthew and Luke give an account of the conception, birth and infancy of Jesus (cf. Matt 1:18-2:23 and Luke 1:26-38; 2:1-52). This information provides materials for reflection on the person and mission of Jesus himself as God and man. The evangelists enhance their message on the humanity of Jesus by tracing his ancestry to historical figures and events prior to him in the genealogy (Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38). Jesus is identified in the two genealogies as historically belonging to a family of men and women. The two genealogies are modelled on OT genealogies in Genesis, Numbers, Ezra and Ruth among others. Female names are generally rare in OT genealogies (see Gen 5; 11:10-32). Matthew on the other hand and in contrast to Luke mentions four women apart from Mary in his genealogy. They are Tamar (1:3), Rahab (1:5a), Ruth (1:5b) and the wife of Uriah (Matt 1:6; Bathsheba). The inclusion is in this perspective catchy. This article studies the four women and their stories in the OT in view of establishing the evangelist’s probable reason for mentioning them. They are a clue to the novelty and import of the Matthean genealogy.
Toward a Documented Biography of Jesus
In our own time, many fine works have endeavored to extricate the “historical” Jesus from the Gospelic context of church image and message. The results have been mostly snippets of insight stitched together to accomplish a patchwork portrait that is always impressionistic, and usually colored by the bias of its author. Recent “historical” theories that Jesus was a political rebel causing social disturbances, or was a religious revisionist discarding Torah law, once again fill the literary ether with intuitive fantasy rather than fact. As remarkable a claim as it may seem, my new book, A Documented Biography of Jesus Before Christianity (anticipated release, summer 2015) now presents a profoundly different Jesus than Christians or Jews have met before, trapped in a drama that should deeply move all of us. On the technical side, my method shares nothing with Bultmann’s two-source critical approach--or with the contrarian criteria establishing Geza Vermes’ “Jewish” Jesus. Rather, it depends on hypothesizing historicity of specific events excavated from beneath strata of Christianizing theology if their occurrence illuminates other hitherto obscure scriptural passages. I have labelled my approach, “The method of precipitous insight.” To wit: If an insight into an event in the Gospels is capable of dramatically clarifying thematic and linguistic uncertainties found elsewhere in the text, the insight, called “precipitous,” is elevated to the level of hypothesis. As hypothesis, it may be “tested” by its predicted consequences. If, for example, it links to other text, creating further pronounced insight, the exponential increase in clarity is likely an advance toward a unified theory. Finding the historical core in the Gospels’ “midrashim” The use of “lesson-legends” to amplify and interpret religious truths was a deeply-rooted literary technique of the ancient rabbis. Such legends embellished and dramatized episodes described in the Torah (giving them an extra aura of divine intention) and authoring them was a standard practice in Jesus’ era. The Hebrew name for them, midrashim, meant made-up stories which interpret the meaning of presumed actual events. In the early centuries of our era, such dramatic, theological enhancement through legends was never created from “whole cloth,” but consisted of fancifully embroidering events considered historical, with their imaginative elaboration built on the supposed actual occurrences. Therefore, one may say, a midrash always had at its core an event regarded by its author as historically true. Christianity’s most famous candidates include: Jesus being born from a virgin, his healing incurable diseases, turning water to wine; Jesus contemplating the adulteress brought before him for judgment, his temptation by satan on the Jerusalem precipice, walking on water, calming the storm, feeding thousands from a small basket of food, and giving Peter the keys to the coming Kingdom of God. Additionally, Jesus’ own words were often cloaked in interpretive “midrashic” embellishment, and they too must be the subject of close scrutiny and re-translation in order to unearth what he actually said, and reach the New Testament’s historical stratum. When, like oysters, the Christianizing shells are opened for inspection, the startling drama of Jesus’ life emerges as the “pearls” of history are strung together. The reader should be aware that midrashic analysis is not the same as searching out a natural explanation for seeming miracles. For example, others have suggested that the “miracle of feeding a multitude from a few loaves” may be explained by a storage facility for baked goods to which Jesus had access. Attempting to reduce the “miracles” to mundane episodes by guessing at “plausible explanations” is a false step obfuscating what actually occurred. To speculate in such a manner is to further gloss and conceal the interconnected sequence of unfolding occurrences, burying the actual history beneath the description. The midrashim, it should be stated, differ from parables--meshalim-- which do not have a historical core. Meshalim--are short stories with a lesson meant to interpret or explain a higher moral truth, generally embodied in a scriptural passage. They are familiar to us as the Gospels’ “parables.”
Something about Mary? Remarks about the Five Women in the Matthean Genealogy
New Testament Studies, 2010
The occurrence and significance of the five women in Jesus' genealogy in the Gospel of Matthew has been a source of continuous scholarly debate. Taking a gender-sensitive approach, this contribution argues for looking at the five women as one group, viewing them as simultaneously accentuating the messianic line that Jesus is part of and vindicating his somewhat irregular birth, as well as substantiating the openness of Israel for Gentiles by adducing precedents from Israel's history.