Some Bible critics, including atheists and skeptics, point to an alleged contradiction between Matthew 1:6 and Luke 3:31 in the genealogy of Jesus.
According to them, these passages present two distinct lines of descent from King David, which would call into question the coherence of Scripture. However, a close analysis shows that there is no contradiction, but rather two different approaches to the genealogy of Christ.
The passages in question
- Matthew 1:6: “Jesse begot King David. David begot Solomon by the wife of Uriah.”
- Luke 3:31: “…the son of Melea, the son of Menan, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David.”
While Matthew claims that Jesus is descended from David through Solomon, Luke says that he is descended through Nathan.
To understand this apparent conflict, it is important to consider the purpose of each evangelist and the Jewish genealogical tradition.
Matthew presents the legal line through Joseph
Matthew writes his gospel primarily for a Jewish audience, so he emphasizes Jesus’ kingship. He presents the genealogy of Joseph, Jesus’ legal father, and follows the line of Solomon, the legitimate heir to David’s throne.
By establishing Jesus’ legal right to David’s throne, Matthew fulfills the messianic prophecy of 2 Samuel 7:12-13:
“When your days are fulfilled and you rest with your fathers, I will raise up your offspring after you, who will come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom.”
Luke presents the biological line through Mary
Luke, on the other hand, addresses his gospel to a Gentile audience and emphasizes the humanity of Christ. Many scholars argue that Luke 3 actually presents the genealogy of Mary, not Joseph.
In this case, Heli (mentioned in Luke 3:23) would be Mary’s father, and Joseph would be her legal son-in-law. Following this line, Jesus is biologically descended from David through Nathan, thus fulfilling another part of the prophecy.
Explanation based on Jewish tradition
In Jewish culture, genealogies were recorded through the paternal line. However, if a woman had no brothers, her husband could be recorded as the “son” of her father-in-law, according to a practice known in Mosaic law. This would explain why Joseph appears in Luke’s genealogy, even though it is in Mary’s line.
Furthermore, the distinction between the legal line (Matthew) and the biological line (Luke) is consistent with the duality of Jesus as legitimate King (Matthew) and direct descendant of David (Luke).
Conclusion
There is no contradiction in the genealogy of Jesus. Rather, we find two complementary approaches:
- Matthew presents the legal line through Joseph and Solomon, establishing Jesus’ royal right.
- Luke presents the biological line through Mary and Nathan, assuring his Davidic descent.
This double lineage not only reinforces Jesus’ legitimacy as Messiah, but also demonstrates the internal coherence of Scripture.
Sources consulted
F. F. Bruce, «The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?»
Jerusalem Bible (Latin American Edition)
Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 437
