Thank you for your response, Jim (if I may call you that). Also, if I
may quote freely,
"Why should we suppose that Matthew or his community did require a
I think for the most part people had assumed that Matthew was more
Judaistic in his gospel, thus for the tight regulations regarding
genealogical descent and whatnot. Even scholars like Loisy reconstruct
1.16 as "And Joseph begat Jesus, called Christ" citing embarrassment
to such a minimal theologically passage. However, there really isn't a
need to assume that Matthew's community (from what we can evince
thereof) were so tight regarding such.
"Yet, there are plenty of commentators who work any potential
ambiguity of Matthew to try and make this genealogy a biological
genealogy of the biological mother of Jesus. It seems to be a
misplaced effort. First, the interest in the genealogy is to
establish the legal inheritance of Jesus. As written, the natural
reading of the genealogy is that of Joseph, husband of Mary. None of
the other women in the genealogy are given patronyms or other
genealogical data. Also, the New Testament as a whole turns its back
on sexual reproduction, taking more interest in conversion and
charism. Finally, a common way to square the two genealogiesis has
the non-royal Davidic line as heirs of David's line when the royal
line is made eunuchs during the exile. This explanation goes back at
least as far as Tyndale who places it in the margin of his translation
of Matthew 1. Even for conservatives it is unnecessary to make one of
the genealogies biological."
I myself do not assume such a position, though I have argued for it
before, because of the tampering one would have to do with the text. I
merely placed it there to refute some of their theories which now seem
ludicrous. However, prior tampering is evident, and the lack of one
genealogy does make it seem suspect. What was originally there?
Perhaps we will never know. My own theory indicates that whatever may
have originally been there is now lost, most likely altered by the
final editor of Matthew before major circulation.