Jesus First Family Tree Analysis
The first fragment is taken from the first chapter of THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW, and the second fragment is from the third chapter of THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. LUKE. These two fragments provide Jesus’s family tree, however comparing the fragments one can notice a difference between the two given family trees. First, the first family tree appears (the first fragment) at the beginning of the first gospel. St. Matthew explains that Jesus is a descendent of David and Abraham, which may indicate Jesus’s Jewish and royal blood. In addition, St. Matthew’s use of the word “begat,” which means “to procreate,” can indicate a strong natural biological bond within the family tree (OED web). One may consider that the first family tree explains
…show more content…
Matthew reveals Jesus’s origins, it is less confusing to comprehend the second fragment. The second fragment explains Jesus’s lineage according to St. Luke. This family tree appears in the third gospel, there St. Luke explains that “Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age.” At the very beginning one can notice the fact that Joseph “was the son of Heli,” as apposed to St. Matthew version, where “Jacob begat Joseph.” As noticeable from the fragment, St. Luke does not uses the word “beget,” which may lead to the answer to the question of — how Joseph possesses two fathers ? St. Luke does not make the claim that Heli is the biological father of Joseph. Therefore, without specific information, one can speculate the true meaning of Heli’s relation to Joseph. Eventually, the fragment provides evidence to a different lineage in St. Luke’s family tree. For example, St. Luke questions Joseph’s credibility being ״as was supposed” Jesus’s father. In addition, the different order and names of the people who fill the family tree show the different lineage in this version, as apposed to the family tree in the first fragment. As a final note, although the family trees provide different perspectives on Jesus’s origins, they still maintain the acknowledgment that royal blood runs in Jesus’s veins, as proof, both trees mention King David as part of the
Matthew reveals Jesus’s origins, it is less confusing to comprehend the second fragment. The second fragment explains Jesus’s lineage according to St. Luke. This family tree appears in the third gospel, there St. Luke explains that “Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age.” At the very beginning one can notice the fact that Joseph “was the son of Heli,” as apposed to St. Matthew version, where “Jacob begat Joseph.” As noticeable from the fragment, St. Luke does not uses the word “beget,” which may lead to the answer to the question of — how Joseph possesses two fathers ? St. Luke does not make the claim that Heli is the biological father of Joseph. Therefore, without specific information, one can speculate the true meaning of Heli’s relation to Joseph. Eventually, the fragment provides evidence to a different lineage in St. Luke’s family tree. For example, St. Luke questions Joseph’s credibility being ״as was supposed” Jesus’s father. In addition, the different order and names of the people who fill the family tree show the different lineage in this version, as apposed to the family tree in the first fragment. As a final note, although the family trees provide different perspectives on Jesus’s origins, they still maintain the acknowledgment that royal blood runs in Jesus’s veins, as proof, both trees mention King David as part of the