qmark wrote:Actually, it was understood by the early church that Luke contained Mary's lineage. They did not have a problem with the way it was recorded. Many people were still alive that knew Mary and Jesus at the time it was written. Most scholars today are in agreement with this.
Joseph may not have been His biological father but he was related, being married to Jesus' mother.
What exactly is your point of contention because it obviously goes deeper than what lineage is listed or not. If this were the case, this is the most stupid conversation I have ever seen.
This came out of OT's mention of God's breeding program. If Jesus isn't a (biological) descendent of Adam, then that whole theory is debunked.
Of course the early church doesn't have a problem with the word Joseph in Luke 3:23 because that suited their agenda which was, in part, to somehow prove Jesus is a direct descendent of Adam.
I don't see how most scholars could possibly be in agreement that when Luke 3:23 says Joseph, it means Mary.
Personally, I don't care whose blood Jesus carried inside his body or if he was an alien from the 5526923rd parallel universe. What I care about is the message Jesus carried in his mind.