ALL HUMAN ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS

JESUS CHRIST IS SET FORTH WITH ALL THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS (BASIC INNER STRUCTURE) OF A TRUE HUMAN BEING

 

 

What are These Elements?

"And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."  1 Thess. 5:23

The physical, psychical, pneumatic nature of man. There will not only be the perfecting of each part, but the perfecting of all three in their proper relationships.
 Paul, in writing to the Thessalonians said, "May your spirit and soul and body be preserved entire, without blame." That is a recognition of the threefold fact of human personality finally reached. Man is essentially spirit and flesh, and he has a mind, or consciousness, or soul. The spirit is the essential, the body is the expressional, and the mind is the consciousness, which is either spiritual or fleshly according to whether spirit or flesh is in the ascendant in the life. The distinction between spirit and soul is sharply maintained throughout the Scriptures.... I think the teaching of revelation concerning the nature of man was most lucidly expressed by Justin Martyr, "As the body is the house of the soul, so is the soul the house of the spirit."
 The spirit is justified when you believe, the mind is sanctified through processes, but not until the perfected body is given to us can we come to the ultimate meaning of our salvation in Christ. In this tabernacle we groan, not until the body is made the perfect instrument of the spirit life.
Physical, Psychical, Pneumatical nature of man with the perfection of each part of the personality which would be the perfecting of the body, of the mind, and of the spirit. The spirit is justified when we believe; the mind is sanctified through processes; but not until the perfected body is given to us can we come to the ultimate meaning of our salvation in Christ and our very purpose for existence.

Our Lord has all These Three Elements

John 2:21 "But he spake of the temple of his body."
John 12:27 "Now is my soul troubled; and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour: but for this cause came I unto this hour."
Luke 23:46 "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

Certain Texts Seem to Contradict this Idea
John 1:14 - "the Word became flesh"

But "flesh" here means more than merely the body.
cf. John 1:13, 3:6 - total human nature

Heb. 2:14 - "flesh and blood" - total human nature
cf. Matt. 16:17 for proof of meaning

THE HUMANITY OF CHRIST

THE HUMANITY OF CHRIST

Introduction:

We have seen that the Word of God presents Jesus Christ as one who is truly God, and then that as God He became incarnate in human nature. We shall now see that this human nature of His was genuine and complete. If the Deity of Christ is important, so also is His Humanity.

THE BIBLE SPEAKS OF CHRIST AS OF ONE WHO IS TRULY HUMAN

He is Called by Names Which Imply Human Nature

1 Tim. 2:5 "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus."
John 8:40 "But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham."
1 Cor. 15:21, 47 "For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead."
"The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven."
John 5:27 ASV "The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven."
Matt. 1:1 "The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham."
Mark 6:3 "Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him."
Luke 2:12, 43 "And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger."
"And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it."

Certain Expressions Also Imply a True Human Nature

Heb. 2:14 "Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil."
Rom. 1:3 "Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh."
Rom. 9:5 "Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen."
Acts 2:30 "Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne."

THE PROBLEM OF THE TWO GENEALOGIES

The Problem of the Two Genealogies

This is an intricate problem to which many solutions have been given (Barnes). But there seems to be no question about the genealogy in Matthew. It is Joseph's. Luke's gives the genealogy of Mary.

Barnes declares that most commentators take this view. This includes men Like Andrews, Ellicott, Godet, Lange, Plumptre, Robertson, Weiss, etc.

Here are Some of the Arguments for This View:

1. It is not likely that there are two genealogies of Joseph, because they divide after David. Matt. 1:6 starts with Solomon, while Luke 3:31 begins with Nathan.
2. If two persons are involved, then it is only logical to regard Mary as one.
3. Mary was certainly of the lines of David (Luke 1:32; 2:4-5).

The Luke genealogy can be interpreted thusly (Luke 3:23).
The parenthesis should be "as was supposed of Joseph)"
Godet says omission of the article before "Joseph" sets him completely outside the genealogy.
"Heli" would be the father (or ancestor) of Mary.
Jesus would thus be the grandson of Heli (If parenthesis is omitted).
The Greek simply affirms that Jesus was ("of Heli").
The omission of Mary's name would not be unusual. Such omission was common practice. Cf. Matt. 1:8.

1.  Barnes says that no early enemy of Christianity tried to prove the two genealogies were incorrect. Records (Not owned by Christians) were important and open to the public (cf. Neh. 7:64). The verse from Nehemiah shows the importance of records.
2. This solution of the genealogical problem fits exactly into O.T. Messianic prophecy (Jer. 22:24-30).

Messiah must come out of the loins of David to qualify (Acts 2:30), yet not through the line of Joseph because of the curse against Coniah. "No man of his seed shall prosper sitting on the throne of David (Jer. 22:30).
If Joseph was the father of Jesus, He could not inherit the Royal throne of David.
Messiah must inherit the throne through the royal line of Solomon, yet He dare not be the seed of that line according to the flesh.
The only solution is for the Messiah to be born of a virgin who is a direct descendant of David according to the flesh, and who marries a man of the royal line of Solomon, making the husband His legal father.

This solution is an evidence of the providential guidance of God in preparing the way for the true Messiah to sit upon the throne of David.
The heathen myths are often impure and obscene, but the Biblical account is so chaste and pure that we can read it to children without offense.
Heathen myths required centuries to grow, but the virgin birth of Christ was an established doctrine within one generation.
Polytheistic pagans were ready to believe all kinds of marvelous and fabulous stories about their gods, but the lofty and severe Jewish doctrine of God (as set forth in the O. T.) was not conducive to the sudden growth of supernatural myths.

The Objection to the Biological Miracle:

This is raised by certain men, who feel that it will be an advantage to get rid of the miraculous element in Christianity as far as possible.

• The true Christian sees no barrier to faith in the miracles of Christianity, He rejoices in them.
• But in dealing with the objections, we might well ask how they can account for a sinless man in the midst of a sinful humanity. For a sinless man is a greater miracle in the moral realm than a Virgin Birth in the biological realm.
• Nothing whatever is gained, therefore, in dropping the Virgin Birth: The man who accepts the sinlessness of Christ has no valid or rational reason for rejecting the Virgin Birth as far as the miraculous is concerned. To be consistent, he would have to reject the bodily resurrection of Christ also.
• A. B. Bruce was right in observing that "with the denial of the Virgin Birth generally goes the denial of the Virgin Life."

 

Passages Speaking of Joseph as Christ's "father".

Matt. 13:55
Luke 4:22
John 6:42
Luke 2:27, 33 (ASV)
Luke 2:48
John 1:45

• Joseph was His legal father -- even today we would call such a man the "father" of an adopted child.

The alleged heathen myth analogies. (Machen, VBC, pp. 317-379)

• These myths do not speak of virgin births at all, but rather of the union of mortal women with gods who came to earth in the form of men. (This is the Mormon view of Christ's birth.) The word "virgin" does not even appear in these myths. Contrast with the Bible!
• These myths are often wild and fanciful in contrast to the sober and reasonable account in Scripture. (For example, the birth of Buddha was made possible by the entrance of a marvelous white elephant into the side of his mother Mary.)

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE VIRGIN BIRTH

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE DOCTRINE OF THE VIRGIN BIRTH

 

 

It is Essential to the Trustworthiness of the Gospel Records

There is only one way to get rid of the Virgin Birth, and that is by making Matthew and Luke either liars or victims of blind credulity.

If we do that, we put a question mark after everything in their writings: the life of Christ, His teachings, His death, resurrection, etc.

Some critics argue that we have been trying to defend too long a battle front, that the line should be shortened by giving up certain parts like, the Virgin Birth, But the difficulty is that we cannot surrender the Virgin Birth without surrendering all along the line, See Luke's claim in 1:1-4. Suppose that he was wrong about the first matter he investi­gated! We could not rely on everything else that Luke wrote.

The Virgin Birth is Vitally Related to our Lord's Sinless Nature

Some argue that the Virgin Birth has no necessary connection with Christ's sinlessness; that if God by a miracle could preserve Christ from the sinful taint of a human mother, the same could have been done in the case of a human father. Therefore, the Virgin Birth is unnecessary. For example, see E. J. Carnell, "The Virgin Birth of Christ", Christianity Today (Dec. 7, 1959), pp. 177-178, reprinted in The Case For Biblical Christianity (ed. Ronald Nash, Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1969), pp. 141 ff.

We reply that it is a hazardous thing for men to judge what was or was not necessary in bringing a sinless Saviour into the world. One thing we do know - God is not in the habit of violating His own laws of nature uselessly. And it is a universal law that sinful humanity in the ordinary process of procreation reproduces its own sinful nature. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh."

Luke 1:35 seems to suggest that our Lord's sinlessness was somehow related to the miraculous manner of His conception and birth (cf. Luke 1:35 ASV margin).

"And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."

The Virgin Birth Gives the Only Reasonable Explanation of the Incarnation of God's Son in Human Flesh

It has been suggested that it is more reasonable to believe that our Lord entered human life in the ordinary manner, through the union of father and mother. But just the opposite is true.

We must remember that the natural result of the ordinary procreative process by human parents always results in the beginning of a new personality.

But Jesus Christ did not get His personality through human birth. He was a person before He was born.

Hence, for the bringing of God's Son into human life, there was not only no need for the ordinary procreative process, but such a process would have been absolutely out of the question.

The use of the ordinary procreative process would have necessitated a special divine miracle to prevent the production of a wholly new personality of the Son of God. Those who deny the Virgin Birth of Christ generally wind up by denying His deity and pre-existent personality. This is logical, if not Biblical.

Those who accept the pre-existence of Christ as a personal being must also accept some kind of a miracle in connection with His entrance into human life with a vital connection to the human race. The miracle of the divine conception and Virgin Birth is by far the most reasonable. By a special creative act the personality of the eternal Son was clothed with human nature and form in the womb of the Virgin Mary.

The Doctrine of the Virgin Birth Protects our Lord (and His mother) From the Blasphemous Alternative

We approach this alternative again only from a sense of duty. There is something utterly abhorrent even in the phrasing of it in human language. But we should be forewarned and forearmed against the defamers of our Blessed Lord. They will tell us with glib assurance that there is nothing wrong with the view that Jesus was a child of Mary and Joseph. Were they not espoused? Is there anything unholy, they will ask, with human parenthood? Is it not a sacred relation ordained by God Himself? Was Jesus not a genuine member of the human race? Why should He not, then, have been born as other men?

But we should mark well that the choice is not between the Virgin Birth and the parenthood of Joseph and Mary. In the only record we have concerning Joseph's relationship with Mary and her child, as it evidently came from Joseph himself (Matt. 1:18-25), Joseph disclaims any procreative responsibility for this child! If our Lord was not born of a Virgin, therefore, then He was the Son of an unknown father, His mother was unfaithful to her betrothal vows, and she lied in saying she had not known a man (Luke 1:34). This is the brutal alternative! Does it appeal to you? Let our Lord Himself answer, as He speaks with deep pathos to His enemies who had made exactly this charge, "ye do dishonor Me" (John 8:49).

Any one of these glib critics, who tells you that the Virgin Birth is not an essential article of Christian faith, would turn pale with anger if such a suggestion were made about his own mother. Yet they do not hesitate to offer this supreme insult to the mother of our Lord, to say nothing about the blasphemy about Christ Himself. The man who asserts the Virgin Birth is a non-essential matter does not deserve the name "Christian".

The Virgin Birth is Necessary to Complete the Picture of the Supernatural Career of the Son of God Upon Earth

Every aspect of His career was shot through with the supernatural. He was a supernatural person, with supernatural knowledge -- power -- works-­message -- life -- death -- resurrection -- ascension! Considering such a Person, would it not have been passing strange if He had entered the world by a merely natural birth? If the Gospel records contained no account of a supernatural birth, it would have marred the harmony of the record. We close with the words of the Ancient Creed, "He was conceived by the Holy Ghost; born of the Virgin Mary."

The Virgin Birth is Necessary to Solve the Enormous Problem of Jeremiah's Curse (22:30) upon the Solomonic Line

Messiah must inherit the throne of David through Solomon (2 Sam. 7:12-16; Acts 2:30).
But Messiah could not be a physical descendant of Solomon through the last legitimate king, Jehoiachin, because of the curse.
The only solution is for Messiah to be born of a virgin who is a physical descendant of David (through Nathan, a brother of Solomon), and who marries a man of the royal line of Solomon. By adopting a boy who had no human father, but was of David's family through his mother, Joseph could pass on to Jesus his title to the throne without the curse that would necessarily accompany it through ordinary generation.

THE VIRGIN BIRTH IN THE RECORDED TESTIMONY OF CHRIST HIMSELF

THE VIRGIN BIRTH IN THE RECORDED TESTIMONY OF CHRIST HIMSELF

 

"And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing. And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business?"

 

These are the first recorded words of our Lord. I resolutely adopt the second marginal reading of the Revised-which is direct translation from the Greek. They were spoken when He was twelve years of age, being then, as Luke so beautifully describes Him, "the boy Jesus." It has often been pointed out that they are very significant as giving the key to the whole of His life and work. The compelling force, the "must" behind all His doing and teaching, was always the same: the things of His Father. He lived and wrought only to do the will of God. There is, however, another value in them. Because He was "the boy Jesus," a most real and true Boy, we gather from these words not only the inherent grace and truth of His character, but also how careful had been His training from babyhood. From the annunciation to Mary, and the revelation to Joseph which Matthew records those two people in a holy fellowship had shared the secret as to that wonderful Child. With what reverent awe and tender solicitude they must have watched His growth and development! And again, because He was a real human Child, they were responsible for all His earliest instruction in "the things of God." The result is seen in this simple, natural, unaffected word, spoken, be it noticed, to both of them: "Knew ye not that I must be in the things of My Father?" The difference between this Boy and our children is admitted; but let us not forget His identity with them. If we remember, we shall ever seek to train them to the same complete conception of life. It is a great thing when as the result of our training and example, our children relate all their lives to God by its "must" of complete surrender.

Preliminary Statement

Joseph and Mary would not likely give it publicity - why?
Certainly the same would be true of Jesus Himself.

There is a passage in Luke 2:48-49 which indicates that our Lord very early knew something about the unusual circumstances  of His own birth.

"Know ye not that I must be in my Father's house?"

Even assuming now that in ordinary matters the child grew in wisdom as Luke says, it is not unreasonable to presume that His parents must have informed Him regarding His origin. No child, thus born, could grow up in company with other children without having faced their cruel taunts. Children are the same in every generation.

The Jews apparently realized that Jesus was claiming a supernatural birth when he insisted that he had come down from heaven (John 6:33,38,41-42).

"For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world."
"For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me."
"The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven. And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?"

Can a man be a Christian and deny the Virgin Birth?
It depends upon what we mean, cf. Machen's view (The Virgin Birth  of Christ pp. 391-97).

The answer of our Lord still stands (John 8:23-24)

"And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world. I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am He, ye shall die in your sins."

OTHER NT WRITERS KNEW OF THE VIRGIN BIRTH

THE VIRGIN BIRTH IN OTHER NEW TESTAMENT WRITINGS

Absence of Account in Mark and John can be Explained in the Light of the Purpose of each Gospel Writer

Matthew - King (genealogy back to David essential)
Mark - Servant (needs no genealogy)
Luke - Man (genealogy back co Adam essential)
John - God (has no genealogy)

Absence of a Complete Account of the Virgin Birth Does not Prove that the Writers Knew Nothing About It

Mark Knew 1:11 (cf. Luke 1:35) "And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased."
"And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."

John Knew 1:14 (cf. 19:25-27)"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."
"Now there stood by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene. When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son! Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home."

Paul Knew -- Gal. 4:4 (in contrast to 4:23, 29) "But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law."
"But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise." "But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now."

VIRGIN BIRTH IN MATTHEW AND LUKE

THE VIRGIN BIRTH IN MATTHEW AND LUKE

Matt. 1:18 - 2:1 & Luke 1:26-28, 2:1-11, 21

Both Accounts Guard Carefully Against Any Suggestion of a Human Father

"Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily. But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us. Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS. Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,"

"And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, thou that art highly favored, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women."
"And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.) And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David:) To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child. And so it was, that, while they were there, the days were accomplished that she should be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn. And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid. And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, which is Christ the Lord."

"And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising of the child, his name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb."

 

Matthew's Genealogy (1:16)

"of whom"  "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ."
Note that Matthew was careful here not to say that Joseph “begat” Christ, departing from the formula used for the other ancestors of Jesus. Thus, Matthew shows that Jesus had the legal right to the throne of David, since Joseph was his foster father. The spiritual right to be king of Israel had to come from David by another route altogether.

Luke's Genealogy (3:23)

"as was supposed of Joseph" "And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,"
The Greek word literally means "according to law." Our translators' use of the expression "as was supposed" is a legal one, intending a legal supposition.

Two separate genealogies are required to solve the problem of Jeremiah's curse upon Jehoiachin (Coniah, Jeconiah - Jer. 22:30)
"Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah."

Messiah must inherit the throne of David through Solomon (2 Sam. 7:12-17)
"And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build an house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men: But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee. And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever. According to all these words, and according to all this vision, so did Nathan speak unto David." 
Cf. Acts 2:30
"Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;"

But Messiah could not be a physical descendant of Solomon through the last legitimate king, Jehoiachin, because of the curse.

The only solution is for Messiah to be born of a virgin who is a physical descendant of David (through Nathan, a brother of Solomon), and who marries a man of the royal line of Solomon. By adopting a boy who had no human father, but was of David's family through his mother, Joseph could pass on to Jesus his title to the throne without the curse that would necessarily accompany it through ordinary generation.

The Two Accounts Agree as to the Main Facts:

• Mother was a woman named Mary - Matt. 1:18, Luke 1:27
• She was a virgin - Matt. 1:18,23; Luke 1:27,34
• She was betrothed (ASV) to a man named Joseph - Matt. 1:18; Luke 1:27.
• Mary becomes with child after her betrothal and before consummation of the Marriage - Matt. 1:18,20; Luke 1:27,34.
• Angels announce the coming birth - Matt. 1:20; Luke 1:26.
• They explain the conception as due to a special creative act of the Holy Spirit - Matt. 1:20; Luke 1:35. (No definite art. with "Holy Spirit" in either text. This emphasizes His power and not His person.
• The child is to be named Jesus - Matt. 1:21; Luke 1:31
• The child is to be the Savior of His people - Matt. 1:21; Luke 2:11.
• Joseph took Mary to be his wife before the Birth - Matt. 1:24; Luke 2:5.
• The child is born in Bethlehem and named Jesus - Matt. 2:1; 1:25; Luke 2:17,21.

There are Differences Between the Two Accounts but No Contradictions

The greatest difference: prominent persons in each account. Joseph in Matthew and Mary in Luke

The Twofold Explanation:

• SOURCES OF INFORMATION: only two people knew the facts - Joseph and Mary. Evidences of Luke's Greek. Chaps 1-3 has Hebraisms, followed by perfect Greek.
• PURPOSES OF THE WRITERS:Matthew tells Joseph's story to show Jesus as King of the Jews. Luke tells Mary's story to show Jesus as the Son of Man. Luke was a doctor and Mary conceivably would have told such a man these things. Christ got His humanity from Mary.

This View is Supported by the Genealogies:

• Matthew goes back to David and Abraham
• Luke goes back to Adam.
• Matthew gives the genealogy of Joseph
• Luke gives the genealogy of Mary

Matthew's genealogy thus supplies the necessary legal claim of Jesus to the royal throne, and Luke's genealogy supplies the necessary physical connection with David himself. Only one genealogy could not have presented the full story of the Davidic throne rights of Jesus.