Seems like this one is brought up a lot too.
Matthew and Luke look to give two different lists of
relatives for Jesus, through Joseph, and from that,
people often start getting confused over the differences
seen between the lists.
Click here to see the two lists.
So why the difference?
In Matthew, it starts out saying Jesus is the son of
Abraham. Matthew then gives the LINEAGE from Abraham
to Joseph, and then says that Mary gave birth to Jesus,
but does NOT say that Jesus is directly the son of Joseph.
Jesus is though related to Joseph by the custom of
adoption.
In Luke there is a difference, the text starts out
listing Jesus first, and then says that he's the
son of Joseph, the son of Heli, etc... which then
clearly doesn't align with that given in Matthew.
There are of course reasons for why this occurs.
In the original scriptures, there is no "the son"
between each of the listed names in Luke, that was
added in by the translators. Since there is no
"the son" prior to each name listed after Joseph's,
the names listed can be most any relative of Jesus,
through either Mary's or Joseph's side of the family.
So, looking again at the original text in Luke and
retranslating, here's the verse as it would read
given the listing:
Lu 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty
years of age, being as was the custom, a
descendant of Joseph, of Heli, ...
In other words, Luke is saying that due to Jesus
being adopted and not including "the son" in the
text prior to each listed name, that all the people
listed are related "by custom" and the list is able
to include any of the near and distant relatives of
Jesus... they don't even have to be in order.
In the typical bible translations, for each person
given in the Luke listing, the "the son" was ADDED
by the translators to make the list easier to read
through. They assumed the text was establishing a direct
lineage for Joseph, but they made a mistake when they
got to "Joanna". They continued to insert "the son"
for Joanna, making her the son of Rhesa... certainly
that was a mistake, she'd have to have been a DAUGHTER.
Some translations then caught on to that mistake and
started translating Joanna to "Joannas", I suppose they
thought a letter was missing in the original text.
Clearly the translators had added in the "the son" to
the text when none was given.
Overall, the answer is that Luke is just LISTING
people that Jesus was related to, and Matthew is
the direct LINEAGE for Joseph, who then married Mary.
The middle portion of Luke is of course the common
descent from Abraham to David that most people of the
day would attach to their heritage. And again, note
that since it's a LIST with no "the son" statements,
it doesn't have to be the full lineage from Adam to
Joseph, nor does it have to be any particular order.
As for Matthew's stated lineage of Joseph, the original
text does in fact say that the persons listed were
the direct offspring as given.
God made it all, Jesus died for our sins.
Note: The above information was written by John P. Boatwright and is freely given. The information is simply my opinion based on how I perceive the content discussed. Anyone reading such should use their own judgement as to whether or not the information has any value to them. You may copy portions of the above opinions as long as a reference to this page is included and no text within said portion is altered. If copied to another medium other than the internet, include the entire text. The above content may change over time.
Best wishes.