| ultima said:
So your argument is: "JUST LOOK! IT'S OBVIOUS!" when the words on the page clearly say the opposite. You do know that in Jewish tradition an adoptee is considered a full family member, and would be included in the family tree, right? |
So on one hand we have two distinct lineages for Joseph and choose to consider it an adoption, while on the other hand we can interpret it as him being the in-law.
For some reason you insist on considering it an adoption and the genealogies a contradiction.
Whereas using the in-law interpretation, which makes much more sense given the importance of Mary as the virgin mother of Christ and hence the importance of a genealogy on her side, we get a matching picture.
I mean the answer is really obvious. I'm sorry. It's just not a contradiction at all. On one end it's Joseph's true lineage, on the other it's Mary's. Simple shit.
