Paul - Mary genealogy

[Guest]

I ignore a lot of what the Talmud says, actually everything it says. The Talmud is not an authority for me, the Aramaic sriptures are.

The Scriptures are inspired and infallible. The Talmud on the other hand is collection of formerly oral traditions from the successors to the Pharisees, useful as an authority in a like manner to other historical and theological works of men such Philo. Josephus, etc.

The Aramaic scriptures read "Yosef bar-Heli" in the third chapter of Luqa. I don't care what Ignatius, Chrysostom.... let alone the Talmud says about the topic. The only thing I care about is the text.

They used the Greek translations, and the Greek mistranslated it and the only reasonable solution they could find to explain the two contradicting genealogies of Yosip was to say the one in Luqa was Mary's (probably because of the detailed virgin birth story in it, despite what the genealogy itself said), and the one in Mattai was Yosip's. I was never very happy with that explanation even when all I had was the Greek, but accepted it because I couldn't come up with anything better myself. But, I see no validity in holding on to a direct contradiction in the Greek when there is a complete solution in the Aramaic, because of an Anti-Yeshu polemic in the Talmud (which may have been dependent upon the Greek tradition of Luke being Mary's genealogy) and the traditional workaround of those who used the inferior Greek texts which produced the workaround in the first place.

Shlama, Craig