In the Insight Bk, Vol.1, page 915 it says:
"Reliability of the Gospel Genealogies. The question arises: Why does Matthew leave out some names that are contained in the listings of the other chroniclers? First of all, to prove one's genealogy it was not necessary to name every link in the line of descent."
Is it just me or is something seriously wrong with that statement? If I needed to prove that my grandfather is my grandfather I would have to list my dad as the link between us. A person can't skip a generation in proving a line of descent.
Then on page 916 it talks about the difference in Matthew's genealogy verses Luke's genealogy. It says that Luke's genealogy is actually listing Mary's family and it gives the reason for listing Joseph's name instead of Mary's by quoting from Commentary on Luke, 1981, page 129:
"Ancient sentiment did not comport with the mention of the mother as genealogical link. Among the Greeks a man was the son of his father, not of his mother; and among the Jews the adage was: "The descendant of the mother is not call her descendant."
That may be true but Matthew listed four women on his list. If Luke was listing Mary's family why couldn't he have done the same?
Last question. The Insight Bk says on page 915 that if either Matthew's or Luke's genealogy of Jesus had been in error, any enemies of christianity in the first century would have used that as an opportunity to prove it. Is there really no one in the first century that brought attention to the inconsistencies between the two genealogies?