Offshoot discussion of "what religion are you" thread

[Lief Erikson]

The fact that these two lineages of Joseph are contradictory as to
Joseph's forefathers calls both into question and clearly shows that
the Gospels contain errors and were thus the work of fallible men and
not God.

It has been claimed that Luke was giving the ancestors of Mary, but
this is spurious, since she is not even mentioned. Further, Luke
mentions clearly in Luke 3:23 that Jesus was not the son of Joseph saying
that "he was supposed the son of Joseph". If Luke was not giving Joseph's
paternal ancestry, he could easily have said so as he did in the case
of Jesus.

I have not studied this subject, but I shall answer anyway.

Luke has been shown to be an incredibly accurate historian in all historical details of the time period. He states his goal to write accurately in the beginning of his book, and there are no writings of the time challenging Jesus' descent that I know of. Mary's not being mentioned is not unusual. Note that no women were mentioned in this genealogy and almost none in the one in Matthew. Very few times were they mentioned in other genealogies either.

Originally written in the NIV notes
There are several differencese between Luke's genealogy and Matthew's (1:2-16). Matthew begins with Abraham (the father of the Jewish people), while Luke traces the line in the reverse order and goes back to Adam, showing Jesus' relationship to the whole human race (see 2:31). From Abraham to David, the genealogies of Matthew and Luk,e are almost the same, but from David on they are different. Some scholars suggest that this is b3ecause Matthew traces the legal descent of the house of David using only heirs to the throne, while Luke traces the complete line of Joseph to David. A more likely explanation, however, is that Matthew follows the line of Joseph (Jesus' legal father), while Luke emphasizes that of Mary (Jesus' blood relative). Althought tracing a genealogy through the mother's side was unusual, so was the virgin birth. Luke's explanation here that Jesus was the son of Joseph, "so it was thought" (v. 23), brings to mind his explicit virgin birth statement (1:34-35) and suggests the importance of the role of Mary in Jesus' genealogy.

Furthermore, I have one other thing I'd like to point out about this part of your quote:

Jeremiah 22:30
30 The Lord says this, list this man (King Jehoiakim) as
childless; a man who made a failure of his life, since none
of his descendants will have the fortune to sit on the throne
of David or to rule in Judah again.

Luke 18:33-37
Pilate then went back inside the palace, summoned Jesus and asked him, "Are you the king of the Jews?"

"Is that your own idea," Jesus asked, "or did others talk to you about me?"

"Am I a Jew?" Pilate replied. "It was your people and your chief priests who handed you over to me. What is it you have done?"

Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place."

"You are a king, then!" said Pilate.

Jesus answered, "You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me."

John 16:33
"I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world."

It says in another passage of the Bible that his dominion is everlasting. He isn't a ruler over a physical realm, but he has overcome the world. Christianity spread and endured and grew large, while physical reigns have fallen.

It is possible that the statement of the Lord to King Jehoiakim was speaking of physical rulership. Jesus himself says that his kingdom is not of this world. And yet we have two genealogies from trustworthy historians pointing his line to David.

Anyway, I don't find it a strong contradiction to the Bible's accuracy, or the using of the prophesies as an evidence. You have brought up an argument that questions one prophesy.