Now Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, the son of Heli,
Why would the doctor Luke include this small subsection into this statement? Why does this statement differ from what Matthew tell us in Chapter 1 where he says Jacob was the father of Joseph?
Matthew 1:16 And Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary,
of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ.
We all know that Joseph was not the natural father of Jesus. God was his Father. Mary was a virgin and the Holy Spirit came upon her to conceive Jesus. The Seed of God was placed into her and the result was baby Jesus.
Skeptics want to tell you the Bible is incorrect because of these two different lines of genealogy but they are wrong. The two lines are from the two people who raised Jesus as their son. One, Mary, had her blood, her DNA in the Messiah and Joseph, the supposed father, but only the adopted father, was the other. Two separate lines for two separate people who both were the worldly parents of Jesus. One by blood and one by adoption.
All of this to fulfill the prophesy from hundred of years prior to the birth of Jesus. Joseph was from the lineage of King David and fulfilled the prophesy from 2 Samuel 7:12–16; Isaiah 11:1; and Jeremiah 23:5–6. While there was no blood DNA of Joseph in Jesus he "as was supposed" the father of Jesus. Remember that in those times women's rights were nothing. There were no women's rights. A woman pregnant out of wedlock, which made her guilty of fornication or adultery were killed. Very little things about women were noted in the Bible due to the times of the day.
When Matthew gives his linage it goes all of the way to Adam, the original son of God. Jesus was from the seed of Adam because of his blood DNA from Mary. What a miraculous thing to contemplate! The writer of the Bible included both linages of Jesus. One to fulfill prophesy and the other to fulfill God's promise to mankind that He would save them.