I understand what you are saying about Matthew; still, he does say, specifically, 14 + 14 + 14 generations, and going from great-great-grandfather to great-great-grandson is not a generation. Also, who knows if the list is accurate with regard to the names he does list? If it is, then Luke's list must be wrong. Joseph was either the son of Jacob or of Heli, etc.

You are also correct, of course, that not everything in the Bible is intended to be taken literally. But when Eccl 1:5, for instance, says that the sun revolves around the earth, that is not a figure of speech, that was the prevailing 'literal' belief at that time. When Leviticus says that the hare cheweth the cud (it dothn't) and the camel parteth not the hoof (it doth), that it clearly intended to be factual. So those are 'facts' that are not 'factual, reliable or dependable'

When Jesus Himself says that the earth has four corners and rests on pillars, that the mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds, that salt can lose its saltiness, and that the end of the age will occur before all of His contemporaries have died, those statements, I guess, fall somewhere in the middle.

Finally, I'd like to make one more point regarding NT referecnes to the first and second OT canons. Let's compare one of each, from those previously discussed. First, one of mine:

'Solomon' says (WS 1:6): 'Wisdom is a spirit that is friendly to people, but she will not forgive anyone who speaks against God, for God knows our feelings and thoughts and hears our every word.'

A century or so later, Jesus says (Mt 12:32): 'Anyone who says something against the Son of Man can be forgiven, but whoever says something against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven now or ever.'

I know of no reference in the protocanon to such an 'unforgivable sin'. If I have missed something, please give me the reference(s). It seems to me very likely that Jesus had this verse in mind. You would disagree, I think, ONLY because it appears in a deuterocanonical book. If the exact quote were in Ecclesiastes (also attributed to Solomon) I believe you would accept it without question, yet both books were in the Septuagint, without distinction, at the time Jesus spoke.

Now lets compare one of yours:

Isaiah 11:1 'The royal line of David is like a tree that has been cut down; but just as new branches sprout from a stump, so a new king will arise from among David's descendants.'

Several centuries later, Matthew writes: '...and made his home in a town called Nazareth. And so what the prophets had said came true: "He will be called a Nazarene."'

Now, caf, I really think that is 'stretching it' far more than any of allusions I provided. I understand that the Hebrew word for 'branch' is built on the consonant group NZR. And there is no question that Isaiah is referring to the promised Messiah here. But Matthew says 'prophets', plural. Which other prophet(s) made such a reference? And given that there are many hundreds of OT references to the Messiah, comprising many thousands of words, I would think that just about any town that Joseph might have chosen could very well have had a name that could be compared with some such OT quote. So, is this prophecy or coincidence? Of course, Luke tells us that Nazareth was Joseph's home in the first place.

In any case, I've enjoyed the exchange, and will look forward to your comments on the other matters.

Finally, a Christmas question, for caf or anyone else who cares to answer: The gospel accounts tell us that Mary and Joseph went to Bethlehem to take part in 'a census of the whole world', for the purpose of taxation, which was held when Quinerius was governor of Syria, and later, Herod slew all male infants in the area. Is either of these events (the census or the slaughter of innocents) recorded by the secular historians of the day? What was the purpose of registering taxpayers in the cities of their ancestors, rather than at their current addresses? And exactly when was Quinerius governor of Syria? I don't know, I'm just asking.