The idea that the gospels must be consistent. The best case here seems to be that they are preserving two traditions side-by-side, an older one of Davidic (or Priestly, depending on the Gospel), and a newer one of divine birth, without reconciling.

Oh, I don’t think the gospels need to be consistent! OMG no! The tensions between the accounts is where the life is. My argument was much closer to what I think you said - if the gospel writers got things “wrong” (from the perspective of their tradition) it was for a reason (an agenda).

Gotcha. Yeah, I think we all mutually agree that the two genealogies were agendas driven, especially Matthew’s, which is almost a work of literature.

And recognising that opens so many doors that remain closed if you spend your energy fighting to reconcile them!

If that’s not what you are arguing, I apologize, but the urge to claim that the gospels are univocal and without contraction seems baked into a lot of discourse

Gotcha. Yes, it definitely is. But I have a doctorate in quantum mechanics, so I absolutely delight in seemingly irreconcilable accounts of reality.

* contradiction