Jesus himself, when he began to teach, was about thirty years old, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli,
Some have asserted that Luke ignored Abraham; but that is not true. Abraham is in the genealogy; the story of Abraham's bosom is found only in Luke (Luke 16:19ff); and one of the strongest statements with reference to that patriarch in the entire New Testament is  Luke 13:28.  By taking the genealogy back to Adam, Luke stressed the fact of Jesus' being the Saviour of all men, not merely of Jews.  Matthew's genealogy through Joseph was given for the purpose of showing that Christ, through his legal father Joseph, was the legitimate heir to the throne of David.  In the very nature of the God-Man, it was inherent that two genealogies should be provided, one showing his legal status in the eyes of men, and the other giving his true physical descent.  The Messianic title, "Son of David," as applied to Jesus required a dual proof: (1) that he was entitled to the throne, as proved by Matthew's genealogy, and (2) that he was literally descended from David, as proved by Luke's genealogy.  The fundamental "rightness" of this approach to the problem will commend itself to any careful student of the Scriptures.  Also, Matthew wrote from Joseph's standpoint, Luke from Mary's.