Introduction
Matthew’s Account
‘This is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham: Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob, Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers, Judah the father of Perez and Zerah, whose mother was Tamar, Perez the father of Hezron, Hezron the father of Ram, Ram the father of Amminadab, Amminadab the father of Nahshon, Nahshon the father of Salmon, Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab, Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth, Obed the father of Jesse, and Jesse the father of King David. David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife, Solomon the father of Rehoboam, Rehoboam the father of Abijah, Abijah the father of Asa, Asa the father of Jehoshaphat, Jehoshaphat the father of Jehoram, Jehoram the father of Uzziah, Uzziah the father of Jotham, Jotham the father of Ahaz, Ahaz the father of Hezekiah, Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, Manasseh the father of Amon, Amon the father of Josiah, and Josiah the father of Jeconiah and his brothers at the time of the exile to Babylon. After the exile to Babylon: Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel, Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel, Zerubbabel the father of Abihud, Abihud the father of Eliakim, Eliakim the father of Azor, Azor the father of Zadok, Zadok the father of Akim, Akim the father of Elihud, Elihud the father of Eleazar, Eleazar the father of Matthan, Matthan the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and Mary was the mother of Jesus who is called the Messiah. Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah.’ Matthew 1:1-17
THE GENEALOGY OF JESUS THE MESSIAH
The reason Matthew starts his account this way is due to the fact that his Jewish readers would place a great deal of emphasis on the genealogy.
Matthew 1:1-17 is parallel with Luke 3:23-38
Matthew 1:3-6 is parallel with Ruth 4:18-22
Matthew 1:7-11 is parallel with 1 Chronicles 3:10-17
Both Matthew and Luke record the genealogy of Jesus, Luke 3:23-38, however, Matthew gives the account of the ancestry of Joseph, the legal and earthly parent of Jesus. Luke records the ancestry of Jesus through the genealogy of Mary, the mother of Jesus.
Matthew divides his account of the genealogy of Jesus into three sections.
1. Abraham to David. Matthew 1:1-6.
2. Solomon to the Babylonian captivity. Matthew 1:7-11.
3. The Babylonian captivity to Jesus. Matthew 1:12-16.
Barclay, in his commentary, says the following.
‘In his genealogy, Matthew shows us the royalty of Kingship gained the tragedy of freedom lost. The glory of freedom restored.’
The names are written here show that Jesus is part of history, they also illustrate God’s wonderful grace, hence the mention of women such as Tamar, Rahab, Ruth and Bathsheba.
Matthew shows from the genealogy the barriers have been broken down between the Jew and Gentile, between male and female and between saint and sinner.
Matthew begins by telling us that ‘this is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah,’ 1 Chronicles 1 / 1 Chronicles 2:1-15 / 1 Chronicles 3:1-19 / Ruth 4:18-22. In other words, this gives us the details of the ancestry of Jesus.
The name Jesus is a form of the name ‘Joshua’, which means God is our helper or deliverer or saviour. It was a very common name in Jewish circles and in New Testament times it meant ‘Jehovah is salvation’.
The Hebrew word, ‘Messiah’, is the Greek word Christ, which means ‘anointed’. In other words, Jesus is the Christ or the Messiah who fulfilled all Old Testament prophecies, Luke 24:44.
The term, ‘son of’ refers to a distant relative and so, when one is the ‘son of’ another, ancestors in the lineage can be left out by the chronicler. Cainan is placed between Shelah and Arphaxad in Luke 3:36, but he is left out of the genealogy of Genesis 11.
Coffman, in his commentary, says the following.
‘Jesus was the literal son of David through Mary, a descendant of Nathan, one of David’s sons, as in Luke’s genealogy. Jesus was the legal son and heir of David through King Solomon as in Matthew’s genealogy. He was also the antitypical son of David in that many parallels exist between the life of our Lord and that of King David. Both were born in Bethlehem. David’s struggle with Goliath answers to Christ’s struggle with Satan. In both cases, it was the enemy’s own weapon that was used to destroy him, Hebrews 2:14. Both David and Christ were sent by their father with a message to the brethren. Both were rejected. David was, in a sense, a mediator between the lines of Israel and the Philistines, Christ is the one Mediator between God and man, 1 Timothy 2:5. Matthew considered it of great importance to identify Jesus Christ as the Son of David, a popular designation for the Messiah and he does so in the very first verse of his gospel.’
Jesus was the ‘son of Abraham’ in more ways than one.
1. He was the ‘seed’ of promise, Galatians 3:16.
2. He was the legal son and heir through Isaac, son of the free woman, as distinguished from Ishmael, son of the slave woman, Galatians 4:22-31.
3. He was literally descended from Abraham through Mary and her ancestors.
4. He was the antitype of Isaac. As in the case of David, there are also sharp contrasts between the life of Abraham and that of Christ. Abraham gave up his wife to Abimelech in order to procure his own safety, or so he thought but Jesus gave Himself up to die for His bride, the church, Genesis 20:2 / Ephesians 5:25.
Gill, in his commentary, says the following.
‘Abraham begat Ishmael before Isaac, and others after him, but they are not mentioned because the Messiah was not to spring from any of them, but from Isaac, of whom it is said, ‘In Isaac shall thy seed be called’, Genesis 21:12 and who, as he was a progenitor, so an eminent type of Christ, being Abraham’s only beloved son and particularly in the binding, sacrifice and deliverance of him.’
‘The genealogy of Christ proceeds from Isaac, in the line of Jacob. Isaac begat Esau, as well as Jacob, and they two were twins, but one was loved, and the other hated; wherefore no mention is made of Esau, he had no concern in the Messiah, nor was he to spring from him, but from Jacob, or Israel, by whose name he is sometimes called, Isaiah 49:3.’
‘The lineage of Christ is carried on from Jacob in the line of Judah, the reason of which is, because it was particularly prophesied that the Messiah, Shiloh, the prince and chief ruler, should be of him, Genesis 49:10 / 1 Chronicles 5:2. And it is evident beyond all contradiction, that our Lord sprung from his tribe, Hebrews 7:14. The reason why the brethren of Judah, who were eleven in number, are mentioned, when the brethren of Isaac and Jacob are not, is, because though the Messiah did not spring from them, yet the promise of him was made to the twelve tribes, who all expected him, and to whom he was sent, and came. These made but one body of men, and therefore, though the Messiah came from the tribe of Judah, yet he is said to be of them all, Romans 9:4.’
Tamar is remembered for her having been twice the daughter-in-law of Judah, and later, by means of deception, his wife also, Genesis 38:12-26. Ram is the same as ‘Arni’, as Luke records, Luke 3:33.
Rahab was the Gentile woman who helped the Israelite spies out of the window in Jericho and later became a Jewish proselyte, Joshua 2 / Joshua 6:22-23 / James 2:8-11 / Hebrews 11:31. Ruth was also a Gentile woman who became a Jewish proselyte, Ruth 4.
Notice that Matthew records, ‘David was the father of Solomon, whose mother had been Uriah’s wife.’ When David committed adultery with Bathsheba and ordered the murder of her husband Uriah, would be an event the Jews would want to forget, 2 Samuel 11.
Coffman, in his commentary, says the following.
‘It is a marvel, in the providence of God, that this guilty and unfortunate wife of Uriah the Hittite should have found a place in the Lord’s ancestry, however, her first child was not permitted to live. David’s sin with her constitutes one of the saddest events in the Old Testament. Like the two women in Matthew 1:5, she was presumably a Gentile.’
Although Matthew records the names of Joram and Uzziah, he omits the kings Ahaziah, Joash and Amaziah, 2 Kings 8:24 / 1 Chronicles 3:11 / 2 Chronicles 22:1 / 2 Chronicles 22:11 / 2 Chronicles 24:27, between Joram and Uzziah.
The reason for this omission is probably because he wants to keep the continuity of the ‘fourteen generations’, Matthew 1:17. Ezra also omits six names from his genealogy, Ezra 7:1-2 / 1 Chronicles 6:6-11.
Jeconiah was a king of Judah, who is also called Coniah, Jeremiah 22:24 / Jeremiah 22:28, and Jehoiachin, 2 Kings 24 / 1 Chronicles 3.
After this king not one of his seed was to reign legally as a God-anointed king on the literal throne of David in Jerusalem in Palestine as king of Israel, Jeremiah 22:30 / Jeremiah 36:30. Jeconiah was carried into Babylonian captivity in 597 B.C.
The Jews remained in captivity for seventy years and returned to their homeland in three stages. The first group returned in 536 B.C. led by Sheshbazzar, Ezra 1-6, the second group returned in 457 B.C. led by Ezra, Ezra 7-10, and finally, the third group returned in 444 B.C. led by Nehemiah, Nehemiah 1:1-13.
It’s interesting to note that Matthew attributes the birth of Jesus to Mary and not Joseph. This is because Joseph had nothing to do with the conception of Jesus because He was born of the Spirit, Matthew 1:18 / Matthew 1:23.
The reason for using the ‘fourteen generations’ and the omitting of some names, appears to be so that they could easily be memorised by the people, Ezra 7:1-2 / 1 Chronicles 6:6-11.
Luke’s Account
‘Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Melki, the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph, the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos, the son of Nahum, the son of Esli, the son of Naggai, the son of Maath, the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein, the son of Josek, the son of Joda, the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel, the son of Neri, the son of Melki, the son of Addi, the son of Cosam, the son of Elmadam, the son of Er, the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer, the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, the son of Simeon, the son of Judah, the son of Joseph, the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim, the son of Melea, the son of Menna, the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan, the son of David, the son of Jesse, the son of Obed, the son of Boaz, the son of Salmon, the son of Nahshon, the son of Amminadab, the son of Ram, the son of Hezron, the son of Perez, the son of Judah, the son of Jacob, the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham, the son of Terah, the son of Nahor, the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalalel, the son of Kenan, the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.’ Luke 3:23-38
Luke informs us that Jesus was thirty years old when He began in ministry. This is the age that a priest was to enter upon the full execution of their office, Numbers 4:3. As mentioned earlier.
Matthew 1:1-17 is parallel with Luke 3:23-38
Matthew 1:3-6 is parallel with Ruth 4:18-22
Matthew 1:7-11 is parallel with 1 Chronicles 3:10-17
Both Matthew and Luke record the genealogy of Jesus, Matthew 1:1-17, however, Matthew gives the account of the ancestry of Joseph, the legal and earthly parent of Jesus. Luke records the ancestry of Jesus through the genealogy of Mary, the mother of Jesus.
The term, ‘son of’ refers to a distant relative and so, when one is the ‘son of’ another, ancestors in the lineage can be left out by the chronicler.
Henry, in his commentary, says the following, concerning Luke’s genealogy.
‘Matthew designed to show that Christ was the son of Abraham, in whom all the families of the earth are blessed, and that he was heir to the throne of David and therefore he begins with Abraham and brings the genealogy down to Jacob, who was the father of Joseph, and heir-male of the house of David, but Luke, designing to show that Christ was the seed of the woman, that should break the serpent’s head, traces his pedigree upward as high as Adam, and begins it with Ei, or Heli, who was the father, not of Joseph, but of the virgin Mary. And some suggest that the supply which our translators all along insert here is not right and that it should not be read which, that is, which Joseph was the son of Heli, but which Jesus, he was the son of Joseph, of Eli, of Matthat, and he, that is, Jesus, was the son of Seth, of Adam, of God, Luke 3:38 / Luke 3:38.’
‘The difference between the two evangelists in the genealogy of Christ has been a stumbling block to infidels that cavil at the word, but such a one as has been removed by the labours of learned men, both in the early ages of the church and in later times, to which we refer ourselves. Matthew draws the pedigree from Solomon, whose natural line ends in Jechonias, the legal right was transferred to Salathiel, who was of the house of Nathan, another son of David, which line Luke here pursues, and so leaves out all the kings of Judah.’
‘It is well for us that our salvation doth not depend upon our being able to solve all these difficulties, nor is the divine authority of the gospels at all weakened by them; for the evangelists are not supposed to write these genealogies either of their own knowledge or by divine inspiration, but to have copied them out of the authentic records of the genealogies among the Jews, the heralds’ books, which therefore they were obliged to follow; and in them they found the pedigree of Jacob, the father of Joseph, to be as it is set down in Matthew; and the pedigree of Heli, the father of Mary, to be as it is set down here in Luke.’
‘And this is the meaning of hos enomizeto, Luke 3:23 / Luke 3:23, not, as it was supposed, referring only to Joseph, but uti sancitum est lege, as it is entered into the books, as we find it upon record, by which it appeared that Jesus was both by father and mother’s side the Son of David, witness this extract out of their own records, which any one might at that time have liberty to compare with the original, and further the evangelists needed not to go; nay, had they varied from that, they had not gained their point. It’s not being contradicted at that time is satisfaction enough to us now that it is a true copy, as it is further worthy of observation, that, when those records of the Jewish genealogies had continued thirty or forty years after these extracts out of them, long enough to justify the evangelists therein, they were all lost and destroyed with the Jewish state and nation; for now there was no more occasion for them.’
Henry, in his commentary, continues and says the following.
One difficulty occurs between Abraham and Noah, which gives us some perplexity, Luke 3:35 / Luke 3:36. Sala is said to be the son of Cainan, and he the son of Arphaxad, whereas Sala was the son of Arphaxad, Genesis 10:24 / Genesis 11:12, and there is no such man as Cainan found there. But, as to that, it is sufficient to say that the Seventy Interpreters, who, before our Saviour’s time, translated the Old Testament into Greek, for reasons best known to themselves inserted that Cainan; and St. Luke, writing among the Hellenist Jews, was obliged to make use of that translation, and therefore to take it as he found it.’
‘The genealogy concludes with this, who was the son of Adam, the son of God.’
1. Some refer it to Adam, he was in a peculiar manner the son of God, being, more immediately than any of his offspring, the offspring of God by creation.
2. Others refer it to Christ, and so make the last words of this genealogy to denote his divine and human nature. He was both the Son of Adam and the Son of God that he might be a proper Mediator between God and the sons of Adam and might bring the sons of Adam to be, through him, the sons of God.
