GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST

At Matthew chapter 1 we find the genealogy of Jesus running from Abraham forward. At Luke chapter 3 is a genealogy back to “Adam, the son of God.” Jesus’ genealogy is the only one given in the Christian Greek Scriptures. Part of his genealogy appears at 1 Chronicles chapters 1 to 3, running from Adam to the sons of Elioenai through Jeconiah (Jehoiachin) and Zerubbabel, royal descendants of Solomon. The books of Genesis and Ruth combined give the line from Adam to David.

The latter three lists agree fully from Adam to Arpachshad (Arphaxad), with minor differences as to certain names, such as Kenan, which is “Cainan” at Luke 3:37. The Chronicles and Genesis-Ruth lists agree down to David, while Luke inserts another “Cainan” between Arpachshad and Shelah.—Luke 3:35, 36.

From Solomon to Zerubbabel the Chronicles record and Matthew agree in the main, Matthew omitting some names. These differences and differences in Luke’s account from David to Jesus will be discussed later.

Under GENEALOGY, we have shown that the Jews kept public records of genealogies, as well as many private family records, and that the chroniclers, such as Ezra, had access to these when compiling their lists; also, that the public registers existed in the first century up until 70 C.E. The matter of the descent of the Messiah from Abraham, and through David, was of prime importance to them. So we can be confident that both Matthew and Luke consulted these genealogical tables.

RELIABILITY OF THE GENEALOGIES BY MATTHEW AND LUKE

The question arises: Why does Matthew leave out some names that are contained in the listings of the other chroniclers? First of all, to prove one’s genealogy it was not necessary to name every link in the line of descent. For example, Ezra, in proving his priestly lineage, at Ezra 7:1-5, omitted several names contained in the listing of the priestly line at 1 Chronicles 6:1-15. Obviously it was not essential to name all these ancestors to satisfy the Jews as to his priestly lineage. Similarly with Matthew: He doubtless used the public register and copied from it, if not every name, the ones necessary to prove the descent of Jesus from Abraham and David. He also had access to the Hebrew Scriptures, which he could consult alongside the official public records.—Compare Ruth 4:12, 18-22 and Matthew 1:3-6.

The lists made by both Matthew and Luke were comprised of names publicly recognized by the Jews of that time as authentic. The scribes and Pharisees as well as the Sadducees were bitter enemies of Christianity, and would have used any possible argument to discredit Jesus, but it is noteworthy that they never challenged these genealogies. If either Matthew’s or Luke’s genealogy of Jesus had been in error, what an opportunity it would have been for these opponents to prove it then and there! For until 70 C.E. they had ready access to the public genealogical registers and the Scriptures.

The same is true regarding the first-century pagan enemies of Christianity, many of whom were, like those Jews, learned men who would readily have pointed to any evidence that these lists of Matthew and Luke were unauthentic and contradictory. But there is no record that the early pagan enemies attacked Christians on this point.

Also, both Matthew and Luke achieved their objective, and that was all they needed to do. To prove that Jesus was descended from Abraham and David it was not necessary to make a new genealogy. All they had to do was copy from the public tables that the nation fully accepted regarding the lineage of David and of the priesthood and all other matters requiring proof of one’s descent. (See Luke 1:5; 2:3-5; Romans 11:1.) Even if there was an omission in these tables, it did not detract from what these Gospel writers intended and indeed accomplished, namely, presenting legally and publicly recognized proof of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah.

PROBLEMS IN MATTHEW’S GENEALOGY OF JESUS

Matthew divides the genealogy from Abraham to Jesus into three sections of fourteen generations each. (Matt. 1:17) This division may have been made as a memory aid. However, in counting the names we find that they total 41, rather than 42. One suggestion as to how they may be counted is as follows:

By taking Abraham to David, fourteen names, then using David as the starting name for the second fourteen, with Josiah as the last; finally, by heading the third series of fourteen names with Josiah and ending with Jesus. Notice that Matthew repeats the name David as the last of the first fourteen names and as the first of the next fourteen. Then he repeats the expression “the deportation to Babylon,” which he links with Josiah and his sons.—Matt. 1:17.

As stated earlier, Matthew may have copied his list exactly from the public register that he used, or he may have purposely left out some links with a view to aiding memory. However, a suggestion as to the omission here of three kings of David’s line between Jehoram and Uzziah (Azariah) is that Jehoram married wicked Athaliah of the house of Ahab, the daughter of Jezebel, thereby bringing this God-condemned strain into the line of the kings of Judah. (1 Ki. 21:20-26; 2 Ki. 8:25-27) Naming Jehoram as first in the wicked alliance, Matthew omits the names of the next three kings to the fourth generation, Ahaziah, Jehoash and Amaziah, the fruits of the alliance.—Compare Matthew 1:8 with 1 Chronicles 3:10-12.

Matthew indicates that Zerubbabel is the son of Shealtiel (Matt. 1:12), and this coincides with other references. (Ezra 3:2; Neh. 12:1; Hag. 1:14; Luke 3:27) However, at 1 Chronicles 3:19 Zerubbabel is referred to as the son of Pedaiah. Evidently Zerubbabel was the natural son of Pedaiah and the legal son of Shealtiel by reason of brother-in-law marriage; or possibly, after Zerubbabel’s father Pedaiah died, Zerubbabel was brought up by Shealtiel as his son and therefore became legally recognized as the son of Shealtiel.

A PROBLEM IN LUKE’S GENEALOGY OF JESUS

Luke inserts a second “Cainan,” between Arphaxad (Arpachshad) and Shelah. (Luke 3:35, 36; compare Genesis 10:24; 11:12; 1 Chronicles 1:18, 24.) Most scholars take this to be a copyist’s error. “Cainan” is not found in this relative position in the genealogical listings in the Hebrew or the Samaritan texts, nor in any of the Targums or versions, except the Septuagint. And it does not seem that it was even in the earlier copies of the Septuagint. Josephus, who usually follows the Septuagint, lists Salah (Shelah) next as the son of Arphaxad (Arpachshad). (Antiquities of the Jews, Book I, chap. VI, par. 7) Early writers Irenaeus, Africanus, Eusebius and Jerome rejected the second “Cainan” in copies of Luke’s account as an interpolation.—See CAINAN No. 2.

COMPARISON OF GENEALOGIES BY MATTHEW AND LUKE

The difference in nearly all the names in Luke’s genealogy of Jesus as compared with Matthew’s is quickly resolved in the fact that Luke traced the line through David’s son Nathan, instead of Solomon, as did Matthew. (Luke 3:31; Matt. 1:6, 7) Luke evidently follows the ancestry of Mary, thus showing Jesus’ real or natural descent from David, while Matthew shows Jesus’ legal right to the throne of David by descent from Solomon through Joseph, who was legally Jesus’ father. Both Matthew and Luke signify that Joseph was not Jesus’ actual father, but only his foster father, giving him legal right. Matthew departs from the style used throughout his genealogy when he comes to Jesus, saying: “Jacob became father to Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.” (Matt. 1:16) Notice that he does not say ‘Joseph became father to Jesus,’ but that he was “the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born.” Luke is even more pointed when, after showing earlier that Jesus was actually the Son of God by Mary (Luke 1:32-35), he says: “Jesus . . . being the son, as the opinion was, of Joseph, the son of Heli.”—Luke 3:23.

Since Jesus was not the real son of Joseph but was the Son of God, Luke’s genealogy of Jesus would prove that he was, by human birth, truly a son of David through his real mother Mary. Interestingly, the Talmud (Haghigha, 77, 4) refers to Mary as the daughter of Heli.

Actually each genealogy (Matthew’s table and Luke’s) shows descent from David, through Solomon and through Nathan. (Matt. 1:6; Luke 3:31) In examining the lists of Matthew and Luke we find that, after diverging with Solomon and Nathan, they come together again in two persons, Shealtiel and Zerubbabel. This can be explained in the following way: Shealtiel was the son of Jeconiah; perhaps by marriage to the daughter of Neri he became Neri’s son-in-law, thus being called “the son of Neri.” It is possible as well that Neri had no sons, so that Shealtiel was counted as his “son” for that reason also. Zerubbabel, who was likely the actual son of Pedaiah, was legally reckoned as the son of Shealtiel, as stated earlier.—Compare Matthew 1:12; Luke 3:27; 1 Chronicles 3:17-19.

Then the accounts indicate that Zerubbabel had two sons, Rhesa and Abiud, the lines diverging again at this point. (These could have been, not actual sons, but descendants, or one, at least, could have been a son-in-law.) (Luke 3:27; Matt. 1:13) Both Matthew’s and Luke’s genealogies of Jesus vary here from that found in 1 Chronicles chapter 3. This may be because a number of names were purposely left out by Matthew and possibly also by Luke. But the fact should be kept in mind that such differences in the genealogical lists of Matthew and Luke are very likely those already present in the genealogical registers then in use and fully accepted by the Jews, and were not changes made by Matthew and Luke.

We may conclude, therefore, that the two lists of Matthew and Luke fuse together the two truths, namely, (1) that Jesus was actually the Son of God, and the natural heir to the kingdom by miraculous birth through the virgin girl Mary, of David’s line, and (2) that Jesus was also the legal heir in the male line of descent from David and Solomon through his foster-father Joseph. (Luke 1:32, 35; Rom. 1:1-4) If there was any accusation made by hostile Jews that Jesus’ birth was illegitimate, the fact that Joseph, aware of the circumstances, married Mary and gave her the protection of his good name and royal lineage, refutes such slander.

[Chart on pages 640, 641]

BIBLE LISTS OF JESUS’ GENEALOGY

Adam Adam Adam

Seth Seth Seth

Enosh Enosh Enos

Kenan Kenan Cainan

Mahalalel Mahalalel Mahalaleel

Jared Jared Jared

Enoch Enoch Enoch

Methuselah Methuselah Methuselah

Lamech Lamech Lamech

Noah Noah Noah

Shem Shem Shem

Arpachshad Arpachshad Arphaxad

Cainan

Shelah Shelah Shelah

Eber Eber Eber

Peleg Peleg Peleg

Reu Reu Reu

Serug Serug Serug

Nahor Nahor Nahor

Terah Terah Terah

Isaac Isaac Isaac Isaac

Jacob (Israel) Jacob Jacob Jacob

Perez Perez Perez Perez

Hezron Hezron Hezron Hezron

Ram Ram Ram Arni (Ram?)

Amminadab Amminadab Amminadab Amminadab

Nahshon Nahshon Nahshon Nahshon

Obed Obed Obed Obed

Jesse Jesse Jesse Jesse

Solomon Solomon Nathana

Rehoboam Rehoboam Mattatha

Abijah Abijah Menna

Asa Asa Melea

Jehoshaphat Jehoshaphat Eliakim

Jehoram Jehoram Jonam

Ahaziah Joseph

Judas

Jehoash Symeon

Amaziah Levi

Jotham Jotham Jorim

Ahaz Ahaz Eliezer

Hezekiah Hezekiah Jesus

Manasseh Manasseh Er

Amon Amon Elmadam

Josiah Josiah Cosam

Jehoiakim Addi

Melchi

Zerubbabeld Zerubbabel Zerubbabel

Rhesa

Hananiah Abiud Joanan

Jeshaiah Joda

Eliakim Josech

Rephaiah Semein

Arnan Azor Mattathias

Maath

Obadiah Zadok Naggai

Esli

Shecaniah Achim Nahum

Amos

Shemaiah Eliud Mattathias

Joseph

Neariah Eleazar Jannai

Elioeni Melchi

Matthan Levi

Matthat

[Footnotes]