-
GenealogyInsight on the Scriptures, Volume 1
-
-
matters in times of reorganization, and the genealogies they compiled were essential to the functioning of things vital to the nation’s existence.
Such genealogical lists were bound to vary from period to period; new names would be added and others would be dropped; often only the more important family heads would be named in those lists dealing with the more remote past. In some cases less important names might appear on certain lists because of being of current interest. The sources employed in some cases may have given only partial lists. Some portions may have been missing, or the chronicler himself may have skipped over sections because they were not necessary for his purpose. And they are not necessary for our purpose today.
In a few instances, copyists’ errors may have crept into the text, particularly in the spelling of names. But these do not present problems that have any significant bearing on lineages necessary to our understanding of the Bible; nor do they affect Christianity’s foundation.
A careful examination of the Bible will eliminate the false idea sometimes advanced that the ancient genealogies in Genesis, chapters 5 and 11, and in other Bible books contain imaginary, or fictitious, names to suit some scheme of the chronicler. These chroniclers were dedicated servants of Jehovah, not nationalists; they were concerned with Jehovah’s name and dealings with his people. Furthermore, not only did other Bible writers refer to many of these individuals as real persons but so did Jesus Christ. (Isa 54:9; Eze 14:14, 20; Mt 24:38; Joh 8:56; Ro 5:14; 1Co 15:22, 45; 1Ti 2:13, 14; Heb 11:4, 5, 7, 31; Jas 2:25; Jude 14) To contradict all this testimony would be accusing the God of truth of lying, or of needing some artifice or expedient to promote belief in his Word. It would also deny the Bible’s inspiration.
As the apostle states, “All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness, that the man of God may be fully competent, completely equipped for every good work.” (2Ti 3:16, 17) Therefore, we may rely fully on the genealogies recorded in the Bible. They provided vital statistics not only for the time they were written but also for us today. By them we have full genealogical assurance that Jesus Christ is the promised, long-awaited Seed of Abraham. We are aided greatly in establishing chronology back to Adam, something found in no other source. We know that God “made out of one man every nation of men, to dwell upon the entire surface of the earth.” (Ac 17:26) We see that truly “when the Most High gave the nations an inheritance, when he parted the sons of Adam from one another, he proceeded to fix the boundary of the peoples with regard for the number of the sons of Israel” (De 32:8), and we understand how the nations are related.
By knowing the origin of mankind, that Adam was originally a “son of God” and that we all descended from Adam (Lu 3:38), we can clearly understand the statement: “Just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned.” (Ro 5:12) Also, such knowledge makes understandable how Jesus Christ can be “the last Adam” and the “Eternal Father” and how it can be that “just as in Adam all are dying, so also in the Christ all will be made alive.” (Isa 9:6; 1Co 15:22, 45) We can better understand God’s purpose to bring obedient men back into the relationship of “children of God.” (Ro 8:20, 21) We observe that Jehovah’s loving-kindness is expressed toward those loving him and keeping his commandments “to a thousand generations.” (De 7:9) We observe his trueness as the covenant-keeping God and his careful preservation of a historical record on which we can safely build our faith. Genealogy, as well as other features of the Bible, proves God to be the great Recorder and Preserver of history.—See GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST.
Paul’s Counsel Regarding Genealogies. The apostle Paul, writing about 61-64 C.E., told Timothy not to pay attention to “false stories and to genealogies, which end up in nothing, but which furnish questions for research rather than a dispensing of anything by God in connection with faith.” (1Ti 1:4) The force of this warning is more appreciated when we know of the extremes to which the Jews later went in researching genealogies and how minutely they investigated any possible discrepancy. The Babylonian Talmud (Pesahim 62b) makes the statement that “between ‘Azel’ and ‘Azel’ [1 Chronicles 8:38–9:44, a genealogical portion of the Bible] they were laden with four hundred camels of exegetical interpretations!”—Hebrew-English Edition of the Babylonian Talmud, translated by H. Freedman, London, 1967.
To engage in studying and discussing such matters was pointless, and it was even more so at the time Paul wrote to Timothy. It was no longer vital to have the genealogical records maintained to prove one’s ancestry, since God did not now recognize any distinction between Jew and Gentile in the Christian congregation. (Ga 3:28) And the genealogical records had already established the descent of Christ through the line of David. Also, it would not be long after Paul wrote this admonition that Jerusalem would be destroyed, and along with it the Jewish records. God did not preserve them. Accordingly, Paul was anxious that Timothy and the congregations should not be sidetracked into spending time in research and in controversy over matters of personal pedigree, which contributed nothing to Christian faith. The genealogy furnished by the Bible is sufficient to prove Christ’s Messiahship, the genealogical matter of prime importance to Christians. The other Biblical genealogies stand as a testimony to the authenticity of the Scriptural record, manifesting clearly that it is a genuinely historical account.
-
-
Genealogy of Jesus ChristInsight on the Scriptures, Volume 1
-
-
GENEALOGY OF JESUS CHRIST
In the first chapter of Matthew we find the genealogy of Jesus running from Abraham forward. At Luke chapter 3 is a genealogy back to “Adam, 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 through Solomon and Zerubbabel. The books of Genesis and Ruth combined give the line from Adam to David.
The latter three lists (Genesis/Ruth, 1 Chronicles, and Luke) agree fully from Adam to Arpachshad, 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 another “Cainan” is found in Luke’s account between Arpachshad and Shelah.—Lu 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 besides many private family records, the Jews kept public records of genealogies 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 evidently 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 Gospel Genealogies. 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 Ru 4:12, 18-22 and Mt 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 they 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 evidently 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 Lu 1:5; 2:3-5; Ro 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 14 generations each. (Mt 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, 14 names, then using David as the starting name for the second 14, with Josiah as the last; finally, by heading the third series of 14 names with Jeconiah (Jehoiachin) and ending with Jesus. Notice that Matthew repeats the name David as the last of the first 14 names and as the first of the next 14. Then he repeats the expression “the deportation to Babylon,” which he links with Josiah and his sons.—Mt 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. (1Ki 21:20-26; 2Ki 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 Mt 1:8 with 1Ch 3:10-12.
Matthew indicates that Zerubbabel is the son of Shealtiel (Mt 1:12), and this coincides with other references. (Ezr 3:2; Ne 12:1; Hag 1:14; Lu 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. Available manuscript copies of Luke list a second “Cainan,” between Arpachshad (Arphaxad) and Shelah. (Lu 3:35, 36; compare Ge 10:24; 11:12; 1Ch 1:18, 24.) Most scholars take this to be a copyist’s error. In the Hebrew Scriptures, “Cainan” is not found in this relative position in the genealogical listings in the Hebrew or the Samaritan texts, nor is it in any of the Targums or versions except the Greek Septuagint. And it does not seem that it was even in the earlier copies of the Septuagint, because Josephus, who usually follows the Septuagint, lists Seles (Shelah) next as the son of Arphaxades (Arpachshad). (Jewish Antiquities, I, 146 [vi, 4]) Early writers Irenaeus, Africanus, Eusebius, and Jerome rejected the second “Cainan” in copies of Luke’s account as an interpolation.—See CAINAN No. 2.
Why do the genealogies of Jesus Christ as given by Matthew and by Luke differ?
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. (Lu 3:31; Mt 1:6, 7) Luke evidently follows the ancestry of Mary, thus showing Jesus’ 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 adoptive 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.” (Mt 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 (Lu 1:32-35), he says: “Jesus . . . being the son, as the opinion was, of Joseph, son of Heli.”—Lu 3:23.
Since Jesus was not the natural son of Joseph but was the Son of God, Luke’s genealogy of Jesus would prove that he was, by human birth, a son of David through his natural mother Mary. Regarding the genealogies of Jesus given by Matthew and by Luke, Frederic Louis Godet wrote: “This study of the text in detail leads us in this way to admit—1. That the genealogical register of Luke is that of Heli, the grandfather of Jesus; 2. That, this affiliation of Jesus by Heli being expressly opposed to His affiliation by Joseph, the document which he has preserved for us can be nothing else in his view than the genealogy of Jesus through Mary. But why does not Luke name Mary, and why pass immediately from Jesus to His grandfather? Ancient sentiment did not comport with the mention of the mother as the genealogical link. Among the Greeks a man was the son of his father, not of his mother; and among the Jews the adage was: ‘Genus matris non vocatur genus [“The descendant of the mother is not called (her) descendant”]’ (‘Baba bathra,’ 110, a).”—Commentary on Luke, 1981, p. 129.
Actually each genealogy (Matthew’s table and Luke’s) shows descent from David, through Solomon and through Nathan. (Mt 1:6; Lu 3:31) In examining the lists of Matthew and Luke, we find that after diverging at 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 Mt 1:12; Lu 3:27; 1Ch 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. Compare 1Ch 3:19.) (Lu 3:27; Mt 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 adoptive father Joseph. (Lu 1:32, 35; Ro 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 913-914]
BIBLE LISTS OF JESUS’ GENEALOGY
Genesis and Ruth
1 Chronicles Chaps 1, 2, 3
Matthew Chap 1
Luke Chap 3
Adam
Adam
—
Adam
Seth
Seth
—
Seth
Enosh
Enosh
—
Enosh
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
—
Arpachshad
—
—
—
Cainan
Shelah
Shelah
—
Shelah
Eber
Eber
—
Eber
Peleg
Peleg
—
Peleg
Reu
Reu
—
Reu
Serug
Serug
—
Serug
Nahor
Nahor
—
Nahor
Terah
Terah
—
Terah
Abram (Abraham)
Abraham
Abraham
Abraham
Isaac
Isaac
Isaac
Isaac
Jacob (Israel)
Jacob
Jacob
Jacob
Judah (and Tamar)
Judah
Judah (and Tamar)
Judah
Perez
Perez
Perez
Perez
Hezron
Hezron
Hezron
Hezron
Ram
Ram
Ram
Arni (Ram?)
Amminadab
Amminadab
Amminadab
Amminadab
Nahshon
Nahshon
Nahshon
Nahshon
Salmon
Salmon (Salma, 1Ch 2:11)
Salmon (and Rahab)
Salmon
Boaz (and Ruth)
Boaz
Boaz (and Ruth)
Boaz
Obed
Obed
Obed
Obed
Jesse
Jesse
Jesse
Jesse
David
David
David (and Bath-sheba)
David
—
Solomon
Solomon
Nathan1
Mattatha
Menna
Melea
Eliakim
Jonam
Joseph
Judas
Symeon
Levi
Matthat
Jorim
Eliezer
Jesus
Er
Elmadam
Cosam
Addi
Melchi
Neri
—
Rehoboam
Rehoboam
—
Abijah
Abijah
—
Asa
Asa
—
Jehoshaphat
Jehoshaphat
—
Jehoram
Jehoram
—
Ahaziah
—
—
Jehoash
—
—
Amaziah
—
—
Azariah (Uzziah)
Uzziah (Azariah)
—
Jotham
Jotham
—
Ahaz
Ahaz
—
Hezekiah
Hezekiah
—
Manasseh
Manasseh
—
Amon
Amon
—
Josiah
Josiah
—
Jehoiakim
—
—
Jeconiah (Jehoiachin)
Jeconiah
—
Shealtiel (Pedaiah)2
Shealtiel
Shealtiel3
—
Zerubbabel4
Zerubbabel
Zerubbabel
Rhesa
Joanan
Joda
Josech
Semein
Mattathias
Maath
Naggai
Esli
Nahum
Amos
Mattathias
Joseph
Jannai
Melchi
Levi
Matthat
Heli (father of Mary)
—
—
Abiud
—
—
Eliakim
—
—
Azor
—
—
Zadok
—
—
Achim
—
—
Eliud
—
—
Eleazar
—
—
Matthan
—
—
Jacob
—
—
Joseph
Joseph (Heli’s son-in-law)
—
—
Jesus (foster son)
Jesus (Mary’s son)
1 At Nathan, Luke begins reckoning the genealogy through Jesus’ maternal line, while Matthew continues with the paternal line.
2 Zerubbabel evidently was the natural son of Pedaiah and the legal son of Shealtiel by brother-in-law marriage; or he was brought up by Shealtiel after his father Pedaiah’s death and became legally recognized as the son of Shealtiel.—1Ch 3:17-19; Ezr 3:2; Lu 3:27.
3 Shealtiel the son of Jeconiah possibly was the son-in-law of Neri.—1Ch 3:17; Lu 3:27.
4 The lines meet in Shealtiel and Zerubbabel, afterward diverging. This divergence could have been through two different descendants of Zerubbabel, or Rhesa or Abiud could have been a son-in-law.
-
-
GenerationInsight on the Scriptures, Volume 1
-
-
GENERATION
A generation commonly refers to all persons who were born about the same time. (Ex 1:6; Mt 11:16) Associated with this is the meaning “contemporaries.” At Genesis 6:9 it is stated concerning Noah: “He proved himself faultless among his contemporaries [literally, generations].” When used with reference to family relationships, a generation can refer to a group of descendants, as sons and daughters or grandsons and granddaughters.—Job 42:16.
The term can be used as a measure of time with reference to past or future ages. The generations of mankind descended from the sinner Adam have been transitory, as contrasted with the earth, which abides forever. (Ec 1:4; Ps 104:5) But the expressions “unnumbered generations” and “a thousand generations” refer to that which is to time indefinite. (1Ch 16:15; Isa 51:8) The command to the Jews that the celebration of the Passover was to be observed “throughout your generations” denoted continual performance to a time then indefinite. (Ex 12:14) God stated to Moses that Jehovah was his name as a memorial “to time indefinite,” “to generation after generation,” which implies forever. (Ex 3:15) The apostle Paul tells us that God is to be given glory “to all generations forever and ever.”—Eph 3:21.
A generation may mean a class of persons, that is, those characterized by certain qualities or conditions. The Bible speaks of “the generation of the righteous one” (Ps 14:5; 24:6; 112:2) and “a generation crooked and twisted,” “a generation of perverseness.” (De 32:5, 20; Pr 30:11-14) Jesus Christ, when on earth, spoke similarly of the people of the Jewish nation of that day, and the apostle Paul applied such terms to the world of his day in general, which was alienated from God.—Mt 12:39; 16:4; 17:17; Mr 8:38; Php 2:14, 15.
One Hebrew word for “generation” is dohr, corresponding to the Aramaic dar. (Da 4:3, 34) Dohr comes from a root verb meaning “stack in a circle” or “move around” (Eze 24:5; Ps 84:10) and thus has a basic underlying meaning of “circle.” The related word dur means “ball.” (Isa 22:18) The Greek equivalent is ge·ne·aʹ, from a root meaning “be born.”
Another Hebrew word, toh·le·dhohthʹ, is occasionally rendered “generations” or “genealogy” (Nu 3:1; Ru 4:18), also “descendants” or “families” (1Ch 5:7; 7:2, 4, 9) and “history” or “origins.”—Ge 2:4; 5:1; 6:9; compare AS, AT, KJ, Dy, NW, RS, and other translations.
Length. When the term “generation” is used with reference to the people living at a particular time, the exact length of that time cannot be stated, except that the time would fall within reasonable limits. These limits would be determined
-