Matthew 1:1-17 “A New Beginning”

“1 The Book of genealogy of Jesus who is the Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. 2Abraham begat Isaac, and Isaac begat Jacob and Jacob begat Judah as well as his brothers. 3And Judah begat Perez as well as Zerah by Tamar, and Perez begat Hezron, and Hezron begat Ram. 4And Ram begat Amminadab, and Amminadab begat Nahshon, and Nahshon begat Salmon. 5And Salmon begat Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz begat Obed by Ruth, and Obed begat Jesse. 6And Jesse begat David the king. And David begat Solomon by she who belonged to Uriah. 7And Solomon begat Rehoboam, and Rehoboam begat Abijah, and Abijah begat Asa. 8And Asa begat Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat begat Joram, and Joram begat Uzziah. 9And Uzziah begat Jotham, and Jotham begat Ahaz, and Ahaz begat Hezekiah. 10And Hezekiah begat Manasseh, and Manasseh begat Amon, and Amon begat Josiah. 11And Josiah begat Jeconiah as well as his brothers at the time of the deportation of Babylon. 12After the deportation of Babylon, Jeconiah begat Shealtiel, and Shealtiel begat Zerubbabel. 13And Zerubbabel begat Abihud, and Abihud begat Eliakim, and Eliakim begat Azor. 14 And Azor begat Zadok, and Zadok begat Achim, and Achim begat Eliud. 15And Eliud begat Eleazar, and Eleazar begat Matthan, and Matthan begat Jacob. 16And Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, by whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ. 17Therefore, all the generations from Abraham until David, fourteen generations; and from David until the deportation of Babylon, fourteen generations; and from the deportation of Babylon until Christ, fourteen generations.


The first words to hit the page are striking: Βίβλος γενέσεως (the book of beginnings). This phrase does more than simply introduce the genealogy to follow, but functions as a title for the whole Book. The term “book” (βίβλος) should be distinguished from the similar term βιβλίον. While βιβλίον can describe a document of book-like length (Lk. 4:17) or a short certificate (Matt. 19:7), the term Matthew uses here is reserved for lengthy documents like the book of Moses (Mk. 12:26), the book of the prophet Isaiah (Lk. 3:4), the book of the “prophets” (Acts 7:42), the book of the Psalms (Lk. 20:42), and the book of life (Rev. 3:5; 20:15).[1] The first verse of Matthew’s gospel must be understood as addressing his whole work and not only the following genealogy. This truly is the book of beginnings regarding Jesus who is the Christ.


By labeling this book as a book of beginnings (γενέσεως), Matthew directs the readers’ attention back to Genesis. Γένεσις (generations/beginnings) translates the Hebrew תּוֹלֵדוֹת, the term that Moses uses to advance his argument throughout the book of Genesis. This new addition to the canon of Scripture is a new beginning, serving a very similar purpose as Genesis. Moses (a Levite) wrote Genesis to inscripturate the beginning of history. The history of the world as well as the history of the nation of Israel. Matthew (or Levi) writes his gospel to catalogue the beginning of a new era: the era of Messiah. Matthew begins by linking his book with the Old Testament. We will first make some observations of this list before examining the authorial intention of the text.


Observations


The work of every Bible interpreter (which means, every Bible reader) begins with reading the text. Once we have finished, we read again, and again, and again. It is called Bible “study” for a reason. The verses before us may seem trivial, perhaps even boring. But these words are still inspired by God and good for our instruction. It is good for us to reflect if we believe these truths that we claim to know. After reading through the text and examining various passages that correspond in the Old Testament, we should be able to at least make the following observations.


Matthew’s Purpose: Presenting a Concept vs. Reporting the News


We should recognize at once that Matthew’s purpose is not simply to provide Jesus’ family tree. By comparing the names in v. 8 to 2 Kings 8:25-15:1 and 2 Chr. 21:16-26:1 we will find three unmentioned kings that reigned in between Joram and Uzziah; namely, Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah. By reading v. 17 it becomes obvious that the number fourteen is part of Matthew’s argument and so we assume that these names were dropped intentionally so that the generations from David to the exile add up to fourteen. It is not that Matthew is unaware of the “missing” kings or that he is trying to pull the wool over the eyes of his readers. Both Matthew and his readers would be familiar with the Old Testament to understand a purposeful omission when they see it. If Matthew’s purpose is grander than simply providing a lineage, then it is of little consequence if a few stones in the path are missing. The trajectory remains intact.


This of course informs our understanding of ἐγέννησεν, which we translate here as “begat.” The aorist active indicative of γεννάω is used to describe the relationship of each father to his son throughout these verses (save one time). The verb highlights the active role a man plays in the procreation of his offspring, yet the term can be used more broadly to speak of the role as an ancestor. With this understanding, Matthew speaks truly that Joram begat Uzziah through the fact that Joram was the physical father of Ahaziah who was the father of Joash who was the father of Amaziah who was the father of Uzziah.


The point is this: Matthew is not creating an unbroken linear genealogy so much as he is advancing a theological point. That point requires the development of the entire text and the summary statement in v. 17 to be understood and appreciated.


Matthew’s Presentation: The Pattern of the Text


The existence of a pattern is evident to both the casual and the serious reader alike. The pattern of father + δὲ ἐγέννησεν + τὸν + son (so/and + father + begat + [article] + son) has almost a hypnotic effect on most English readers. This pattern is very purposeful because it allows Matthew to emphasize various persons and themes when he breaks that pattern. Therefore, the casual reader must remain vigilant to catch these intentional departures.


Matthew’s Exceptions: The Pattern is Occasionally Broken


There are several places where Matthew’s pattern is broken. Each instance is designed to make the reader stop and consider what Matthew is doing. We will save the discussion of these instances for the exposition below but will identify them here.


Judah and his brothers: In v. 2 the pattern is hardly begun before it is broken. We read not only that Jacob begat Judah but that he also begat Judah’s brothers.


Judah begat Perez and Zerah: In v. 3 we read not only the son of Judah through whom the lineage is passed (Perez) but also his twin brother. This is interesting because this is not the first set of twins in this line. Genesis 25:19-26 states that Isaac begat twin boys as well, yet we read in v. 2 only the mention of one of them; namely, Jacob. Like Esau, Zerah is not a part of this genealogy and yet Matthew makes mention of him.


The mention of various women: In v. 3 we see that Judah begat Perez and Zerah by Tamar (ἐκ τῆς Θαμάρ). The mention of the woman by whom the specific son was born is repeated twice in v. 4 (Rahab and Ruth) as well as v. 6. All four of these instances are identical in the Greek (ἐκ + τῆς + mother or preposition [by/from] + article + mother’s name). The inclusion of women in this list of ancestors is strange enough, but why these women? Where are the matriarchs of Israel, Sarah, Rebekah, Rachel, and Leah? Answers to these questions range far and wide. Some suggest that the dubious morality of these women may provide something of a defense against the Jews who slandered the chastity of Mary; that is, before questioning the virgin birth perhaps one should consider the immorality of some women who are in David’s line.[2] Yet, it is difficult to understand how Ruth is to be considered of low moral character when she is praised for her virtue. Others consider that these four women are of Gentile descent and therefore their inclusion in the line of Messiah indicates an inclusion of Gentiles into the kingdom.[3] Yet, it is not clear that the mother of Solomon was in fact a Gentile, only that she was once married to a Gentile, namely, Uriah the Hittite. Others are closer to the mark when they suggest that these women are placed here to set up a coming contrast with a fifth woman, Mary the mother of Jesus.[4]


David the king: In v. 6 we read that Jesse begat David the king. No other person is given this title even though every name mentioned from Solomon to Jeconiah was in fact a king. This break in the pattern certainly provides emphasis on Matthew’s them of Israel’s king.


Josiah begat Jeconiah and his brothers: The same phrase used of Judah’s brothers (καὶ τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς αὐτοῦ) is used here of Jeconiah’s brothers. There is much debate about what is meant here, but we should certainly look for an answer that takes v. 2 into account.


The deportation of Babylon: The only event that is mentioned in this history of Jesus’ ancestors is the Babylonian exile. Think of the many events that are not mentioned here and yet occurred during the lives of the individuals here listed: The exodus, the giving of the law on Sinai, the conquest, the ark arriving in Jerusalem, and the dedication of the temple. None of these are included as part of this history and yet the deportation is mentioned at the end of v. 11 and the beginning of v. 12.


Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary: The most significant break in the pattern is found in v. 16 when Matthew fails to make Joseph the subject of the active verb ἐγἐννησεν (begat) in order to make Mary the subject of the passive verb ἐγεννήθη (bore). Joseph’s significance is not as the father of Jesus, but as the son of Jacob and the husband of Mary.


Matthew’s Form: The Structure of the Text

It is possible that the careful reader would have already picked up on the fact that Matthew’s arrangement follows three distinct groupings of 14 names, a fact that is made overtly clear in v. 17. Matthew has gone to great trouble to arrange his list this way. The obvious question then is why.


The leading theory today seems to be that Matthew is employing a form of gematria,[5] the practice of assigning numerical values to letters of the alphabet (e.g., A=1, B=2, C=3, etc.). By taking the Hebrew name David (דָּוִד) and assigning numerical value to the consonants (ד=4 + ו=6 + ד=4) one can arrive at the number 14. “David” then becomes the key focus of Matthew’s structure. While this may seem impressive, the one thing we can know for absolute certain is that Matthew is not utilizing gematria. Various reasons exist for this certainty and they include but are not limited to the following:


Matthew isn’t writing in Hebrew: While it is true that a gematrical sum of דָּוִד comes to 14, Matthew is writing in Greek. Applying the same theory to Δαυίδ arrives at a sum of 38 (δ=4 + α=1 + υ=20 + ι=9 + δ=4). It is difficult to imagine that Matthew would expect his audience to follow this sequence when it is only discernable through back translation from the original Greek into Hebrew.


Matthew emphasizes Abraham as much as he does David: The opening and closing verses highlight three people, not just two: Christ, David, Abraham (v. 1) and Abraham, David, Christ (v. 17). Seeing David as the exclusive key to this text ignores the structure provided by the author in his introduction and summary.


Gematria was not common in Matthew’s day: There is no evidence to suggest that gematria was used to any serious extent in the early first century AD. While Jewish mysticism and Gnostic heretics began utilizing it as early as the mid second century, there are very few examples gematria that would date within a hundred years of Matthew’s gospel.


Gematria is unprecedented in the Scriptures: There are no other examples of gematria found in the Scriptures. If Matthew knew that he was writing a book of a new beginning, why would he introduce a method of interpretation that has no precedent?


Gematria was rejected as a legitimate hermeneutical tool: The purpose of Scripture is to reveal God rather than obscure Him through encryption. While this cryptographical nonsense appealed to the Gnostics, early church fathers like Irenaeus soundly refuted the practice of gematria and warned against it.[6] In other words, if Matthew is in fact using gematria, then the Gnostic heretics of the second century understood Matthew far better than Irenaeus.


While this does not answer the question regarding Matthew’s three-fold fourteens, it certainly eliminates the ridiculous notion that Matthew is writing in code.


Exposition


The purpose of this genealogy is very simple: Jesus is the Christ, who is both David and Abraham’s promised seed. Matthew claims this in his opening (v. 1), proves the claim (vv. 2-16), and then concludes with a summary statement with a theological focus (v. 17).


Matthew’s Claim: Jesus Marks a New Beginning (v. 1)


“1The Book of genealogy of Jesus who is the Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham


As already stated, Matthew’s first words are designed to link the reader back to the book of Genesis and present Jesus as a kind of new beginning. With the coming of Christ, Messiah, God’s anointed One, a new era has dawned. This Jesus is claimed to be both the son of David and the son of Abraham. Why does Matthew associate Christ with David and Abraham?


There are many men who stand tall in the biblical narrative. Moses stands in a category all by himself as a man whom Yhwh spoke to as a friend (Num. 12:6-8). Joshua is of course Jesus’ namesake. Both Elijah and Elisha stand out in the book of Kings. Yet Matthew purposefully connects Jesus to David and Abraham because of God’s covenant with them.

God promised three things to Abraham: land, seed, and blessing (Gen. 12:1-3). A nation was to come from Abraham’s son Isaac that would be God’s very own possession. The land of Israel was promised to this nation, and the blessing that God would pour out would extend even to the nations. One might wonder what kind of a blessing would positively impact all the families of the earth (Gen. 12:3)? The seed promised to Abraham coincides with the seed promised to come from the woman (Gen. 3:15). This promise extends the promise God made to provide a curse reverser. God’s covenant with Abraham provides the foundation for all future covenants.


A thousand years later, God made another covenant with David, the anointed king of the people that has come from Abraham’s loins. Here God promised that there would be a seed that would come directly through David who would sit on David’s throne forever (2 Sam. 7:12-16).


Matthew is saying so much more than Jesus is an Israelite and heir to the throne via his blood ties to both Abraham and David. He is making the claim that Jesus of Nazareth is God’s Messiah because He is the specific seed promised of the woman (Gen. 3:15), to Abraham (Gen. 12:1-3), and David (2 Sam. 7:12-16). That is a claim that he sets about proving in the following verses.


Matthew’s Proof: Jesus’s Ancestry (vv. 2-16)


This list is more than a simple family tree linking Jesus with Abraham through David, but it certainly is not less than that. If Matthew claims that Jesus is THE SEED promised to both Abraham and David, then Jesus needs to be from their physical line. The text below is divided as Matthew directs in v. 17 beginning in the time between Abraham and David and concluding in the time between the deportation of Babylon to Christ.


From Abraham to David (vv. 2-6a)


2Abraham begat Isaac, and Isaac begat Jacob and Jacob begat Judah as well as his brothers. 3And Judah begat Perez as well as Zerah by Tamar, and Perez begat Hezron, and Hezron begat Ram. 4And Ram begat Amminadab, and Amminadab begat Nahshon, and Nahshon begat Salmon. 5And Salmon begat Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz begat Obed by Ruth, and Obed begat Jesse. 6aAnd Jesse begat David the king.


1:2 In the span of three names Matthew reviews the history found in Gen. 12-35. Two things become apparent. First, Messiah’s line does not take into account birth order.[7] Abraham’s first born, Ishmael, did not receive the covenant promise while Isaac did. To Isaac was born twin sons by the same woman, Rebekah. Yet it was the younger of the two, Jacob, who received the blessing and birthright. It is not therefore terribly surprising that Jacob’s fourth born, Judah, is the recipient of the covenant (Gen. 49:10). What is surprising is that his brothers are included in this covenant promise. The covenant made with Abraham is passed to Isaac, then to Jacob but is then spread to include all 12 sons of Jacob.


1:3 Twins run in the family and are known to skip a generation, as is demonstrated in Judah’s twin boys Perez and Zerah. With the mention of Tamar, our attention is drawn to the drama of Gen. 38. Yet nothing of Judah’s debauchery or Tamar’s immorality is mentioned here. The point is simply that Tamar is the person who was the means (ἐκ as a preposition of means) of Perez and Zerah’s birth. They were begat by Judah but came by means of Tamar. By the time we get to Hezron, we can place the chosen family in the land of Egypt with Joseph sitting as prime minister (Gen. 46:12).


1:4 Little is said of Ram or Amminadab, yet Nahshon was alive at the time of the exodus from Egypt and is mentioned as the head of the tribe of Judah as Israel departs Sinai (Num. 1:7). In the span of two verses, Israel has gone from a promise to an old man to a thriving nation able to put over 600,000 fighting men in the field. The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob has revealed Himself to His people, given them His law, and is leading them to the land sworn to Abraham.


1:5 Salmon marks the time of the conquest while Boaz, Obed, and Jesse mark the extended period of the judges. Two more women are mentioned, both with identical grammatical markers as Tamar (ἐκ τῆς Θαμάρ; ἐκ τῆς ῾Ραχάβ; ἐκ τῆς ῾Ροὺθ). Rahab, the prostitute from Jericho, and Ruth, the Moabitess, are presented as additional means by which the seed promised to Abraham is carried out. Israel has been brought faithfully out of Egypt, through the wilderness, and into the land. Meanwhile, the family carrying the seed has been firmly established in Bethlehem.


1:6a From Jesse to David the king. So much is assumed in those two words. Israel had chosen their own king, Saul, a man who was rejected for his constant faithlessness. Therefore, God chose a man after His own heart, anointed him, and promised him a seed to sit on his throne forever. The promise made to Abraham has now been reiterated and expanded to David. From this point forward, the line carries royal significance. This first phase begins with an obscure Aramean and ends with the beginning of a royal dynasty.


From David to Deportation (vv. 6b-11)


6bAnd David begat Solomon by she who belonged to Uriah. 7And Solomon begat Rehoboam, and Rehoboam begat Abijah, and Abijah begat Asa. 8And Asa begat Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat begat Joram, and Joram begat Uzziah. 9And Uzziah begat Jotham, and Jotham begat Ahaz, and Ahaz begat Hezekiah. 10And Hezekiah begat Manasseh, and Manasseh begat Amon, and Amon begat Josiah. 11And Josiah begat Jeconiah as well as his brothers at the time of the deportation of Babylon.


1:6b David did his fair share of begetting, but Matthew focus’ only on Solomon who came by means of Uriah’s wife. The text does not mention Bathsheba, but only refers to the one who belonged to Uriah (ἐκ τῆς τοῦ Οὐρίου). If Matthew had a feminist agenda or sought to emphasize God’s care of the downtrodden, leaving Bathsheba’s name out of the list is a strange way to go about it. But if the point is to present a grammatical precedent for female means of childbirth, then this passing reference serves quite well. This second phase begins on a high note. The torch has passed from David to Solomon. Under Solomon that torch burned with bright glory.


1:7-9 The glory of Solomon’s kingdom falls into disrepute and despair in a single generation. Rehoboam is responsible for driving the northern tribes to rebellion. The kingdom is now split and few of the men who follow the line of the king are worthy of the title. By the time of Joram, the kings of Judah have intermingled with the wicked line of Ahab and his evil offspring. It is hard to imagine things getting much worse. Yet v. 9 ends with hope with the mention of Hezekiah. This son of David reformed Judah by tearing down the high places of pagan worship and did much to restore the temple to the glory it knew in Solomon’s day. Is it possible that the line will regain the height it once knew?


1:10 A yo-yo affect seems to be in play as we see righteous Hezekiah beget Judah’s evilest king Manasseh. The Chronicler tells us of Manasseh’s repentance (2 Chr. 33:10-17) but this repentance is not embraced by his son Amon who reinstituted all of his father’s original abominations. The decline of the seed promised to Abraham and David seems unstoppable. Yet there is hope in the son begotten by Amon, Josiah.


1:11 There has not been a king like Josiah since David the king (2 Chr. 34:2). This one did right in the eyes of God and did his level best to eradicate pagan worship from the land. It is he who begat Jeconiah and his brothers. Several men succeeded Josiah when he fell in battle including three sons and a grandson. The effect of this phrase “and his brothers” has a similar implication as its mate in v. 2. The promise concerns all of those who come from Josiah’s loins because he came from David who came from Abraham. However, the line of the king can only come through Jeconiah. This seems like an impossibility, maybe even a contradiction because God cursed Jeconiah stating that no son of Jeconiah will sit on the throne (Jer. 22:30). This curse was fulfilled in the fact that Jeconiah was sent into exile when Babylon deported the nobility of Judah in 605 BC. The line of the king has fallen. This phase began at extreme heights only to fall to seemingly unredeemable depths. What will become of the seed promised to Abraham and David?


From Deportation to Christ (vv. 12-16)


12After the deportation of Babylon, Jeconiah begat Shealtiel, and Shealtiel begat Zerubbabel. 13And Zerubbabel begat Abihud, and Abihud begat Eliakim, and Eliakim begat Azor. 14 And Azor begat Zadok, and Zadok begat Achim, and Achim begat Eliud. 15And Eliud begat Eleazar, and Eleazar begat Matthan, and Matthan begat Jacob. 16And Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, by whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.


1:12 Jeconiah is mentioned again, but the context has shifted from the throne in Jerusalem to the deportation in Babylon. Under Babylonian king Evil-Merodach Jeconiah was freed from prison and provided for in recognition of his rank (2 Kings 25:27-30). In this state he begat Shealtiel who in turn begat Zerubbabel, the first governor of Judaea under the Persian king Cyrus in 539 BC (Ezra 3:2). The seed has survived deportation and is now back in the land of promise.


1:13-15 Nothing is known to us about these men who lived between the return of the exiles to Jerusalem other than the fact that they lived in the land. The promised line of the seed is in the Promised Land awaiting the promised blessing. During this time Persia would fall to Greece (331 BC). Greece would rise under Alexander the Great only to be divided into four lesser kingdoms (323 BC). Antiochus Epiphanes would exercise his reign of terror (167 BC) only to be driven out of Israel by the Maccabean revolt (167-161 BC). The Israelite Hasmonean kingdom would be established (147 BC) only to fall (76 BC) and be replaced by Roman oversight (63 BC). Yet none of these events are recorded within this genealogy. In fact, it is interesting that the line of David’s seed which holds the key to Abraham’s blessing received so little attention during these days to slip into utter obscurity.


1:16 When we read that Jacob begat Joseph (Ἰακὼβ δὲ ἐγέννησεν τὸν Ἰωσὴφ) we expect to read that Joseph in turn begat Jesus (Ἰωσὴφ δὲ ἐγένσεν τὸν Ἰσοῦς) with perhaps a reference to Jesus’ mother in the same fashion that we have read before (ἐκ τῆς Μαρίας). Yet we are shocked to see a massive departure from the pattern. Joseph is not said to have begotten anyone at all. Rather, he is said to simply be Mary’s husband (τὸν ἄνδρα Μαριάς) and that by means of Mary Jesus was born (ἐξ ἧς ἐγεννήθη Ἰησοῦς). Matthew exchanged the active verb “begat” with the passive verb “was born” while still highlighting Mary as the means of this birth and excluding Joseph as the active agent. Who begot Jesus?! Matthew does not explicitly state it here but leaves the question unanswered until 1:18-25. What is clear to the reader is that Joseph is not the natural father of Jesus while Mary is most certainly His natural mother. It is this Jesus who is called Christ. The line of the seed had fallen into the ash heap of deportation only to lay in obscurity for centuries. Yet here He is! The seed of David. The Seed of Abraham. Jesus the Christ!


Matthew’s Summary: Jesus Marks a New Beginning (v. 17)


17Therefore, all the generations from Abraham until David, fourteen generations; and from David until the deportation of Babylon, fourteen generations; and from the deportation of Babylon until Christ, fourteen generations.


The chiastic structure finds its conclusion here as Matthew repeats the names of v. 1 (Christ, David, Abraham) but in reverse order (Abraham, David, Christ). Matthew’s summary focuses on the fact that fourteen generations passed between each of these three phases. As has been discussed, there are a minimum of three names missing from this list and so we take Matthew to mean that all the generations reflect the generations presented here rather than a total of all the generations that existed during these times. Yet the question remains, why the emphasis of three sets of fourteen?


Even though David is the fourteenth name on the list, we have already ruled out the use of gematria to focus all the attention on David. Besides, both David and Abraham are found in the first table of generations. Christ concludes the third table, but what then would be the significance of the second table? Taking a step back and viewing the way Matthew arranges this list of names is helpful.


The ebb and flow of this genealogy rises and falls at the points highlighted by Matthew. The obscure Aramean rises to the throne of God’s anointed (Abraham to David). This height descends into the shame of deportation (David to deportation) only to rise to a height never before reached in the person of Jesus who is called Christ (deportation to Christ). These three tables keep track of the rise, fall, and rise of God’s promised seed of Abraham and David. The fourteen generations of each phase reflect the same change that can be seen in the phases of the moon. In fourteen days a dark and moonless night is transformed to a bright full moon only to be replaced by a vacant hole in the night sky fourteen days later. But the next phase will being another bright shining moon in its fullness.


The point Matthew is making is not tied to pagan astrology or even scientific astronomy so much as he is making a statement of times and epochs. The height of David’s kingdom was not a fulfillment, but a shadow of the greatness to come in Messiah’s kingdom. The fullness of time has now come. The king has arrived! The ebb and flow of the promised Seed has come to its fullness in Jesus who is called Christ.


Conclusion


In his expositional notes, J. C. Ryle makes three observations of this text. First, God always keeps His promises. The words spoken to Abraham and David were no idle comments. God worked all the way through human history to bring His promise about. Many times, He used means and people that were never suspected, yet His promise remained secure. Second, human nature is definitively corrupt and wicked. It is impossible to read this list of names without thinking of the despicable actions of many of the men (and women) involved. The world needs a savior, and the line of Abraham and David is no exception. Third, the magnitude of Jesus’ mercy and grace is beyond compare. The second person of the Trinity condescended to be born of a woman in the likeness of man.[8] What can we say to these things but to adore and worship this One who is called Christ? May He reign forever and ever, Amen!


Soli Deo Gloria!

[1] Charles Quarles, Matthew, Exegetical Guide to the Greek New Testament (Nashville, TN: B&H Academic, 2017), p. 13-4. [2] R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Matthew’s Gospel (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961), p. 28-9. [3] Quarles, p. 16. [4] Grant Osborne, Matthew, Zondervan Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2010), p. 64. [5] D. A. Carson, Walter Wessel, and Mark Strauss, Matthew & Mark, Revised, vol. 9, 13 vols., The Expositor’s Bible Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2010), p. 94; D John Nolland, The Gospel of Matthew, The New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005), p. 86-7; Osborne, p. 68; David Turner, Matthew, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), p. 58-60. [6] Philip Schaff, The Complete Ante-Nicene & Nicene And Post-Nicene Church Fathers Collection (London, UK: Catholic Way Publishing, 2014), Irenaeus, Against Heresies §5.30:3. [7] Nolland, p. 73. [8] J. C. Ryle, Expository Thoughts on the Gospels: Matthew (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2007), p. 3-4.

27 views

Recent Posts

See All