The genealogy of Jesus Christ in the Old Testament is
intermingled with so many others that are useless that it cannot be distinguished. If
Moses had kept only the record of the ancestors of Christ, that might have been too plain.
If he had not noted that of Jesus Christ, it might not have been sufficiently plain. But,
after all, whoever looks closely sees that of Jesus Christ expressly traced through Tamar,
- Blase Pascal, Pensees (578), 1660
There are four major division of genealogies.
|Gen 5 MT||1 Chr 1 - MT||Luke 3|
|3 - Adam||1 - Adam||38 - Adam|
|4 - Seth||1 - Sheth||38 - Seth|
|5 - Enos||1 - Enosh||38 - Enos|
|9 - Cainan||2 - Kenan||37 - Cainan|
|12 - Mahalaleel||2 - Mahalaleel||37 - Maleleel|
|15 - Jared||2 - Jered||37 - Jared|
|18 - Enoch||3 - Henoch||37 - Enoch|
|21 - Methuselah||3 - Methuselah||37 - Mathusala|
|25 - Lamech||3 - Lamech||36 - Lamech|
|28-29 - Noah||4 - Noah||36 - Noe|
|Gen 11 MT||1 Chr 1 - MT||Luke 3||Gen 11 (LXX)||1 Chr 1 (LXX)|
|(10:)32 - Noah||4 - Noah||36 - Noe||10:32 - Noe||4 - Noe|
|10 - Shem||24 - Shem||36 - Sem||10 - Sem||24 - Sem|
|10 - Arphaxad||24 - Arphaxad||36 - Arphaxad||10 - Arphaxad||24 - Arphaxad|
|36 - Cainan||12 - Cainan|
|12 - Salah||24 - Shelah||35 - Sala||12 - Sala||24 - Sala|
|14 - Eber||25 - Eber||35 - Heber||14 - Heber||25 - Eber|
|16 - Peleg||25 - Peleg||35 - Phalec||16 - Phaleg||25 - Pheleg|
|18 - Reu||25 - Reu||35 - Ragau||18 - Ragau||25 - Ragau|
|20 - Serug||26 - Serug||35 - Saruch||20 - Seruch||26 - Seruch|
|22 - Nahor||26 - Nahor||34 - Nachor||22 - Nachor||26 - Nachor|
|24 - Terah||26 - Terah||26 - Thara||24 - Tnarrha||26 - Tnarrha|
|26 - Abram||27 - Abram||34 - Abraham||26 - Abram||27 - Abram|
New Testament follows Gen 11 LXX reading. 1 Chronicles (MT and LXX) follows Gen (MT). Cainan may have appeared to be repeating from Gen 5:9 list and been dropped from MT listing in Genesis. 1 Chron may have repeated this before it was copied to LXX for 1 Chr 1
|Ruth 4||1 Chron 1-2||Luke 3|
|1:28 - Abraham||34 - Abraham|
|34 - Isaac||34- Isaac|
|2:1 - Israel||34 - Jacob|
|1 - Judah||33 - Juda|
|18 - Pharez||4 - Pharez||33 - Phares|
|18 - Hezron||5 - Hezron||33 - Esrom|
|19 - Ram||9 - Ram||33 - Aram|
|19 - Amminadab||10 - Amminadab||33 - Aminadab|
|20 - Nahshon||11 - Nahshon||32 - Naason|
|20 - Salmon||11 - Salma||32 - Salmon|
|21 - Boaz||11 - Boaz||32 - Booz|
|21 - Obed||12 - Obed||32 - Obed|
|22 - Jesse||12 - David||32 - Jesse|
|22 - David||15 - David||31 - David|
|1 Chron 3||1/2 Kings||Matt 1||Luke 3|
|1 - David||1 Kings 5:7 - David||6 - David||31 - David|
|5 - Solomon||5:7 - Solomon||6 - Solomon||31 - Nathan|
|10 - Rehoboam||11:43 - Rehoboam||7 - Roboam||31 - Mattatha|
|10 - Abia||14:31 - Abijam||7 - Abia||31 - Menan|
|10 - Asa||15:8 - Asa||7 - Asa||31 - Melea|
|10 - Jehoshaphat||15:24 - Jehoshaphat||8 - Josaphat||30 - Eliakim|
|11 - Joram||22:50 - Jehoram||8 - Joram||30 - Jonan|
|11 - Ahaziah||2 Kings 8:24 - Ahaziah||8 - Ozias||30 - Joseph|
|11 - Joash||11:2 - Joash (*)||30 - Juda|
|12 - Amaziah||14:1 - Amaziah||30 - Simeon|
|12 - Asariah||14:21 - Azariah||29 - Levi|
|12 - Jotham||15:7 - Jotham||9 - Joatham||29 - Mattat|
|13 - Ahaz||16:1 - Ahaz||9 - Achaz||29 - Jorim|
|13 - Hezekiah||16:20 - Hezekiah||9 - Ezekias||29 - Eliezer|
|13 - Manasseh||20:21 - Manasseh||10 - Manasses||29 - Jose|
|14 - Amon||21:18 - Amon||10 - Amon||28 - Er|
|14 - Josiah||21:26 - Josiah||10 - Josias||28 - Elmodam|
|15 - Jehoiakim||23:34 - Eliakim = Jehoiakim||28 - Cosam|
|16 - Jeconiah||24:6 - Jehoiachin||11 - Jechonias||28 - Addi|
|28 - Melchi|
|27 - Neri|
|17 - Salathiel||12 - Salathiel||27 - Salathiel|
|12 - Zorobabel||27 - Zorobabel|
|13 - Abiud||27 - Rhesa|
|13 - Eliakim||27 - Joanna|
|13 - Azor||26 - Juda|
|14 - Sadoc||26 - Joseph|
|14 - Achim||26 - Semei|
|14 - Eliud||26 - Mattathias|
|15 - Eleazar||26 - Maath|
|25 - Nagge|
|25 - Esli|
|25 - Naum|
|25 - Amos|
|25 - Mattathias|
|24 - Joseph|
|24 - Janna|
|24 - Melchi|
|24 - Levi|
|15 - Matthan||24 - Mattat|
|15 - Jacob||23 -Heli|
|16 - Joseph||23 - Joseph|
|16 - Jesus||23 - Jesus|
It is fairly easy to demonstrate that there are "gaps" in the genealogies. These were well known to the audience of the book.
The phrase "son of" can mean "descendent of", and does not necessarily mean "a single generation". As an example:
Mat 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.
Jesus was not the son of David or Abraham in the sense that neither of them was his father.In this instance, "son of" means "descendent of". Jesus is frequently called the son of David. We would use the phrase "descendent of David."
God frequently changed the name of someone to include Himself in their name. This was standard practice in that culture and time. This practice was not limited to Israel. For instance Esarhaddon is mentioned in 2 Kings 19:37 means "Assur has given a brother." Asurnasipal means "Assur preserves the son." Assur was the name of one of the Assyrian deities.
2 Ki 23:34 And Pharaoh nechoh made Eliakim the son of Josiah king in the room of Josiah his father, and turned his name to Jehoiakim, and took Jehoahaz away: and he came to Egypt, and died there.
The New Testament relies on the text of the LXX more closely than it does the MT.
Thus all the very apparent weaknesses are strength. Example; the two genealogies in Saint Matthew and Saint Luke. What can be clearer than that this was not concerted? - Pascal, Pensees (578).
. Now, when men lived so long, children lived long with their parents. They conversed long with them. But what else could be the subject of their talk save the history of their ancestors, since to that all history was reduced, and men did not study science or art, which now form a large part of daily conversation? We see also that in these days tribes took particular care to preserve their genealogies. Pascal, Pensees (626).
The most common contemporary solution to the differences between Matthew and Luke's genealogy is that Luke's is Mary and Matthew's is Joseph's genealogy. As an example.
Luke traces Marys geneaology up from Davids son Nathan, whereas Matthew traces Joseph's geneaology up from Davids son, Solomon, while Chronicles follows a different son of Zerubbabel up. See Web site.
The opinion that Luke's genealogy is that of Mary was unknown to Christian antiquity. In the fifteenth century it was first propounded by Roman Catholic Church to do honour (as they supposed) to Mary. It was first broached by Annius of Viterbo, a.d. 1502.
The problem is the text does not say this at all.
Julius Africanus ca 230 AD said:
Matthan, descended from Solomon, begat Jacob. Matthan dying, Melchi, descended from Nathan, begat Hell by the same wife. Therefore Hell and Jacob are uterine brothers. Hell dying childless, Jacob raised up seed to him and begat Joseph, his own son by nature, but the son of Hell by law. Thus Joseph was the son of both.
Christian antiquity is agreed that:-
Copyright 2001 - Douglas Gilliland