The Genealogy of Jesus (Part 1)

Dante Gabriel Rossetti. Ecce Ancilla Domini [The Annunciation] (oil on canvas), 1849-1850.
Tate, London.

In his massive volume, The Birth of the Messiah, a Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in Matthew and Luke, Raymond E. Brown rightly observes: “to the modern reader there are few things in the Bible less meaningful than the frequent lists of descendants or ancestors” (p. 64). Yet, as we have continued our study of Scripture, we have found the genealogical lists to be extremely important. In Genesis they propel us through the narrative, giving us the origins of families and peoples who play very important roles later on in the Bible. Recall how Lot’s daughters seduce him after Sodom and Gomorrah are destroyed: “So both of Lot’s daughters became pregnant by their father. The older daughter had a son, and she named him Moab; he is the father of the Moabites of today. The younger daughter also had a son, and she named him Ben-Ammi; he is the father of the Ammonites of today” (Genesis 19: 36-38). Both the Moabites and the Ammonites become bitter enemies of the Israelites; yet, from the Moabites comes Ruth, David’s great grandmother and an ancestor of Jesus (Matthew 1: 5). Likewise, Esau, Jacob’s twin brother, becomes the father of the Edomites, another bitter enemy of the Israelites (Genesis 36: 31-43). In an often-unnoticed thread of Scripture, the Edomites resurface as looters when the Babylonians sack Jerusalem in 586 B.C.; for their actions they become the object of a dreadful prophecy in Obadiah. They show up again in the New Testament when we learn that Herod, who sets out to destroy the infant Jesus, is half Edomite (Josephus, Antiquities 14, 403). Little wonder that God says in Malachi, the last book of the Hebrew scriptures, “Was not Esau Jacob’s brother?… Yet I have loved Jacob, but Esau I have hated, and I have turned his mountains into a wasteland and left his inheritance to the desert jackals” (Malachi 1: 2-3). When we encounter genealogies in the Bible, we do well to pay attention to them: they comprise the warp and the woof into which the tapestry of the Bible is woven.

Joachim Antonisz Wtewael. Lot and His Daughters (oil on canvas), c. 1597-1600.
Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA), Los Angeles.

The genealogy of Jesus plays a prominent role in both Matthew and Luke. Matthew, written by a Jew for a Jewish audience, functions like a swinging door between the Old and New Testaments, swinging backward into the Old, drawing up threads of prophecy, and pulling them up into the New. Appropriately, then, the gospel of Matthew begins with the genealogy of Jesus, starting with Abraham, father of the Jews, and ending with “Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ” (Matthew 1: 1-16). Luke, written by a gentile for a gentile audience, places Jesus’ genealogy in chapter three, just after he is baptized and immediately after “a voice came from heaven: ‘You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased’” (Luke 3: 22). Luke begins his genealogy by saying, “Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph….” and he ends it with “…the son of Adam, the son of God” (Luke 3: 38). Matthew traces Jesus’ genealogy to Abraham, emphasizing his Jewish roots; Luke traces his genealogy through Abraham, back to Adam, and finally to God, emphasizing Jesus’ humanity and his relationship to the entire human family.

Matthew and Luke present several important differences in their genealogies that have given critics endless problems. Raymond Brown summarizes them well:

• Overall

Matthew’s list descends from Abraham to Jesus and uses the formula “A was the father of B; B was the father of C”; Luke’s list ascends from Jesus through Adam to God and uses the formula “A, (son) of B, (son) of C.” Since Luke’s genealogy extends beyond Abraham to Adam and to God, his list is naturally longer, 77 names compared to Matthew’s 41.

• Pre-monarchical Period (c. 2100 B.C. - 1010 B.C.)

During the period between Abraham and David, Matthew and Luke agree, although some manuscripts of Luke place Arni and Admin between Hezron and Amminadab, while Matthew has only Ram.

• Monarchical Period (1010 B.C. - 586 B.C.)

During the period between David and the Babylonian exile the lists are totally different, agreeing only on David. Luke lists 21 names, Matthew 15. Of the 21 listed by Luke, only David and Nathan occur in the Old Testament records.

• Post-monarchical Period (586 B.C - 6/5 B.C.)

During the period from the beginning of the Babylonian exile to the birth of Jesus, Luke lists 22 names, Matthew 13. The lists only agree on the first two and last two names (Shealtiel and Zerubbabel/Joseph and Jesus). These four are the only names for which there is any biblical information. The others do not occur in the Hebrew Scriptures.

To illustrate the differences in detail, I have set out the genealogies in parallel columns:

Notice the major differences. Since Luke emphasizes Jesus’ relationship to the entire human family, he naturally extends his genealogy back to Adam—and, indeed, to God, reinforcing the voice from heaven’s claim at Jesus’ baptism that he is the Son of God. Since Matthew emphasizes Jesus’ Jewish roots, he begins with Abraham. From Abraham to David, Matthew and Luke agree. But at David the lists separate radically. Matthew traces Jesus’ descent through Solomon, David’s son to Bathsheba and heir to his throne; Luke traces it through Nathan, one of four sons born to him by Bathsheba (the four sons were Shimea, Shobab, Nathan and Solomon—see 1 Chronicles 3: 5). The lists converge again in the post-monarchical period with Sheaaltiel and Zerubbabel, then separate. They strike another dramatic difference at Jesus’ grandfather: Matthew lists him as Jacob, while Luke lists him as Heil.

Historically, two basic explanations have been given to explain the differences: 1) Both Matthew and Luke present Joseph’s genealogy, but there was a levirate marriage at one or more points in the line and 2) Matthew gives Joseph’s lineage, while Luke gives Mary’s. We’ll explore that levirate marriage explanation in Part 2 of this Genealogy of Jesus blog!