Monday, May 21, 2012


Matthew's strange genealogy of Jesus:  "{1} The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. {2} Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren; {3} And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram; . . . {5} And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse; {6} And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias; . . . {16} And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ. {17} So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations" (Matt. 1:1-17).

While it is extraordinary that a Jewish “historian,” such as Matthew, would include four women in Christ’s genealogy in his Gospel account, it is even more amazing that he included those four.  Tamar “played the harlot” in order to get her father-in-law to get her pregnant (Gen. 38:6-30).  Rahab was not only a Gentile, she actually was a harlot (Josh. 2:1-21; 6:17-25).  Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah, committed adultery with King David, and it not only resulted in the murder of her husband, and the death of her child, she ended up being just one of David’s many wives and concubines (2 Sam. 3:2-5; 5:13-15; 11:2 – 12:12). 

And finally, there is Mary who gave birth to Jesus (Matt. 1:16; Lk. 3:23).  She has been the subject of much scorn from those who do not believe she was a virgin when she conceived of the Holy Spirit; even Joseph did not believe her (Matt. 1:18-20).  And yet, the virgin birth of the Messiah was prophesied over 600 years earlier (Isa. 7:14; 9:6).

Had Matthew’s genealogy been like Luke’s, having gone all the way back to Adam (Lk. 3:38), he would have had to included Eve, not exactly the poster girl of spirituality.  And, he would have had to say something similar about Eve as he had about Mary.  You see, just as Joseph was not the father of Jesus, technically, neither was Adam part of the Lord’s lineage, unless of course, we include the “rib thingy” (Gen. 2:21-23).  Of course, Luke included Adam, so perhaps I am in error on this one (Lk. 3:38).  Nevertheless, Genesis 3:15 says, “And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her Seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise His heel.”  In other words, all those “begats,” from Adam to Joseph, did not apply to Jesus; He was the only begotten Son of God (Jn. 3:16)!

When you think about it, no one in Christ’s genealogy is worthy, man or woman!

No comments:

Post a Comment