23 And Jesus himself, when he began _to teach_, was about thirty
years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the _son_
of Heli, 24 the _son_ of Matthat, the _son_ of Levi, the _son_ of
Melchi, the _son_ of Jannai, the _son_ of Joseph, 25 the _son_ of
Mattathias, the _son_ of Amos, the _son_ of Nahum, the _son_ of
Esli, the _son_ of Naggai, 26 the _son_ of Maath, the _son_ of
Mattathias, the _son_ of Semein, the _son_ of Josech, the _son_ of
Joda, 27 the _son_ of Joanan, the _son_ of Rhesa, the _son_ of
Zerubbabel, the _son_ of Shealtiel, the _son_ of Neri, 28 the
_son_ of Melchi, the _son_ of Addi, the _son_ of Cosam, the _son_
of Elmadam, the _son_ of Er, 29 the _son_ of Jesus, the _son_ of
Eliezer, the _son_ of Jorim, the _son_ of Matthat, the _son_ of
Levi, 30 the _son_ of Symeon, the _son_ of Judas, the _son_ of
Joseph, the _son_ of Jonam, the _son_ of Eliakim, 31 the _son_ of
Melea, the _son_ of Menna, the _son_ of Mattatha, the _son_ of
Nathan, the _son_ of David, 32 the _son_ of Jesse, the _son_ of
Obed, the _son_ of Boaz, the _son_ of Salmon, the _son_ of
Nahshon, 33 the _son_ of Amminadab, the _son_ of Arni, the _son_
of Hezron, the _son_ of Perez, the _son_ of Judah, 34 the _son_ of
Jacob, the _son_ of Isaac, the _son_ of Abraham, the _son_ of
Terah, the _son_ of Nahor, 35 the _son_ of Serug, the _son_ of
Reu, the _son_ of Peleg, the _son_ of Eber, the _son_ of Shelah,
36 the _son_ of Cainan, the _son_ of Arphaxad, the _son_ of Shem,
the _son_ of Noah, the _son_ of Lamech, 37 the _son_ of
Methuselah, the _son_ of Enoch, the _son_ of Jared, the _son_ of
Mahalaleel, the _son_ of Cainan, 38 the _son_ of Enos, the _son_
of Seth, the _son_ of Adam, the _son_ of God.
The genealogy of Jesus given by Luke contains marked differences from that
recorded by Matthew. Possibly some of these differences can be explained
and may be found of real significance.
1. First of all, the genealogy is found in a different part of the Gospel.
In Matthew it opens the story; in Luke it closes the third chapter. This
is of course by no mere chance. The purpose of Matthew is to prove that
Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah, who, as the King of Israel, fulfills all
the Old Testament prophecies. It is of the utmost importance that Jesus
should be shown to be the Son of David and of Abraham and that the
official genealogy containing this record should open the story and even
precede the account of the nativity.
Luke, however, has given the significant account of the birth and infancy
and career of the great forerunner, John, because of the light these throw
upon the ministry of Christ. Therefore, when the career of John has been
related, when the ministry of Jesus is about to be recorded, Luke gives
his genealogy to emphasize the fact that the narrative concerning John has
closed and the story of the ministry of Jesus is about to begin. The
genealogy is thus an artistic interlude, or an important introduction. It
suggests the real purpose of the writer and marks the transition from the
ministry which called men to repentance to the saving work which secures
salvation from sin. The gospel is not good advice but good news. We are
not followers of John but of Jesus.
2. Then again, the genealogy in Matthew follows the order of descent; Luke
ascends the family line from son to father. The former is the order of an
official record; individuals are registered only as they are born; the
latter is that of a private document compiled from the public records with
a view to fixing the attention upon the particular person whose name
stands at the head of the list. This is quite in accord with the literary
art of Luke, who desires at this point in the narrative to center the
thought upon the supreme importance of Jesus, the Saviour, of whose
redeeming work he is now to write.
3. In the third place, while the names given by Luke, from Abraham to
David, correspond with those given by Matthew, the names from David to
Jesus differ. Some have attempted to explain the differences on the ground
that Matthew gives the genealogy of Joseph, while Luke gives that of Mary.
It is probably wiser to conclude that both give the genealogy of Joseph,
but Matthew traces the line of royal succession showing Jesus to be the
heir of David; while Luke gives the line of actual descent. This surely
accords with the purpose of Matthew who ever depicts Christ as the King,
and also with the purpose of Luke who is painting for us Christ as the
true, the ideal Man.
4. Then, too, the genealogy in Matthew begins with Abraham, while Luke
traces the line back to Adam. The former proves Jesus to be a Jew, the
true son of Abraham, in whom the covenant was fulfilled. The latter
reminds us that Jesus belongs to the whole human race. It makes us look
beyond all national lines and remember that this ideal Man on whom Luke is
fixing our thoughts is the Saviour of mankind.
5. When the genealogy closes with the statement that Adam was “the son of
God,” it does indicate that Jesus was reckoned as one in the great
brotherhood of man, and like all his brothers, owed his origin to God; but
it does not mean to deny that he also sustained to God a relationship that
is absolutely unique. The genealogy opens with the statement that Jesus
was the reputed Son of Joseph; he was the legal heir of Joseph and so the
promised Son of David because of the marriage of Joseph to Mary; but he
was not really the son of Joseph; he was the “only begotten Son” of God.