Matthew 1:12-17 Two Family Trees
Format for Your Devotions
Instructions: Do not read my example devotion until you have completed your own devotional time in the scriptures. Reading my thoughts first may limit your own understanding. Let the Holy Spirit speak to you alone before looking to see what anyone else has to say, whether it is me, a Bible commentary, or a friend. Let God speak to you before you let another person speak to you. I have provided a format, but modify it to fit your needs. For example, I usually combine my application and prayer together talking to God about the application to my own life. You can go through this devotion process mentally, speaking out loud, or in writing as you wish. Don’t worry if you are not following this process exactly. Sometimes, I add extra information and sometimes I emphasize one part more than others. However, you should always think about what you learn about God from this passage.
Step 1: Pray–Ask for the Holy Spirit’s guidance first of all and that God may reveal the lessons that He wants you to have that day. Request that God protect you from Satan’s distractions (and the devil will try to distract you whether it is pinching the baby or putting you to sleep). Ask to see God more clearly as you read and think about the passage.
Step 2: Read the passage–Read to get an overview of the information first. Then start looking at specific parts after the first reading. You may read a larger or smaller section than I have here because you do not have to follow my organization at all.
Step 3: Understand the passage–You can summarize, ask and answer your own questions about the passage, visualize the story, analyze the characters, and relate this passage to other scriptures and personal experiences.
Step 4: What does this reveal about God?–What do you learn about the Father, Son, and/or Holy Spirit from this passage?
Step 5: Apply this to your own life.
Step 6: Prayer
My Example Devotion: January 6, 2019, Matthew 1:12-17
Note: In the devotion examples, I leave my questions and thought processes in the text because I am trying to demonstrate that a devotional time is a dialogue with God about what you are reading from His word. As such, any questions or ideas that you have should be explored by talking it out with God. These example devotions are not my attempts to teach you what the meaning of a particular scripture is. They are an attempt to teach you the process of devotions, which is a combination of prayer and Bible study where you explore ideas with God as you read His word.
And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoniah was the father of Shealtiel, and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel, and Zerubbabel the father of Abiud, and Abiud the father of Eliakim, and Eliakim the father of Azor, and Azor the father of Zadok, and Zadok the father of Achim, and Achim the father of Eliud, and Eliud the father of Eleazar, and Eleazar the father of Matthan, and Matthan the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ. So all the generations from Abraham to David were fourteen generations, and from David to the deportation to Babylon fourteen generations, and from the deportation to Babylon to the Christ fourteen generations.
(Understanding the Text) Matthew left out a lot of kings in his genealogy in order to make fourteen. Why? Was this because there was already a list of fourteen that the rabbi’s used? Was he counting generations as longer than a few years? There are also some discrepancies between Luke’s and Matthew’s lists in the next section. Clark gives some explanations for this. “Various ways have been proposed to explain this difficulty, but it must be admitted that none of them is perfectly satisfactory. It does not comport with the design of these notes to enter minutely into an explanation of the perplexities of these passages. All that can be done is to suggest the various ways in which attempts have been made to explain them. 1. It is remarked that in nothing are mistakes more likely to occur than in such tables. From the similarity of names, and the different names by which the same person is often called, and from many other causes, errors would be more likely to creep into genealogical tables than in other writings. Some of the difficulties may have possibly occurred from this cause. 2. Most interpreters have supposed that Matthew gives the genealogy of Joseph, and Luke that of Mary. They were both descended from David, but in different lines. This solution derives some plausibility from the fact that the promise was made to David, and as Jesus was not the son of Joseph, it was important to show that Mary was also descended from him. But though this solution is plausible, and may be true, yet it wants evidence. It cannot, however, be proved that this was not the design of Luke. 3. It has been said also that Joseph was the legal son and heir of Heli, though the real son of Jacob, and that thus the two lines terminated in him. This was the explanation suggested by most of the Christian fathers, and on the whole is the most satisfactory. It was a law of the Jews that if a man died without children, his brother should marry his widow. Thus the two lines might have been intermingled, According to this solution, which was first proposed by Africanus, Matthan, descended from Solomon, married Estha, of whom was born Jacob. After Matthan’s death, Matthat being of the same tribe, but of another family, married his widow, and of this marriage Heli was born. Jacob and Heli were therefore children of the same mother. Heli dying without children, his brother Jacob married his widow, and begat Joseph, who was thus the legal son of Heli. This is agreeable to the account in the two evangelists. Matthew says that Jacob begat Joseph; Luke says that Joseph was the son of Heli, i. e., was his legal heir, or was reckoned in law to be his son.” The SDA commentary says “Between David and Jesus—a period of about a thousand years—Luke lists 15 more generations than does Matthew, implying further omission on the part of Matthew.”
Jechoniah and Shealtiel According to the Cambridge Bible commentary “Jechonias begat Salathiel] Jehoiachin had no children of his own, ‘write ye this man childless’ (Jer_22:30). Salathiel was the son of Neri (Luke), but heir to Jehoiachin.” “For thus says the LORD concerning Shallum the son of Josiah, king of Judah, who reigned instead of Josiah his father, and who went away from this place: “He shall return here no more,” (Jer 22:11). The SDA commentary disagrees. It says that the prophecy is explained in context that Jechoniah would have no heirs to reign on the throne, not that he would have no biological heirs. It says that 1 Chronicles 3:17 & 18 lists several sons for Jechoniah.
Zerubbabel and Abiud (Ezra 2:2) According to the Cambridge Bible Commentary “Zorobabel begat Abiud] Here a step is omitted, Abiud—the Hodaiah of 1Ch_3:24—being the grandson of Zerubbabel. Rhesa, who is named as Zerubbabel’s son (Luk_3:27), is a title: the text in Luke should run, “which was the son of Rhesa Zorobabel.” The Juda of Luke is the same as Abiud.” Ezra 2:2 tells of Zerubbabel leading 50,000 Jews back to Jerusalem when the 70 years of captivity prophesied by Jeremiah were finished and Cyrus sent forth his decree (SDA commentary).
Eliakim / Azor / Zadok / Achim / Eliud / Eleazar / Matthan The SDA commentary says “Nothing more is known of the eight persons listed from Abiud to Matthan (vs. 13-15) than their names, none of them being mentioned elsewhere. These eight generations span five centuries. Matthew may have omitted certain names here in order that the third section of his genealogy might correspond to the first two sections.” The logic for omission is that there do not seem to be enough generations for this time period and Luke lists nine more names. Since it is proven that Matthew omitted names in other sections, it is logical that he may have omitted names here. I think that Matthew viewed the word begat /ghen-nah’-o/ as blood descendent rather than as a father-son relationship.
Jacob and Joseph The Cambridge Bible commentary says “Jacob begat Joseph] “Joseph which was the son of Heli” (Luke), see last note; probably Joseph was the son of Heli and the heir to Jacob. It is conjectured with much probability that Jacob was Mary’s father. In that case, although both genealogies show Joseph’s descent, they are in fact equally genealogies of Mary’s family.”
The SDA commentary has one more comment about Matthew abbreviating his lists. “Matthew may have adopted the device of an abbreviated. numerically symmetrical list, as an aid to the memory. Abbreviated lists are found in the Old Testament, as, for example, in Ezra (see on Ezra 7:a, 5). But that abbreviated genealogy was evidently considered adequate proof of Ezra’s descent from Aaron, at a time when others were denied admission to the priesthood because they could not give acceptable proof of their ancestry (Ezra 2:62; Neh. 7:64). The Jewish philosopher Philo and the Jewish historian Josephus, both of whom were practically contemporary with Jesus, gave abbreviated genealogies that they evidently considered adequate to establish their pedigrees.”
The SDA commentary points out that if you add up all the names, you only get 41, but if you have three groups of fourteen each, you should have 42. There are two explanations submitted for this. First, Jechonias should be counted twice—once in the kings’ group and once in the captivity group. The second possible explanation is that Matthew originally listed Jehoiakim as the father of Jechonias. I guess Matthew could have thought he wrote it and then didn’t, or it could have been omitted later. I’m not too thrilled with either possible explanation for the discrepancy.
(Application) I don’t really have any applications for myself from the genealogies of Matthew today. There are probably lessons that I could learn but I’m tired of trying to research them. That’s why I just put commentary comments today. It is interesting that apparent contradictions that some could use to weaken a person’s faith can be explained satisfactorily when looked at from a different perspective. Some people might be bothered that the genealogies of both Matthew and Luke end in Joseph, but if Joseph was Jacob’s legal heir through his marriage to Mary, then the genealogies are also that of Mary. Thus, the legal and the actual genealogies are both represented here. When I cannot see the way or truth of God clearly, my lesson is to wait, watch, and research to see how the way clears up when looked at differently. Many times the problem is not in the words, but in my preconceptions of what the words should mean. Other times, I am simply missing key pieces of information that would shed a whole different light on the meaning or situation. I need to be careful not to read my own feelings, attitudes, and misconceptions into God’s word and into the situations around me.
(Revelation of God) God uses humans to explain His messages to other humans. Matthew was trying to show that Jesus had the lineage spoken of in the Old Testament prophecies of the Messiah. To our modern culture, this seems pointless and boring, but to the people who had been steeped in the prophecies for centuries and were eagerly awaiting the promised Messiah, Matthew’s genealogy was a precious promise. Matthew understood his own people and that they needed to know about Jesus’ lineage. God understands us and knows that even today, it is important for us to see the link between the prophecies and people in the Old Testament and the fulfillment in the New Testament.
(Prayer) Teach me to look beyond my own limited understanding to see the true meaning in the scriptures. Give me wisdom to understand and faith to look beyond my first impressions. Most of all, I want Your words to sink into my heart and make me more like You in all ways.