The Genealogies of Jesus Christ

• No man could claim to be a Hebrew without proof of his lineage. No man could be a priest or Levite without proof of his decent from Levi. (Num. 3:10). Thus all Jewish families were very careful about preserving records of their family lineage.
• The royal dynasty of the Hebrew nation was to be of David’s descendants (II Sam. 7:12-16); Solomon being the first heir after David.
• The Messiah was to be descended from David (Is. 9:6-7).
• Matthew wrote his gospel first of all for the Jewish people. He opens his case by presenting the lineage of Jesus, establishing his lineal qualification to sit on David’s throne as his heir. It is noteworthy that although the Jews of Jesus’ day rejected him as their Messiah, never once did they challenge his royal lineage. That modern Jews do so. simply reflects their prejudice and hostility towards the Lord.
• The Sanhedrian kept the public archives of Hebrew family records at Jerusalem. The national archives were destroyed when Jerusalem was burned by Rome in 70 AD. Today no Hebrew can prove his race, much less his right to the priesthood, the throne or Messiahship. They have no records prior to 70 A.D.

The differences in Matthew’s and Luke’s genealogies are not by accident. Each of them fulfills a different but necessary purpose in establishing Christ’s claim.

• Matthew gives us the legal and royal lineage through Joseph of Nazareth, his adoptive father. Jews allowed an adopted son to inherit his father’s estate. Being the adopted son of Joseph would have posed no impediment to Jesus’ right to the throne had the Jews been willing to accept him
• Luke provides us with the natural, blood lineage of Christ through the ancestors of Mary his mother
• Matthew stresses Jesus’ Abrahamic (Jewish) and his royal (Davidic) heritage (1:1).
• Luke stresses Jesus link with humanity and deity. Note that he begins with God, then Adam. Jesus , being the Son of God and the son of Mary, is God incarnate, i.e., God in human flesh. Matthew makes this same point in 1:23.

Luke show us that Jesus is descended from David through his son Nathan (Luke 3:31). This is no impediment since it was to be a descendant of David that mattered for the throne.

Some people are baffled because Luke, while tracing the lineage through Mary, says, “Jesus...being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli....” (Lk. 3:23). As R. A. Torrey explains, “Joseph’s name is introduced into this record in place of Mary’s; he being Mary’s husband. Heli was Joseph’s father-in-law; and so Joseph was called the son of Heli.” Technically Joseph was the son of Jacob (Matt. 1:16). He was the son-in-law of Heli. This sounds confusing to us, but not to the ancient Jews. “For a woman’s did not usually stand in the tables of genealogy. The term ‘son’ as used in such tables...had three meaning: (1) son by actual birth, (2) son-in-law, (3) son by creation, as in the case of Adam (Luke 3:38)” (Torrey).

The two genealogies clear up a point that could have caused some to stumble. Jeremiah 22:30 says that no descendant of Jechoniah would ever sit upon the throne of David. Thus if Jesus had actually been the literal, fleshly descendant of “Coniah, i.e. Jechoniah,” an objection could have been raised against his qualifications for the throne See Matt. 1:12). But since Jesus’ actual link to David was through Nathan, that impediment did not effect him.