Matthew 1 - Proving a Claim

Being the daughter of a history buff, I love learning about my ancestry. My aunt has done wonderful research into our family history, and we've learned incredible stories about those who have gone before us, whose blood runs through us. For example, my great-great-great... [ad nauseum] ... grandfather showed up near Boston Harbor one day in the 1700's and ended up in the hull of a ship hauling out crates of tea in what became the most famous tea party in our country's history. Of course, there are some shady characters in there too, but let's not focus on my boot-legging great-grandfather. We'll just leave him out of this.


As much as our ancestry may be important to some of us, it was extremely important in the Jewish culture. Why? According to Matthew Henry, "The Jews were very exact in preserving their pedigrees, and there was a providence in it, for the clearing up of the descent of the Messiah from the fathers." The Jews were looking for the coming Messiah, and they knew that He would not only be a Jew, a son of Abraham, but He would also be a son of David and heir to his eternal throne. Verse 1 of Matthew 1 could be considered Matthew's thesis: "The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham." (ESV). Matthew makes a bold claim in verse 1, and then he uses the rest of the chapter to back it up.

It's important to note that this genealogy is through Joseph's line. Although Jesus was no blood relation to Joseph, since inheritances went from father to son, this establishes Jesus as the son of David and Abraham legally. Interestingly, Luke 3 also includes a genealogy which varies from this one from David until Jesus. It is believed that Luke traces the lineage of Jesus through Mary, His mother, which would make it a record of His bloodline. So, whether through Mary or Joseph, by blood or by law, Jesus is a son of David and of Abraham and so fulfills the promises regarding the Messiah. It is also important to note that while Matthew traces Jesus' lineage through Joseph, he never claims any blood relation between the two: "Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ" (Matt. 1:16).

There are a few names that jump out from the genealogy as I remember the Old Testament accounts. Most notably, there are four women (five, if you include Mary). Jewish genealogies didn't typically include women, and yet here they are listed in the Messiah's lineage. Why? Because the Messiah didn't come just to save men, He came to save all people, men and women alike. And what kind of women were these? Tamar and Rahab prostituted themselves, Bathseheba was an adulteress, Ruth was a Moabitess and Rahab was a Canaanite woman. Most people would not have prided themselves on such a heritage, but Christ the Messiah came not just to Jews and not just to men, for "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to the promise" (Gal. 3:28-29). This promised Messiah is not just for the Jewish people, He is for all people.

The final proof that Matthew gives regarding Jesus' fulfillment of Messianic prophecy is the virgin birth. The Jewish scholars would have known the verse that Matthew quotes, "Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel" (Isaiah 7:14, Matt. 1:23). The promised Messiah would be born of a virgin, and Matthew gives a startling account of Mary, betrothed to Joseph, with child from the Holy Spirit, and giving birth to the Savior of the world. Immanuel, "God with us." The God of the universe incarnate - in the flesh, in the flesh of a tiny, wrinkled, newborn baby. And they called His name Jesus - "Joshua" or "Yeshua," meaning "God is salvation" - for He would save His people, all people, from their sins.

It took me much longer than I though to get this blog posted (in consequence of having a 16-month-old vying for my attention). I will try to post earlier in the week, but I may try to break up Matthew chapter 2 into segments, and make shorter posts. So if you are reading with me, read the whole chapter, but focus on the first half.

Please comment and let me know what you see in the first chapter of Matthew. What stuck out to you? Did God show you anything you hadn't seen before?

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Amy, this is fascinating! I am not reading along in Matthew right now, but I am going to read your blog posts anyway. Matt and I were just discussing how skeptics try to say Jesus isn't technically in the line of David because of Joseph not being a blood relative, but like you said, he legally was his father, and then there's Mary's side. There are no "But's" about it. That is so cool! -Sarah H.

Amy said...

Thanks Sarah! Another issue skeptics bring up is Mary's virginity. Some say that since the word for "virgin" in Isaiah can also mean "girl of marriageable age" that Mary wasn't a virgin. However in the account of the angel's announcement to Mary in Luke 1, the Greek meaning is, "How can this be, since I have known no man?" I think skeptics will do anything to discredit the truth and make Jesus out to be just a good teacher. And we know that's not possible: either He was a liar, a lunatic, or He was Lord, the promised Messiah.

Anonymous said...

Sheesh. There really are no loopholes, yet they will still try to find some. It is so important to go back to the Hebrew or Greek.

I pray that His sacrifice becomes known to all and that He comes back soon. -Sarah