We find other traces of the existence of the public tables of descent in the New Testament : the taxation spoken of by Luke ii, 2, 3, would clearl}' indicate this, for how could each one be able to go to his own city unless he knew the specific tribe to which he belong- ed? Hence it was, we think, thiit Paul was aide with confidence to appeal to the Hebrews concerning the lineage of Christ, "for it is evident," says he, " that our Lord sprung out of Judah" (Heb. vii, 14; 2 Tim. ii, 8). To evince this beyond reasonable doubt, it pleased God to give us, by his inspired servants Mat- thew and Luke, these genealogies.
II. Statement of the Subject. — The following is a tabular view of these records, with which it will be convenient to compare the parallel lists as found in the Hebrew copies of the Old Testament.
No.
Luke iii, 23-38. (Inverted.)
Matt, i, 2-17.
Gen. V, X, xi, and Ruth iv.
I Chron. i.ii, iii.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. fi. 7. 8. !1.
lo! 11.
12. 13. 14. 15. K). 17. IS. I'J.
Adam
^^Ctll
Enos
Cainan
Maleleel
J.ared
Knoch
Mathusela
Lamech
Noe
?em
Arphaxad
Cainan
Sala
Kbcr
Phalec
Rajraii
Saroucli
Naclior
Ad.am
Seth
Enos
Cainan
Jlahalaleel
.Tared
Adam.
Sheth.
Enosh.
Kenan.
Mahalaleel."
Jered.
Henoch.
Methuselah j Methuselah. Lamech Lamech. Noah Noah. Shorn Sheni.
Arphaxad
Saiah
i;ber Peleg Reu
Serug Nahor
Arphaxad.
sii'eiaii'.
Eber.
Peleg. Reu. Serug. Nahor.
GENEALOGY
772
GENEALOGY
No.
Luke iii, 'iS-IiS. (Inverted.)
Matt.i,2-n.
(ien. V, X, xi,and Ruth iv.
1 Chron. i, ii, iii.
'20. 21. 2'2. 23. 24. 25. 26. 2T. 2S. 29. 30. 3L 32. S3. 34.
30.
ss!
30. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 4G. 47. 4S. 49. 50. 01. 52. 53. 54.
55.
50.
5T.
5S.
59. CO. CI. C2. 63. C4. 65.
CG.
67.
OS. GO. TO. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77.
Thara
Abraam
I saac
Jacob
Joudas
Phares
l-jivom
Aram
Aminadab
Naason
Salmon
Pooz
Obed
Jcss.ai
David
Nathan
Mattatha
Jlaiiian
Melea
Elialceim
Jonan
Joseph
Jouda
Simeon
Levi
JIatthat
Joreim
Eliezer
Jose
Er
Elmodam
Cosam
Addi
Melchi
Neri
Salathiel
Zorobabel
Terah Abram
Terah.
Abra(,lia)m.
Isaac.
Israel.
Judab.
Pharez.
Ilezron.
l!am.
Amniinadab.
Nah.-hon.
Salina.
Boaz.
Obed.
Jesse.
David.
Solomon.
Kehoboam.
Abia.
Asa.
Jebosbapbat.
Joram.
Abaziah.
Joasli.
Aniaziah.
.Aza'-'iah.
Jotliam.
Ahaz.
llezckiab.
Manasseh.
Amon.
Josiab.
Jehoiakim.
Jtconiah.
Salathiel and
Pedaiah.
Zerubbabel.
Hananiah.
Pel.itiab and
Itepbaiah.
.\rnan.
Obadiah.
Sbecbaniab.
Sbemaiab.
Abraam
Isaac
Jacob
Joudas
Phaies
Esrom
Aram
.\minadab
Naason
Salmon
Booz
Obed
Jessai
David
Solomon
Iloboam
Abia
Asa
Jos.nphat
Joram
Pharez Hczron Kam Amminadab
Nalishon
Salmon
Boaz
Obed
Jesse
David
Ozias
Jotliam
.\chaz
Ezekias
Manasses
Amon
Josias
Jechonias Salathiel Zorobabel
'.'.Z'.'.'.'.'.'J
\
Khesa
Joanna
Joudas
Joseph
Scmci
Mattatbias
Maath
Nagsai
Esli
Naoum
Amos
Mattatbias
Joseph
Janna
Melchi
Levi
Matthat
i:ii
Joseph
Jesls
j (
Abioud Eliakeim
Azor
(
Neariah. Elioenai and Azrikam. Johanan and Anani.
t
i
(
Sadoc
Acheim
Elioud
Eleazar
Matthan
Jacob
Joseph Jf.sus
ted generations in the latter part of the list. See Ra-
HAB ; liUTII.
On tlie other hand, the names Menan and Melea, also Mattathias and Maath, seem to be supertluous rep- etitions of others in the same li.^^t.
1. Difficulties that apphj to the Evangelists ixinviD- UALLY. — (1.) It is objected that Jechoniah was not the son of Josiah, but his grandson. Answer : Matthew does not mean to say he was his son ; for verses 11 and 12 are obviouslj' intended to designate two differ- ent persons, viz. Jehoiakim, and his son Jehoiachin. Tliat the former is the person meant in ver. 11 is evi- dent from the addition of " his brethren." "Whose brethren ? Kot Jehoiacliin's (or Jeclionias), for he had none, but Jehoialiim's, viz. Jehoahaz and Zedeki- ah, the former of wliom reigned before him (thougli a younger brother), and the latter after him (1 Chron. iii, 15-17). Admitting tliis, we sec the con.'isteney of the evangelist as to the nunilier of generations in the second and third series ; whereas they who make Jechonias (ver. 11, 32) to be the same penson leave only thirteen in the second series, if Jechonias be add- ed to the third; or in the third, if lie be placed to the second. If the objection had any truth, the evange- list would be palpably inconsistent with himself! St. Jerome (/w Matt/iaum, cap. i) confirms this view : "If Jechonias be included in the first tessarodecade there will not be fourteen generations : we may therefore assume that the first Jechonias meant Joalcim and the latter Joachin — the one spelt with the letters h and m, the other with ch and n; which letters, in the course of time, by faidt of transcribers, were confounded by Greeks and Latins." Porphyr}- brought forward this objection against Matthew's genealogy, and we find the same father, in his Comment, en Llaniel, thus re- plying : '■ In the Gospel of Matthew one generation seems to be wanting, for the second tessarodecade ends with Joakim, the son of Josiah, and the third be- gins with Joachin, the son of Joakim. Porphj-rj-, ig- norant of this, would exhibit his own skill in proving the falsit}' of the evangelist Matthew." "We may add that some respectable MSS. still exhibit the name of Jehoiakim as well as that of Jechonias. (See Strong's Greek Harmony of the Gospels, ad loc.) The triple sc- ries of fourteen generations will therefore stand thus See Jehoi.\ki.ai.