Some people follow a program of daily Bible reading. However, they dread when their program brings them to genealogies. They see them as nothing more than “so-and-so begat so-and-so”, and “blah blah blah”. They skim through them as quickly as possible so they can get to the stories. Other people skip them altogether, finding nothing interesting or worth reading. Both of these approaches are missing some very important things. Space in the Bible is premium, so we should approach everything in it with a more inquisitive mind, asking the questions, “Why did God use space in the Bible to include this?”, and “what am I to be getting out of this passage?” This includes the genealogies. Still others study the genealogies not to learn what the information in them teaches us, but to try to find alleged problems in them which they think will discredit the Bible as a whole.
The first genealogy is found in Genesis 4. Only 4 chapters in and we are given a genealogy of the family of Cain. The genealogy dodgers might ask, “Who cares about the descendants of wicked Cain who killed his brother and went out from the presence of the Lord in judgment?” Others ask the question, “Where did Cain get his wife?” The answer to both of these questions is found in another genealogy, in fact the very next one in the next chapter.
Genesis chapter 5 gives us the lineage of Adam though Seth to Noah. Thus, chapter 4 gives us the lineage of wicked Cain, and chapter 5 gives us the lineage of Seth, whom his mother said was given as a replacement for righteous Abel (Gen 4:25-26). This leads directly into chapter 6. These two lists of lineages are the backdrop of the flood narrative. Chapter 6 begins with the account of the behavior of men which brought on the judgment of God in the flood. It says that the sons of God married the daughters of men (vs 2 and 4). These are two of the most commonly misinterpreted verses in the Bible. Some say that fallen angels married women who gave birth to supernatural hybrid beings. This is not in the passage at all. They say the phrase “sons of God’ means angels. It does mean that in two passages – Job 1-2 and Job 38:7, but it much more often means Christians in the New Testament (Jn 1:12, Rom 8:14-19, Phil 2:15, 1Jn 3:1-2). There is also the phrase “children of God” referring to Christians (Mt 5:9, Lk 20:36, Jn 11:52, Rom 8:16 & 21, Rom 9:8, Gal 3:26, 1Jn 3:10, 1Jn 5:2). In fact, the reference in 1John 3:10 is directly in the context of righteous Abel and wicked Cain, and their spiritual descendants. There is nothing supernatural about giants. There are giants mentioned numerous times in the Old Testament. There is nothing supernatural about men being mighty and famous. Also, angels are spirits (Heb 1:13-14). Spirits do not have flesh and bones (Lk 24:39), although angels appeared momentarily and visibly to men in many forms including that of young men. Angels do not marry (Mt 22:30), and they do not have human seed to reproduce (Heb 2:16). So, the key to understanding what the first verses of Genesis 6 are talking about is the context of the two lines of the righteous and wicked and their intermarrying. This is a violation of separation from sin to God throughout the Bible in both Testaments.
Critics of the Bible question the lifespans of the men listed in Genesis 5, some of which are over 900 years. Methuselah lived the longest at 969 years. This seems incredible in the light of today’s average lifespans, but there are several things to take into account. Adam and Eve had access to the tree of life, which would have caused them to live forever (Gen 2:9, Gen 3:22). God did not forbid the tree of life until after they sinned. He did not want man to live forever in a sinful state, so He barred access until the problem of sin could be dealt with through the blood of Jesus Christ. After the consummation of God’s redemptive plan, man will again have access to the tree of life and will live forever (Jn 3:16, Rev 22:1-5).
There are at least 4 important facts we can learn from Genesis 5:
1. Critics of the oral passing of accounts before the first scriptures were written are
answered by the overlapping lives, particularly of 2 of the most attacked accounts –
creation and the flood.
a. Adam lived 56 years into the life of Lamech, Noah’s father. He died 126 years before
Noah was born. He could give an eyewitness account of Gen 1-5 to Noah’s father.
Following generations could confirm it.
b. Adam saw 8 generations after born him.
c. Adam and 8 of the first 10 generations lived almost 1/6 of human history.
d. Noah saw 10 generations born and lived 60 years into the life of Abraham. He could
give an eyewitness account of the flood.
e. Shem outlived Abraham and lived 50 years into the life of Jacob. He could also give
an eyewitness account of the flood to him.
f. Shem saw 11 generations born.
2. Seth was in the image of Adam (fallen nature passed down) (Gen 5:3, Rom 5).
3. Long life spans before the flood are to be compared to Genesis 11 after the flood (Gen
6:3 – 120 years, Ps 90:10 – 70 to 80 years like now).
4. Enoch was the first to be bodily taken (Gen 5:18-24, Heb 11:5, Jude 14).
The genealogy in Genesis 5 is followed by the one in chapter 11, which is a recording of the descendants of Seth after the flood and takes us to Abraham. So, the lineage from Adam to Noah is given in Genesis 5, and the lineage from Noah to Abraham is given in Genesis 11. Since Abraham lived approximately 4,000 years ago, we can add up the lifespans given in these two genealogies to learn that God created the earth about 6,000 years ago. The scientific evidence supports this when interpreted properly. There are many other genealogies in the Old Testament, such as in 1Chronicles 1-9. They all have their meaning and purpose. There are also many valuable nuggets to be dug out of various lineages. Genesis 10 is called the table of nations, because it explains how the descendants of Noah spread out after the flood and the tower of Babel to form the beginnings of the nations. The name Eliam only appears twice in the Bible. In 2Samuel 11:3, Eliam is the father of Bathsheba. In 2Samuel 23:34, Eliam is the son of Ahithophel. This could explain why Ahithophel turned against David (2Sam 15:31). If these verses refer to the same man, Ahithophel was Bathsheba’s grandfather. We can only see that through genealogies. They also show us 4 unlikely women getting into the lineage of Jesus Christ (Gen 38, Josh 2, Josh 6:22-25, Ruth 4, 2Sam 11-12, Mt 1:1-6 – Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba).
Keeping track of lineage was especially important to Jews, and it still is. Although Gentiles could believe and be involved to an extent in Jewish life, they could not fully partake of everything involved with the covenant because it was made particularly for Jews (Ex 19:5-6, etc.). This is made evident after the Jews began to return from exile. They had to be able to show their lineage, especially if they claimed to be of the line of priests and Levites (Ezra 2, 7, 8, 9, and 10; Neh 7). The most important reason there are genealogies in the Bible is that they show us that Jesus Christ fulfilled the prophecies and came from the correct lineage of Abraham (Gen 12, 15, 17, and 22) and of David (2Sam 7).
There are two vital genealogies in the New Testament – Matthew 1 and Luke 3. Besides these, the New Testament does not emphasize lineage because the new covenant is not just for Jews. It is for all men – Jew or Gentile (Acts 10-11, Acts 15, Eph 1-2). The purpose of these 2 genealogies is to show that Jesus came from the line of Abraham and David. The naysayers try to assert that these 2 genealogies are not consistent and contradict each other, and therefore the Bible is not the word of God. While these two lists are different, there are several possible explanations of why this is so. It is also possible that more than one of them applies.
A vital key to properly interpreting scripture is context. The book of Matthew has the Jewish perspective in mind, although it applies to all. He emphasized how Jesus fulfilled prophecy, which substantiates His status as the Messiah. This is stated 16 times in this book. That is the context of the lineage listed in Matthew 1. This is clearly stated at the outset in Matthew 1:1, “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.” The word generation is translated from the Greek word genesis, which means “source, origin: βίβλος γενέσεώς τινος a book of one's lineage, i. e. in which his ancestry or his progeny are enumerated (Thayer’s Greek Lexicon)”. It was essential that the lineage of Jesus Christ came from Abraham and David, especially to Jews who had the scriptures. Only a descendant of David had the legal right to the throne. Matthew 1 and 2 emphasize the role of Joseph, Mary’s husband, more than her. The angel of the Lord speaks to Joseph 3 times with instructions, and he had a dream with instructions as well.
Luke 3 also has a genealogy of the Lord Jesus, and it does differ from the one in Matthew. One possible explanation is the context. Luke emphasizes the role of Mary. Her name is mentioned 12 times in Luke 1 and 2. It is possible that the lineage listed in Matthew 1 is of Joseph, and the one in Luke 3 is of Mary. Normally, in the Old Testament the lineage is given of the men; but in the case of Jesus his Father was not Joseph, it was God. Therefore, both lineages would be given to show that the legal lineage of Jesus came through his “stepfather” Joseph, and the biological line which came through his mother Mary. Both Joseph and Mary came from the lineage of Abraham and David. That is why when people called Jesus the son of David, they were acknowledging that He is the Messiah. Also notice Luke 3:23, which says Jesus was “(as was supposed) the son of Joseph”.
Let us further address some of the alleged discrepancies in the 2 lineages. Matthew lists 41 people in 3 groups of 14. Luke lists 57 people. Matthew starts with Abraham and follows the line through David to Jesus. Luke starts with Jesus and works his way backwards all the way to Adam. Although the book of Luke applies to all, it is written with a broader, Gentile audience in mind. In fact, it was written to a specific Gentile named Theophilus, who was a Roman official (Lk 1:1-4). Luke takes us all the way back to Adam to show that Jesus is the Savoir of all men, not just Jews. That is also why Luke lists more people than Matthew.
Matthew lists 3 groups of 14 people totaling 41 because one is mentioned twice. This is a summary of the lineage of the Lord, not an exhaustive list. This is not unusual in the Bible and ancient secular genealogies. Matthew lists Jeconiah (Mt 1:11), who is also known as Jehoiachin (2Ki 24:6, Jer 24:1). Luke does not. One possible explanation is that Jeconiah was cursed because of his sin, and none of his descendants would inherit the throne (Jer 22:30). On the surface, this appears to be a problem. One thing to notice is that he did not have Salathiel, the next person in the lineage, until he was carried captive to Babylon (Mt 1:11-12). Salathiel never sat on the throne because Israel was conquered by Babylon. After Israel’s return from exile, his son Zerubbabel was the leader (Ezra 2-5, Hag 1-2, Zech 4), but not of an independent Israel. Israel was under the rule of the Persians (Ezra 1).
Matthew 1:16 says Jacob was the father of Joseph, but Luke 3:23 says it was Heli. There are several possibilities to consider before jumping to the unreasonable conclusion that this proves the Bible is wrong. Many people in the Bible have more than one name. Some of the apostles did. Simon is also Peter, Simon Peter, and Cephas (Mt 16:16-18, Jn 1:42). Lebbaeus had the surname was Thaddaeus (Mt 10:3). Bartholemew was also Nathaniel (Mt 10:3, Jn 1:45). Thomas was also called Didymus (Jn 21:2). The name Richard can be said to also be Rick, Ricky, Rich, Richie, Dick, and Dicky. The U.S.A. can also be called the U.S., the United States, the United States of America, and America. Nobody is running around shouting “Discrepancy, discrepancy!” It should also be mentioned that the naysayers swallow camels of issues in secular literature and strain at alleged gnat discrepancies in the Bible (Mt 23:24). This exposes their hypocrisy. Another possibility is that there was what is called a leverage marriage. In the law of Moses, if a husband died childless, his brother was to marry the widow and give his dead brother an heir (Deut 25:5:10). This was apparently a custom even before it was codified in the law of Moses (Gen 38:7-10). This was still the practice in the time of Jesus Christ on the earth (Mt 22:23-33). This was an issue of property rights. There was a man named Zelophehad who had 5 daughters and no sons. They went to Moses and asked how the inheritance would work since there was no son (Num 27, Num 36). The ruling was given that they were right. The inheritance was to stay in their tribe, so they were to marry within their tribe. Later, as Joshua was allotting the tribes their inheritance, the daughters of Zelophehad spoke to him and made their claim (Josh 17). It is possible that there was a leveraged marriage where one man Heli was the biological father, but another man Jacob was the legal father. There is no mention of Mary having any brothers, although she did have a sister (Jn 19:25). This would also fit the possibility of the lineage of Matthew 1 being the legal one, and the one in Luke being the biological one. There was no word for son-in-law, and the word son can have a broader meaning, especially in the Old Testament. It can also mean male descendant. One example is Belshazzar, the grandson of Nebuchadnezzar, who is called his son (Dan 5). Historian Eusebius wrote in “Ecclesiastical History” that a leveraged marriage explains the apparent discrepancy of who Jospeh’s father was. Another example of leveraged marriage is in 1Chronicles 2:31-35).
Naysayers of the Bible like to allege that the writers of the 4 gospels copied from each other. If Matthew and Luke did this, wouldn’t they have done a better job of falsifying their collusion? Luke in particular is a very detailed and precise historian, and the history of his writings have been thoroughly substantiated. It is absurd to think that he would not have noticed such alleged discrepancies.
One or more of the above possibilities could explain the differences in the genealogies given in Matthew and Luke. Given the miraculous nature of the Bible, the importance of its message and its extreme accuracy in prophecy and history, there is no reason to dismiss the whole Bible over some minor differences that do not invalidate the main purpose of the scriptures which can be accounted for in several ways. The Bible cannot give every detail about everything that ever happened over millennia. As John said, “And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen (Jn 21:25)”. The main purpose of the Bible is to tell us about God in spiritual terms.
Comments