Bible Commentaries
E.M. Zerr's Commentary on Selected Books of the New Testament
Matthew 1
Matthew 1:1-17; cf. Matthew 22:41-42). The birth of Jesus is then
described, with the announcement of the angel to Joseph, and the
protection of her virginity until His birth (Matthew 1:18-25).
POINTS TO PONDER
* The genealogy, comparing it with the one in Luke's gospel
* The prophecies of Isaiah and the angel regarding the virgin birth
* The significance of the names given to the child born of Mary
REVIEW QUESTIONS
1) What are the main points of this chapter?
- The genealogy of Jesus Christ - Matthew 1:1-17
- The birth of Jesus Christ - Matthew 1:18-25
2) Whose genealogy is given by Matthew? (Matthew 1:1)
- Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham
3) What four women are included in this genealogy? (Matthew 1:3; Matthew 1:5-6)
- Tamar
- Rahab
- Ruth
- The wife (Bathsheba) of Uriah
4) What was the initial relationship between Joseph and Mary? (Matthew 1:18)
- Betrothed (engaged)
5) When and how did Mary become pregnant? (Matthew 1:18)
- Before she and Joseph came together
- From the Holy Spirit (cf. Luke 1:26-35)
6) What two names would be given the child, and what do they mean?
(Matthew 1:21-23)
- Jesus (savior); Immanuel (God with us)
7) What scripture in the OT was fulfilled by the virgin birth of Christ?
(Matthew 1:22-23)
- That written by Isaiah in Isaiah 7:14
8) How long did Joseph wait until he knew Mary as his wife? (Matthew 1:25)
- Until she had given birth to her son (Jesus)
Matthew 1:1-25
Matthew 1:1-17
This genealogy is quite unlike that in Luke 3:1-38. Labored efforts to reconcile the two generally lead to suppositions concerning Levirate marriages in which the issue had two fathers (the legal and the actual), and also to various renditions of the same name, and other devices pressed into service for the purpose of achieving a "harmony"! Perhaps the best, and certainly the simplest, reconciliation of these two lists is to view Matthew's account as the ancestry of Joseph, and Luke's genealogy as the record of Mary's ancestry. Two separate genealogies of Jesus Christ are absolutely necessary in the establishment of the Christ, first as the blood descendant of David, and secondly, as the legal heir to the royal throne of the Hebrews. Matthew shows Christ as the legal heir to the throne by tracing his ancestry down through the royal line of the kings of Israel.
Luke's genealogy is utterly different, because it is not concerned with title to a throne but with the blood ancestry of Jesus. The only real difficulty in this view is the statement in Luke 3:23 that Joseph is the "son of Heli." R. A. Torrey stated that "Joseph's name is introduced into this place instead of Mary"s, he being Mary's husband. Heli was Joseph's father-in-law; and so Joseph was called "the son of Heli." While Joseph was son-in-law of Heli, he was, according to the flesh, actually the son of Jacob (Matthew 1:16). Luke 3:38).
There is no evidence that the names Shealtiel and Zerubbabel in the two lists refer to the same individuals. It would be just as reasonable to suppose that the two Eliakims refer to the same man. The Jews, as do all peoples, used the same names over and over. There are two each of the following names in the Luke account of the76 generations from Christ to Adam: Cainan, Matthat, Melchi, Levi, Joseph, Mattathias, and Jesus!
The two genealogies of Jesus also clear up another point. The prophecy in Jeremiah 22:30 forbade any descendant of Jechoniah ever to sit upon the throne of David. Therefore, if Jesus had actually been the literal fleshly descendant of "Coniah," as he was called, it would have countermanded his claim upon the throne due to the prophecy, Joseph, Jesus" foster father, however, could lawfully transfer his right to the throne to his legal son, Jesus Christ! Thus, Jesus was the legal son with right to the throne of David through Jechoniah, and he was the literal blood-son of David through Nathan, the ancestor of Mary, Jesus" mother. How marvelous are the ways of the Lord. Again, from Torrey, "As we study these two genealogies, we find that so far from constituting a reason for doubting the accuracy of the Bible, they are rather a confirmation of the minutest accuracy of that Book ... We need no longer stumble over the fact of there being two genealogies, but discover and rejoice in the deep meaning of the fact that there are two." Matthew 1:1)
The book of the generation. The true meaning of this appears in a glance at various renditions in some of the versions and translations: "The book of the origin of Jesus Christ" Hebrews 2:14). Both David and Christ were sent by their father with a message to the brethren. Both were rejected. David was, in a sense, a mediator between the of Israel and the Philistines; Christ is the one Mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5). Matthew considered it of great importance to identify Jesus Christ as the Son of David, a popular designation for the Messiah; and he does so in the very first verse of his gospel.
The son of Abraham. Jesus was the "son of Abraham" in the following senses: (1) He was the "seed" of promise (Galatians 3:16). (2) He was the legal son and heir through Isaac, son of the free woman, as distinguished from Ishmael, son of the slave woman. (3) He was literally descended from Abraham through Mary and her ancestors. (4) He was the antitype of Isaac. As in the case of David, there are also sharp contrasts between the life of Abraham and that of Christ. Abraham gave up his wife to Abimelech in order to procure his own safety, or so he thought; but Jesus gave himself up to die for his bride, the church (Genesis 20:2 and Ephesians 5:25).
Genesis 38:1-30) is remembered for her having been twice the daughter-in-law of Judah, and later, by means of a deception, his wife also. It was with reference to her that Onan refused to raise up seed to his brother; and the Roman Catholic superstition concerning birth control is founded on this incident in the life of Onan and Tamar. Paul Blanchard's comment on this is:
Onan, not wishing to give his brother credit for paternity under the system of Jewish law, "spilled" his seed on the ground, whereupon "God slew him also." If this story has any moral, it is that all men who refuse to marry their brothers" widows should be killed. Indeed, that was the moral of the original story, since the Levirate law laid down the rule for the Jews that a man inheriting his brother's cattle and lands should also cohabit with his deceased brother's wife or wives and raise a direct heir for his brother's property. Onan's primary sin was the defiance of a property law of ancient Jews, a law that was abandoned at least2 ,000 years ago! ... Catholic theologians, lacking any Scriptural authority for their extreme position on birth control, have taken this ancient story of Onan, distorted its meaning by declaring that Jehovah slew Onan for his "coitus interruptus," and inflated this "interpretation" into a whole system of social hygiene for the20th Century. Luke 3:33). Also, it should be noted that several names are possibly omitted from this list of generations from Abraham to David. McGarvey pointed out that from the appearance of Rahab in the line, "There are366 years for the time between this event and the birth of David? Joshua 2:1). Ruth appears in Scripture as one of the sweetest and truest of womankind ever to live upon the earth. She, like Rahab, was a Gentile. The Book of Ruth recounts her remarkable story.
... wife of Uriah. It is a marvel, in the providence of God, that this guilty and unfortunate wife of Uriah the Hittite should have found a place in the Lord's ancestry; however, her first child was not permitted to live. David's sin with her constitutes one of the saddest events in the Old Testament. Like the two women in Matthew 1:5, she was presumably a Gentile.
And Joram begat Uzziah. Here are skipped some names in the ancestry, as will be seen by a glance at 2 Kings 8:26 ff. This was a common practice of the keepers of genealogical records in those days.
Fourteen generations. This is an artificial grouping of the names to make possible their easier retention by the memory. It will be noted that Jechoniah is counted twice, being the end of the second grouping and also the beginning of the third and final grouping. McGarvey's view is typical of many. He said, "Matthew, seeing there were just14names in the preceding division, desired for the sake of aiding the memory, to have the same number in the next one." Ezra 7:1-2 with 1 Chronicles 6:6-11.
ENDNOTE:
John 1:1) has existed from all eternity, but the marvel is that he should consent to become a man at all, not that he should pass through the processes of conception and birth as well. Furthermore, in normal procreation, the union of a man and a woman always produces a NEW LIFE. Christ's life was not new but had existed from before the beginning of the creation. In truth, it can hardly be imagined just HOW God could enter the world of human life in any other way than that depicted in the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. Jesus" conception in the womb of the virgin Mary is not more wonderful, really, than any other conception; it is merely different. In fact, it is unique; but it was not more difficult on the part of God for this to happen than for any other baby to he born. Wonderful benefits accrue to mankind as a result of the virgin birth. His birth accomplished the following: (1) It honored and elevated womanhood to a place of dignity, honor, and respect, hitherto unknown on earth. (2) It virtually destroyed infanticide by revealing the sanctity of embryonic life. (3) It has emphasized absolute chastity as one of the highest virtues in both men and women. (4) It has glorified motherhood as a state of purity and honor every whit as righteous and desirable as virginity. Concerning the infancy of Jesus Christ, Spurgeon said:
Is he not rightly called Wonderful? Infinite and an infant! Eternal, yet born of a woman! Almighty, and yet hanging on a woman's breast! Supporting the universe, yet needing to be carried on a mother's arm! King of Angels, and yet the reputed son of Joseph! Heir of all things, and yet the carpenter's despised son! Wonderful art thou, O Jesus! And that shall be thy name forever? Deuteronomy 22:23-24). That this law was still practiced in the day of Christ is shown by John 8:5.
By the Holy Spirit. Matthew leaves no room for misunderstanding of this important point. Mary's conception was the work of the Holy Spirit of God and must therefore be understood as the most holy and sacred occurrence that can possibly be imagined!
ENDNOTE:
Proverbs 11:13).
But when he thought on these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife; for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.
An angel of the Lord This is perhaps the same angel whose name is given in Luke 1:19; Luke 1:26; if so, he is Gabriel. The existence of angels affords no difficulty for Christians. The Scriptures abound with the deeds of angels. Angels announced the birth of Christ, ministered to Jesus in the wilderness of temptations, strengthened him in the garden of Gethsemane, and escorted him to glory. Angels appeared and spoke at his resurrection (Matthew 28:5), at his ascension (Acts 1:11), to Cornelius (Acts 10:3), to Philip (Acts 8:26), and to Peter (Acts 12:7). The scholarly Robert Milligan summarizes the functions of angels as follows: (1) to frustrate the wiles of Satan (Jude 1:1-16); (2) to punish wicked men (Genesis 19:1-26; 2 Kings 19:35; Acts 12:23); (3) to preside over the councils of princes and governments (Daniel 10:20-21; Daniel 11:1; Daniel 12:1); (4) to aid providentially in bringing men to repentance (Acts 10:1-8); (5) to take care of living saints (Hebrews 1:14; 2 Kings 6:15-23; Psalm 34:7; Psalm 91:11; Daniel 3:25-28; Daniel 6:22; Matthew 18:10; Acts 5:19; Acts 12:7); (6) to comfort dying saints and to bear their souls home to glory (Luke 16:22). Revelation 10:1-11).
ENDNOTE:
Matthew 16:16. In all ordinary cases, parents do not name their children before they are born, seeing that the question of their sex is not determined until after birth; however, an angel of the Lord announced Jesus" name along with the news of his conception!
Now all this came to pass, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, Behold the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel; which is, being interpreted, God with us.
The question of whether Isaiah (Isaiah 7:14) fully understood this as applying to the virgin birth of Christ is irrelevant. God's great prophets did not always know the true meaning of the words God gave them. Peter did not know the full meaning of what he prophesied on Pentecost (Acts 2:38-39); and a miracle was required later (Acts 10:1-48) to convince Peter that the Gentiles should be permitted entry into the church. See 1 Peter 1:11-12. In this verse, Matthew uses for the first time an expression found ten times in his gospel and nowhere else in the New Testament, "that it might be fulfilled, etc." That the virgin birth is clearly included in Isaiah's prophecy is certain. Matthew declares it IN. The fact that the rabbis and Pharisees had overlooked it is only an indication of spiritual blindness on their part. This beautiful prophecy not only reveals the virgin birth but also sets forth the dual nature of Christ. His name means "God with us!" but his diet is that of a man, "butter and honey"; Here, then, is the GOD-MAN in prophecy!
And Joseph arose from his sleep, and did as the angel of the Lord commanded him, and took unto him his wife and knew her not till she had brought forth a son; and he called his name JESUS.
This verse has a bearing on the so-called doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity. Mary's virginity BEFORE the birth of Christ is a valid Christian doctrine, bearing the seal of the Holy Spirit, the testimony of the apostles, and Christ, and commending itself to the redeemed of all ages; but her so-called virginity AFTER the birth of Christ is a monstrous superstition, without Scriptural sanction, indeed opposed to the New Testament, and refuted by several urgent considerations both practical and theological. It is here stated that Joseph knew her not "till" she had brought forth a son. This implies that the relationship of Joseph to his wife Mary, after the birth of Christ, was altogether that of any normal husband and wife. Indeed, how else should the other sons of Mary have been born? Matthew 13:55 gives the names of four of Jesus" brothers and even mentions his sisters. It is no refutation of these facts to quibble about other possible uses of the word "till" or the word "brothers"! The mere fact that a word CAN have other meanings does not prove that it DOES have any other meaning than the obvious and ordinary meaning implicit in the terse language of Matthew's gospel. Catholic commentaries, and even the footnotes in their New Testament, cast eager reflections against the ordinary meaning of these passages; but, concerning all such insinuations against the truth, men need only to remember that God's word is not vitiated by such quibbles.
As reflecting further light on the question of Mary's virginity, whether perpetual or not, the statement in Luke 2:7 is also pertinent. "She brought forth her FIRSTBORN son, etc." This terminology also suggests that Mary bore other sons, otherwise Christ should have been called her "only" son. The sacred Scriptures make the truth quite plain. Christ is called the "only begotten Son of God" (John 3:18) and the "firstborn son" of Mary! (Luke 2:7). It takes a very unskilled and naive student of the Bible to suppose that the Holy Spirit actually meant that Christ was the "only begotten son of Mary" as well as the "only begotten of the Father"; and that the Holy Spirit merely used the wrong word in referring to him as the "firstborn" of Mary!
The entire superstition regarding the perpetual virginity of Mary is actually founded on a misunderstanding, a groundless assumption, namely, that the perpetual virginity of Mary, even if it could be proved, would add the slightest luster to the crown of Mary's glory. It would do no such thing. The Bible does not elevate virginity as a state above Christian motherhood. To suppose Mary's virginity throughout her life would be to suppose that she defrauded Joseph her husband, contrary to the conjugal duty owed to him (1 Corinthians 7:2-3). We cannot believe that Mary did this. A Christian mother is every whit as holy as any virgin, perpetual or not. For hos, no celibate, male or female, can compare with Christian parents. As Paul expressed it, "Marriage is honorable in all, and the bed undefiled" (Hebrews 13:4 KJV). Then why pretend that the marriage bed IS defiled and strive to "protect" the virgin Mary from such man-imputed defilement?
The word book is from the Greek word BIBLOS and Is defined by Thayer, "A written book, a roll or scroll."Generation is from GENESIS which Thayer defines, "used of birth, nativity," Book of the generation. This phrase is commented on by the same author as follows: "A book of one's lineage. in which his ancestry or his progeny [ancestors from whom he is a descendant] are enumerated." David; Abraham, etc. Matthew wrote his book for the special benefit of the Jews and this is the reason he did not go any farther back than to Abraham. He was the first patriarch to whom the promise ,of the Messiah was made and their interest in Him would hence not include any earlier ancestors. After Abraham the most important man in the ancestry of Christ was David, so tbe record makes mention of him. Tbe word for book means generally any written document. but in this place it applies only as a title tor tbe family history or the ancestors or Christ which will include verses1through17 (See Matthew 1:1-17).
Abraham had more than one son but the promised seed was to come through his son Isaac (Genesis 21:12; Romans 9:7), hence Matthew goes from Abraham to Isaac in the record. Isaac also had more than one son and it was stipulated that Jacob was the one through whom the line was to go (Genesis 25:23; Romans 9:12-13) thus the author goes from Isaac to Jacob in his tracing of the blood line. Jacob also had many sons who figure in an important manner in the history, but only one of them (Judah, here called Judas) could be used in the blood line, so the significant wording is Judas and his brethren. This idea of singling out the particular one in each family was observed all down the line. I have gone into detail in this verse to set forth the subject, and such details will not need to be repeated in all of the following verses.
Thamar is called Tamar in Genesis and she was the daughter-in-law of Judah. The account of how she became the mother of his sons is in Joshua 6:25; she was the woman in Jericho. This verse names two women who were connected with the blood line of Christ (Rachab and Ruth) who were not direct descendants of Abraham. However, this should not confuse us because it was customary in ancient times to ignore the daughters in the family registers. But these women were so outstanding in their parts of the great drama that the inspired writer gives them special mention.
Here the record takes on an additional phase of Importance. In the days of Samuel the prophet the people of Israel clamored for a king in order to he like the nations around them. The Lord was displeased with their request but suffered them to have a king. The first one was Sjiul of the tribe of Benjamin, but he was so unrighteous that God took the throne from him and his family and even shut out that tribe from the royal line. The throne was then given to the tribe of Judah which had possession of the kingdom in Jerusalem until the Babylonian captivity. David was the first man to occupy the throne from that tribe, hence the words David the king. All of the rest to be named in the blood line were kings also but the fact will not be mentioned. This special notice was given to David because be was the first man to be in both the royal and blood lines. And in having such a place in the history of Israel he became the most important type of Christ as king, hence the various references to Him as sitting on the throne of his father David. The term "father" refers to the blood line and the term "throne" refers to the royal line. The mother of Solomon is referred to but not named as were Rachab and Ruth. No reason is given in the Scriptures for this variation in the mention of persons. It is worth considering, however, that of the many wives that David had, this one was the mother of both Solomon and Nathan ( 1 Chronicles 3:5). The significance of this is in the fact that both of these sons of David were direct ancestors of Christ; Solomon's line coming down to Joseph, the (foster) father, and Nathan's coming down to tell the father of Mary. Hence, the two blood streams from David coming through the two sons who were full brothers, were brought together by the marriage of Joseph and Mary.
Jechonias has three different forms in the Old Testament but the one generally used is Jeholachia. He was not the last temporal king that the people of Israel ever bad; there was one more (Zedekiah). But while he was a son of Josiah, he had been placed on the throne in Jerusalem by the king of Babylon (2 Kings 24:17 ). having deposed Jeholachia and taken him to Babylon as a captive. But the blood line remained with him, hence the present verse words: Jechonias and his brethren. Also, the words about the time they were carried away to Babylon are explained by the facts just mentioned in this paragraph.
After they were brought to Babylon. Family life was not discontinued even though the Jews were in captivity. The inspired writer is able to give us the names of lineal descendants that he wished to use in connecting the blood line from Abraham to Christ. Not all of the succeeding names are given nor was that necessary. The present verse virtually covers the70 years of the captivity, for it was in the days of Zorobabel (Zerubbabel) that they came out of it (Ezra 3:2).
This paragraph covers the space of over four centuries, from the return after the captivity to the time of Jacob, father of Joseph. It is evident that not all of the men in the blood line are named, but only enough of them to show the connection of the list as that would affect the ancestry of Jesus.
The use of the term "begat" Is not used here because Joseph was only the foster father of Jesus. But the verse states that he was the husband of Mary in order to show how the two blood streams from David were Joined. Husband is from aseb which Is the only word for "husband" in the New Testament. It is so rendered50 times and by "man" 156 times. The word cannot hence be known to designate a married man except by the connection in which it is found. Jesus who is called Christ. The specific meaning of the first word is "saviour" and the last is defined "anointed." The force of the combined title Is "Saviour and King."
Generations is from genea and Thayer's definition at this place is, "The several ranks In the natural descent, the successive members of a genealogy." The three sets of14generations are so arranged for the sake of uniformity as an aid to the memory. There are several names omitted and a man may be said to have begotten a person when it really means a generation or more later. This manner of speaking was done before this; for instance. in Daniel 5:18 Belshazzar is spoken of as the son of Nebuchadnezzar whereas he was his grandson. The count of the generations is based on the ones named in the chapter. By strict count there are40 instead of42as the three sets of14would require; this is because David and Jechonias are each counted twice.
The meaning of espousal as compared with marriage will be considered at verse20. Before they came together means before they began living together as husband and wife. Found with child should be considered separately from the words of the Holy Ghost. Joseph did not know that her condition was produced by a miracle but thought she had been impure. The Inspired writer adds the italicized words for the information of the reader. The meaning of the clause is as if It said "she was found with child (which later proved to be by the Holy Ghost)."
Being a just man denotes that Joseph was kind and considerate, yet was conscientious and unwilling to ignore the moral law. Because of this he planned to put her away which means to break the engagement. He had such a personal regard for her that he did not want to expose her to public disgrace, yet he did not think it would be right to live with her.
While Joseph was pondering, the subject the angel of the Lord appeared and explained the situation. He further advised him to proceed with their plans because Mary was pure from all wrong. She is here called his wife and In Luke 2:5 she is called"his "espoused wife." All this is because In Biblical times an espousal was regarded as binding, as to the obligation, as the actual marriage.
The angel not only told Joseph the cause of Mary's condition, but even told him what to call the child when born. Proper names in ancient times usually had some specific meaning, hence the name Jesus, meaning "Saviour,"" was to be given to this son to be born of Mary, because he was designed to save his people from sin.
The Information was also given Joseph that what was happening was in fulfillment of prophecy, all of which would meet his approval because he was a believer of the inspired word.
The angel then quoted the prophecy to which he had referred which is in Isaiah 7:14, The thing of special Importance is that the child was to be born of a virgin, an event that could not occur by the laws of natural reproduction alone. God with us. This signifies that since the body of this child was both divine and human, it meant that It would be virtually the presence of God with man, hence he was to be called by the name of Emmanuel which has that meaning.
Did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him denotes that what follows in this verse and the next will be in obedience to the command of the angel. Raised from sleep Is explained by the fact that In ancient times God used various means in communicating His will to the people (Hebrews 1:1) and one of them was by dreams. After the dream bad delivered the desired information to Joseph, it was time for him to arise out of sleep and proceed with the program pointed out by the angel.
Joseph took Mary into his home in fulfillment of his espousal and on the Instructions of the angel. Knew her not is a Biblical expression for the intimate relation of the sexes. The reason Joseph did not have this relation with Mary now was because the angel had told him that her son was to be born of a virgin, which required that at the time of the birth his mother must never have had intimate relations with a man. Till she had brought forth has to mean that after the birth of Jesus, Joseph lived with Mary In the intimate relation of husband and wife, else the language Is meaningless and deceptive. It therefore proves that Mary did not continue to be a virgin, but lived with her husband in the relationship of a wife, and her children by that marriage will be met with in later chapters of this book.
Add Comment
Comments