Who was of Mathathias, who was of Amos, who was of Nahum, who was of Hesli, who was of Nagge,
του ματταθιου του αμως του ναουμ του εσλι του ναγγαι
3 Church Fathers comment on this verse
Naggai Artaxad served as the leader of the Jewish people for many years. During his time, seventy wise men were dispatched by Hierarch Eleazar to Ptolemy Philadelphus, the king of Egypt, to translate the Holy Scriptures from Hebrew into Greek. This period also includes figures such as Ifm, known as Agaius Elias, and the notable Nahum Maslof, along with Amos Sirach and Mataphius Siloa.
The individuals listed in the initial section of the genealogy, spanning from Elijah to Neriah, which encompasses the duration of the Babylonian exile, number twenty-one according to the Gospel of Luke. In contrast, Julius of Africa asserts there are only nineteen, as he excludes Matthatha and Levi, who appear in Luke’s account between Elijah and Melchiah. Some scholars suggest that Julius Africanus may have misremembered the names, while others propose that the manuscript he used did not include Matthatha and Levi. Regardless of the reason, the counts of fourteen as per Matthew and nineteen from Julius are insufficient to represent such an extensive timeframe of 538 years. In this context, Luke’s genealogy emerges as particularly detailed and precise.
Commencing His ministry refers to the moment He was baptized, marking the initiation of His significant mission. When it states ‘about thirty years,’ it means He was roughly around that age, possibly a bit more or less. For a more precise timeline, it is reasonable to assume He was slightly over thirty (refer to the note on Luke 3:1). The phrase ‘as they thought’ indicates the perceptions of the Jews; however, the truth is that He was not Joseph's son (Eph. 3:19).
In discussing the genealogies of Christ found in the Gospels of Luke and Matthew (Matt. 1:1-16), notable discrepancies arise which have historically posed challenges for interpreters and have led to various interpretations. The main contrasts are as follows: 1) In Matthew’s genealogy, Joseph's father is Jacob (Matt. 1:16), while Luke lists Eli (Luke 3:23). 2) Salathiel and Zerubbabel have different fathers and descendants in both accounts. In Matthew, Salathiel is identified as the son of Jechoniah (Matt. 1:12), whereas Luke names him as the son of Neriah (Luke 3:27). Additionally, Matthew states that Zerubbabel's son is Abiud (Matt. 1:13), while Luke identifies him as Risaiah (Luke 3:27). 3) Regarding ancestry, Matthew's lineage traces Joseph’s descent from David through Solomon (Matt. 1:6-7), while Luke’s account goes through Nathan (Luke 3:31). 4) The lists of names from David to Salathiel (Matt. 1:7-12; Luke 3:31-27) and from Zerubbabel to Joseph (Matt. 1:13-16; Luke 3:27-23) differ, not only in names but also in their quantity.
Several explanations for these differences have been proposed: 1) One view is that Matthew documents Joseph’s lineage while Luke covers Mary’s, as both were descendants of David but through different branches. This interpretation is challenged by Luke’s explicit mention of tracing Joseph's genealogy (v. 23), and it was uncommon to maintain genealogical records for women, despite Mary’s Davidic lineage. 2) Another theory suggests that the individuals listed in both genealogies are identical, but with varying names due to the Jewish practice of assigning multiple names to the same person. This theory, however, contradicts the genealogies' indications of differing branches from David through Solomon and Nathan, as well as the discrepancy in the number of ancestors listed.
3) The most viable explanation for these differences may be rooted in the law of levirate marriage, which required a brother or close relative of a deceased man without children to marry his widow and continue the family line (see note on Matt. 1:12). The offspring from this union would have two fathers: one by natural descent and the other by legal obligation. Thus, Matthew calls Salathiel the son (in a legal sense) of Jechoniah, who was childless, while Luke refers to his biological father as Neriah, who continued the lineage of the childless Jechoniah.
Zerubbabel, who was adopted by Salathiel, fathered Abiud and Risaiah. Matthew follows the genealogy through Abiud, whereas Luke traces it through Risaiah, paralleling how Matthew connects his line from David via Solomon, while Luke follows the route through Nathan. Consequently, Matthew traces his lineage to Jacob, and Luke to Eli, both acknowledged as Joseph's fathers. Specifically, Eli, son of Matthat, died without children; thus, Jacob, his closest relative, married Eli's widow, resulting in the birth of Joseph. Therefore, Joseph is considered the son of Jacob by lineage and Eli by legal right. This genealogy can be succinctly summarized: David | Solomon---------- Nathan | | Jechoniah----- wife of both-----Neriah (childless) (continued the lineage) | Salathiel | Zerubbabel | Abiud -----------Risaiah | | Jacob---- wife of both------Eli (childless) (continued the lineage) | Joseph the betrothed.
The explanation for these genealogical differences is traced back to the 2nd-century writer Julius Africanus, who learned it from relatives of the Blessed Virgin (Euseb. Church Hist. 1, 7). This reasoning is widely accepted among many Church fathers and theologians. It is quite possible that the law of levirate marriage was applied on two occasions during challenging periods for the Davidic line, particularly during the Babylonian exile and prior to Christ’s coming, when the line of David was no longer ruling in Jerusalem.
Greek text, 10 words with lemma, transliteration and Strong’s number. Tap to expand.
THEOSIS