Luke 3:32Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Examining the genealogies of Christ provided in the Gospels of Luke and Matthew reveals several discrepancies, which have historically sparked various interpretations. The primary distinctions are: 1) In Matthew’s account, Joseph’s father is named Jacob (Matthew 1:16), while Luke lists Eli (Luke 3:23). 2) There are differences in the lineage of Salathiel and Zerubbabel in both accounts. Matthew claims Salathiel is the son of Jechoniah (Matthew 1:12), while Luke states he is the son of Neriah (Luke 3:27). Similarly, Matthew records Zerubbabel’s son as Abiud (Matthew 1:13), while Luke names him Risaiah (Luke 3:27). 3) Matthew traces Joseph’s lineage back to David through Solomon (Matthew 1:6-7), whereas Luke traces it through Nathan (Luke 3:31). 4) The names between both genealogies from David to Salathiel (Matthew 1:7-12, Luke 3:31-27) and from Zerubbabel to Joseph (Matthew 1:13-16, Luke 3:27-23) are not the same, and the total number of names differs as well.

Several explanations have been posited regarding these variations: 1) It is suggested that Matthew provides the genealogy of Joseph, while Luke presents that of Mary, since both were descendants of David, albeit through different lines. Yet, Luke explicitly states that he details the genealogy of Joseph (v. 23), and it was not customary to maintain genealogies through the female line, though Mary certainly descended from David. 2) Another theory proposes that the individuals listed are the same but bear different names, attributable to the Jewish practice of assigning multiple names to a single person. However, this theory lacks the support of direct indications from the genealogies, which reveal that one lineage follows David through Solomon and the other through Nathan, two distinct figures, along with the different totals of names listed. 3) A plausible explanation aligns with the law of inheritance, wherein a brother or close relative of a deceased man without heirs would marry the widow and establish a lineage (see note on Matthew 1:12). Consequently, children born in such a manner could be seen as having dual father figures—one by blood and another by legal standing. Hence, Matthew refers to Salathiel as the son (by law) of Jechoniah, who died childless, while Luke identifies his physical father as Neriah, who reestablished the lineage of Jechoniah.

From Zerubbabel, who was raised by Salathiel, were born Abiud and Risaiah, with Matthew following the lineage through the former and Luke through the latter. Thus, Matthew’s genealogy traces back to David via Solomon and Luke’s through Nathan, ultimately leading to Jacob and Eli, who are both recognized as the fathers of Joseph. In essence, Eli, the son of Matthat, died without children; Jacob, being his nearest relative, married his widow to restore the line, resulting in the birth of Joseph, who thus was, by flesh, Jacob's son, while legally he was Eli's.

This framework for interpreting the genealogical disparities originates from the writings of the 2nd-century scholar Julius Africanus, who learned it from the living descendants of the Blessed Virgin (Eusebius, Church History 1, 7). This explanation is widely deemed credible and has been accepted by numerous Church fathers and theologians. The application of the law of inheritance may have occurred several times during periods of decline for the house of David, notably during the Babylonian exile and prior to Christ's advent when the Davidic lineage ceased to hold power in Jerusalem.