Matthew 1:8Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

What the Holy Spirit testified through the Prophet, saying, that He would cut off every male from the house of Ahab, and Jezebel, that Jehu the son of Nausi fulfilled, and received the promise that his children to the fourth generation should sit on the throne of Israel. As great a blessing then as was given upon the house of Ahab, so great a curse was given on the house of Joram, because of the wicked daughter of Ahab and Jezebel, that his sons to the fourth generation should be cut out of the number of the Kings. Thus his sin descended on his posterity as it had been written, I will visit the sins of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation. (Exod. 20:5.) Thus see how dangerous it is to marry with the seed of the ungodly.

Or, Ochozias, Joash, and Amasias, were excluded from the number, because their wickedness was continuous and without interval. For Solomon was suffered to hold the kingdom for his father’s deserts, Roboam for his son’s. But these three doing evil successively were excluded. This then is an example how a race is cut off when wickedness is shewn therein in perpetual succession. And Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias.

In the fourth book of Kings we read, that Ochozias was the son of Joram. On his death, Josabeth, sister of Ochozias and daughter of Joram, took Joash, her brother’s son, and preserved him from the slaughter of the royal seed by Athalias. To Joash succeeded his son Amasias; after him his son Azarias, who is called Ozias; after him his son Joatham. Thus you see according to historical truth there were three intervening kings, who are omitted by the Evangelist. Joram, moreover, begot not Ozias, but Ochozias, and the rest as we have related.

That there were two kings of the name of Joakim, is clear from the Book of Kings. And Joakim slept with his fathers, and Joachin his son reigned, in his stead. (2 Kings 24:6.) This son is the same whom Jeremiah calls Jeconias. And rightly did St. Matthew purpose to differ from the Prophet, because he sought to shew therein the great abundance of the Lord’s mercies. For the Lord did not seek among men nobility of race, but suitably chose to be born of captives and of sinners, as He came to preach remission of sin to the captives. The Evangelist therefore did not conceal either of these; but rather shewed them both, inasmuch as both were called Jeconias.

In the midst of this passage, one may wonder why the evangelist chose to leave out three monarchs: Ohoziah, the son of Joram, Joash, the son of Ohoziah, and Amaziah, the son of Joash. According to the fourth book of Kings, Amaziah fathered Azariah, who in the second book of the Chronicles is referred to as Hosea, since he possessed two names. How then does Matthew indicate that Joram was the father of Hosea? It is clear that Joram is mentioned as the ancestor of Hosea, rather than his direct parent. To date, no one has provided a satisfactory explanation for why these three kings have been omitted by the Evangelist, and contemporary interpretations remain vague, as prior scholars did not explore this matter.

Thus the stain of the Gentile alliance being purged, the royal race is again taken up in the fourth following generation.

Or; ‘the might of the people,’ because he quickly converts the people to the faith.

But it may be asked, why the Evangelist says they were born in the carrying away, when they were born before the carrying away. He says this because they were born for this purpose, that they should be led captive, from the dominion of the whole nation, for their own and others’ sins. And because God foreknew that they were to be carried away captive, therefore he says, they were born in the carrying away to Babylon. But of those whom the holy Evangelist places together in the Lord’s genealogy, it should be known, that they were alike in good or ill fame. Judas and his brethren were notable for good, in like manner Phares and Zara, Jechonias and his brethren, were notable for evil.

Hosea was the king who took the bold step of making sacrifices in the temple, and for this act, he was struck with leprosy. Interestingly, he had two names; he was also known as Azariah. It is important to clarify that Hosea, or Azariah, was not a descendant of Joram but belonged to his tribe. Hosea, or Azariah, was the offspring of Amassiah, who was in turn the son of Joash. This indicates that the Evangelist Matthew did not mention these three names: Ohoziah, Joash, and Amassiah. The reason for this omission may be that they were associated with disbelief and moral corruption, as the Holy Scriptures reveal, or perhaps their names were removed from the Hebrew texts due to their unfaithfulness and wickedness. It might also be that the Evangelist aimed to highlight only the three four-generation segments leading from Abraham to Christ.

The Scriptures of the Old Testament reveal that Joram fathered a son named Ochoziah, who in turn had a son named Joash. Joash's son was Amaziah, and Amaziah's son was Hosea. It is believed that the evangelist intentionally left out three kings to simplify the genealogy, making it easier to remember if we note exactly fourteen names in three groups. St. John Chrysostom regards the reason for omitting these particular names, as opposed to others, as insignificant and unnecessary to resolve.

As we delve deeper into the analysis of the Gospel genealogies, we cannot overlook the significant disparities, both among the genealogies themselves and in comparison to those found in the Old Testament. These variations have been examined by scholars since as far back as the third century and continue to be explored today. The primary distinctions involve either the omission of certain individuals or the substitution of some names for others appearing in the same position and timeframe.

It is important to understand that the ancient custom among sacred writers often involved omitting certain ancestral names, as seen in 1 Ezra 7:1-5 and 1 Chronicles 6:4-13. Matthew may have drawn from a historical genealogical table or perhaps considered the absence of certain kings who were connected to the disreputable lineage of Ahab, king of Israel. Although Joash and Amaziah were noted for their righteousness (refer to 2 Kings 8:26, 27; 12:2; 14:3), Matthew might have intentionally excluded names that were unnecessary for maintaining the significant number of 142x7 in his genealogy.

Asa fathered Jehoshaphat, as stated in 3 Kings 15:24. Jehoshaphat was the ancestor of Joram, according to 3 Kings 22:50. Joram's lineage progresses to Hosea, as referenced in 4 Sam. 8:24, 1 Chronicles 3:11, 2 Chronicles 22:1, 11, 2 Chronicles 24:27, and 2 Chronicles 26:1. Joram directly gave birth to Ochoziah, who then became the father of Joash. Joash was the father of Amassiah, and Amassiah in turn fathered Hosea, while the three kings in between are not included (see note on Matthew 1:17).