Matthew 1:1-17
The family tree of Jesus Christ, David’s son, Abraham’s son:
Abraham had Isaac,
Isaac had Jacob,
Jacob had Judah and his brothers,
Judah had Perez and Zerah (the mother was Tamar),
Perez had Hezron,
Hezron had Aram,
Aram had Amminadab,
Amminadab had Nahshon,
Nahshon had Salmon,
Salmon had Boaz (his mother was Rahab),
Boaz had Obed (Ruth was the mother),
Obed had Jesse,
Jesse had David,
and David became king.
David had Solomon (Uriah’s wife was
the mother),
Solomon had Rehoboam,
Rehoboam had Abijah,
Abijah had Asa,
Asa had Jehoshaphat,
Jehoshaphat had Joram,
Joram had Uzziah,
Uzziah had Jotham,
Jotham had Ahaz,
Ahaz had Hezekiah,
Hezekiah had Manasseh,
Manasseh had Amon,
Amon had Josiah,
Josiah had Jehoiachin and his brothers,
and then the people were taken into the Babylonian exile.
When the Babylonian exile ended,
Jehoiachin had Shealtiel,
Shealtiel had Zerubbabel,
Zerubbabel had Abiud,
Abiud had Eliakim,
Eliakim had Azor,
Azor had Zadok,
Zadok had Achim,
Achim had Eliud,
Eliud had Eleazar,
Eleazar had Matthan,
Matthan had Jacob,
Jacob had Joseph, Mary’s husband,
the Mary who gave birth to Jesus,
the Jesus who was called Christ.
There were fourteen generations from Abraham to David,
another fourteen from David to the Babylonian exile,
and yet another fourteen from the Babylonian exile to Christ.
December 11th, 2006 at 2:43 pm
1. So why is this whole family tree/lineage thing so important regarding Jesus’ identity?
2. How come the big deal about tracing the line all the way from Abraham to Joseph and then saying “ha!…. but Joseph wasn’t the dad anyway!” what’s the point of the passage?
3. The line includes a prostitute (Rahab), Incest (Tamar), Murder (David) and of course an unmarried mum (Mary)… not terribly respectable!
4. Written for a religion that seemed to be all about ‘insiders’ and racialk purity, this line seems to celebrate the outsiders from different races (Ruth, Rahab)
December 11th, 2006 at 6:56 pm
A boring list…yes…but it gives identity and a lineage…..it links Jesus to his earthly family….the line of David….a family prophesised throughout the OT. It also makes Jesus more human. I have been more and more struck in recent months by Jesus’ humanness…..and in order to be human He had to be part of a human family.
Okay Joseph wasn’t Jesus actual dad but he was his step-dad, if you like. Never-the-less he was given the awesome responsibility by God, along with Mary, to care for and raise Jesus as he grew up. I often think about Mary, especially at this time of the year, but the amazing job Joseph must have done too really struck me as I read this passage and Richard’s comments.
Jesus was a man…he needed a role model. Joseph taught him his trade as a carpenter and will have helped shape Jesus’ human character. But this leaves questions in my mind……
Even though Jesus had the character of his heavenly father, he will also have had the character of his earthly father, Joseph.
Might Jesus outburst in the temple, however justified, have been how his earthly father would have reacted?
The other thing that this passage shows, which I love, is that Jesus was part of a real family…a real and dysfunctional family!!!!…..and he, in one sense, as a baby, had no choice in the matter! I am part of a dysfunctional family too, a very loving and fantastic family, but never-the-less dysfunctional with lots of skeleton in lots of closets. But it’s great coz my God understands where I’m coming from…I hate my dad’s tendency to be lazy, or my mum’s staunch independence…..but I am still loved accepted and being used by my amazing God…..coz he knows what it’s like because became part of a dysfunctional family too!!
December 11th, 2006 at 7:58 pm
Liking the points on the ‘unclean’ bits of Jesus’ lineage, and how it really lays out his humanity- makes sense.
I think also of how much of the Bible is written to tell stories, the kind that was probably passed down from generation to generation before ending up as the Big Book. Maybe this list gave extra credibility to people 2000 years ago, showing how long this story had already been going on for, before Jesus had even been born?
Out of interest, anyone know why the list is set out in groups of 14?
Also, not that its particuarly insightful, but i think i have actually found the best biblical name EVER- ‘Uzziah’.
December 11th, 2006 at 8:58 pm
Blimey, Richard - you weren’t kidding when you said we’d start with “turbulence”. You don’t believe in easing us in gently do you ;)
Yes - boring, but by giving us the origins of Jesus, we see in his genealogy
a number of people who didn’t exactly model the love, justice and purity of Jesus. This passage points to as many sinners, liars, and schemers in his genetic and historical lineage as they do to saints, honest people, and men and women of faith.
This passage says to me that God uses flawed people. Christianity isn’t just for the pure, the talented, the good, the humble and the honest. Our background, our history, being an outsider etc - none of this determines our worth or importance in the Kingdom.
Nobody is so bad, so insignificant, so devoid of talent, or so outside the circle of faith, that he or she is outside the story of Christ.
December 11th, 2006 at 9:44 pm
great coments!
Josh 14 is significant because in ancient Hebrew 1 = Da and 4 = Vinci proving that Dan Brown secretly wrote the New Testament…. sorry!
More seriously, I reckon that this passage massively challenges all kinds of ideas about where our identity comes from (position, job, wealth, etc). Instead, identity is basically all about who your dad is. Now of course as we’ve said Joseph wasn’t actually Jesus’ dad, but… this is the miracle of the incarnation, the crossover where God becomes man and gets adopted into a human family so that his identity becomes the son of his father Joseph, while in the same event, we get adopted into a different line, so that our identity is based on our adopted father, God! Yeah!
December 12th, 2006 at 9:58 am
A day late - but never mind!
The list may be boring - but look at who’s in it! All sorts of saints and sinners. If you can get to be Jesus’ ancestor with a dubious lifestyle like Rahab, or as a king who bumped off the hubby so he could get his woman, then maybe there’s room for me in His kingdom after all…
December 12th, 2006 at 10:03 am
Josh, I think the 14 thing is cos it’s 2 x 7 and 7 is the perfect number, lots of references elsewhere, like forgiving 70 x 7 times, Egypt’s 7 years of feast then 7 of famine. etc. have just looked up in my search function on my pda bible programme, and 7 is mentioned 427 times in the bible. There’s a fascinating fact! not…
December 12th, 2006 at 4:56 pm
Nah sorry don’t buy that 7 theory. Why 2×7. Why not just 7 or 7×7. Sorry!
December 12th, 2006 at 5:17 pm
Oh - When I say thanks to Frances I mean for the “Saints and Sinners so there’s room for me” bit. Not the 7’s thing. I’ve heard that before, but there’s a Church movement claiming 12 as the “magic number” coz Jesus didn’t ‘av 7 disciples did he|? So I just pass on all these number-wonder dooberrys. Loving all the comments - so helpful to ‘discuss’ a passage, see it from new angles etc. Great!
December 12th, 2006 at 6:22 pm
But why 12 Pam……coz one was a duff un!!!!
December 12th, 2006 at 6:24 pm
actually I’m not against the significance of numbers. Lots of people see Jesus’ choice of 12 as hi reconfiguring the people of God - ie replacing the 12 tribes of the Old Testament - it’s just that the whole number thing easily gets out of hand or stretched too far.