kecilkan semua  

Teks -- Matthew 1:1-25 (NET)

Tampilkan Strong
Konteks
The Genealogy of Jesus Christ
1:1 This is the record of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. 1:2 Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob, Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers, 1:3 Judah the father of Perez and Zerah (by Tamar), Perez the father of Hezron, Hezron the father of Ram, 1:4 Ram the father of Amminadab, Amminadab the father of Nahshon, Nahshon the father of Salmon, 1:5 Salmon the father of Boaz (by Rahab), Boaz the father of Obed (by Ruth), Obed the father of Jesse, 1:6 and Jesse the father of David the king. David was the father of Solomon (by the wife of Uriah), 1:7 Solomon the father of Rehoboam, Rehoboam the father of Abijah, Abijah the father of Asa, 1:8 Asa the father of Jehoshaphat, Jehoshaphat the father of Joram, Joram the father of Uzziah, 1:9 Uzziah the father of Jotham, Jotham the father of Ahaz, Ahaz the father of Hezekiah, 1:10 Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, Manasseh the father of Amon, Amon the father of Josiah, 1:11 and Josiah the father of Jeconiah and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon. 1:12 After the deportation to Babylon, Jeconiah became the father of Shealtiel, Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel, 1:13 Zerubbabel the father of Abiud, Abiud the father of Eliakim, Eliakim the father of Azor, 1:14 Azor the father of Zadok, Zadok the father of Achim, Achim the father of Eliud, 1:15 Eliud the father of Eleazar, Eleazar the father of Matthan, Matthan the father of Jacob, 1:16 and Jacob the father of Joseph, the husband of Mary, by whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ. 1:17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations, and from David to the deportation to Babylon, fourteen generations, and from the deportation to Babylon to Christ, fourteen generations.
The Birth of Jesus Christ
1:18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ happened this way. While his mother Mary was engaged to Joseph, but before they came together, she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit. 1:19 Because Joseph, her husband to be, was a righteous man, and because he did not want to disgrace her, he intended to divorce her privately. 1:20 When he had contemplated this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife, because the child conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. 1:21 She will give birth to a son and you will name him Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.” 1:22 This all happened so that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet would be fulfilled: 1:23 “Look! The virgin will conceive and bear a son, and they will call him Emmanuel,” which means “God with us.” 1:24 When Joseph awoke from sleep he did what the angel of the Lord told him. He took his wife, 1:25 but did not have marital relations with her until she gave birth to a son, whom he named Jesus.
Paralel   Ref. Silang (TSK)   ITL  

Nama Orang, Nama Tempat, Topik/Tema Kamus

Nama Orang dan Nama Tempat:
 · Abijah the son and successor of King Rehoboam
 · Abiud a son of Zerubbabel; an ancestor of Jesus
 · Abraham a son of Terah; the father of Isaac; ancestor of the Jewish nation.,the son of Terah of Shem
 · Achim a son of Zadok; the father of Eliud and an ancestor of Jesus
 · Ahaz a son of Jotham; listed as an ancestor of Jesus,son and successor of King Jotham of Judah,son of Micah of Benjamin
 · Amminadab A son of Ram; the father of Nahshon and an ancestor of Jesus,son of Ram (Judah); father of Nahshon, Moses' deputy over Judah,son of Kohath son of Levi,a man of Levi; head of the clan of Uzziel under David
 · Amon a son of Manasseh; the father of Josiah and an ancestor of Jesus,governor of the Town of Samaria under King Ahab,son and successor of King Manasseh,a man who, with his sons, were servants of Solomon
 · Amos father of the prophet Isaiah
 · Asa a son of Abijah; the father of Jehoshaphat; an ancestor of Jesus.,son of Abijam and king of Judah,son of Elkanah; a Levite whose descendants returned from exile
 · Azor a son of Eliakim; the father of Zadok; an ancestor of Jesus.
 · Babylon a country of Babylon in lower Mesopotamia
 · Boaz son of Salma of Judah,one of 2 principal pillars in Solomon's temple
 · David a son of Jesse of Judah; king of Israel,son of Jesse of Judah; king of Israel
 · Eleazar a son of Eliud; the father of Matthan; an ancestor of Jesus.,a chief priest; son of Aaron,son of Abinadab; caretaker of the Ark at Kiriath-Jearim,son of Dodo the Ahohite; one of David's military elite,son of Mahli the Levite,a priest who participated in the dedication of the wall,a priest under Ezra; son of Phinehas,a layman of the Parosh clan who put away his heathen wife
 · Eliakim son of Abiud the son of Zerubbabel over 20generations from David; an ancestor of Jesus,son of Melea, only 4 generations from David; an ancester of Jesus,son of Hilkiah; head of Hezekiah's household,son of Josiah; made king of Judah by Pharaoh Neco,a priest who helped celebrate the completion of the wall
 · Eliud the great, great grandfather of Joseph; an ancestor of Jesus
 · Emmanuel a male child that Isaiah prophesied would be born
 · Hezekiah the son of Ahaz who succeeded him as king of Judah; an ancestor of Jesus,son of Ahaz; king of Judah,forefather of the prophet Zephaniah,an Israelite chief who signed the covenant to obey God's law
 · Hezron members of the clan of Hezron of Reuben
 · Isaac the only son of Abraham and Sarah; father of Jacob and Esau
 · Jacob the second so of a pair of twins born to Isaac and Rebeccaa; ancestor of the 12 tribes of Israel,the nation of Israel,a person, male,son of Isaac; Israel the man and nation
 · Jehoshaphat the son and successor of king Asa of Judah; the father of Jehoram; an ancestor of Jesus,son of Ahilud; a recorder for King Solomon,an officer over collecting food supplies for King Solomon from Issachar; son of Paruah,son of Asa; King of Judah,son of Nimshi; father of King Jehu of Israel,a situation ("valley") of being judged (OS)
 · Jesse a son of Obed; the father of David the king and ancestor of Jesus,son of Obed of Judah; father of David
 · Joram a son of Jehoshaphat; the father of Uzziah; an ancestor of Jesus.,son of Toi or Tou, king of Hamath,son and successor of King Jehoshaphat of Judah,second son and second successor of King Ahab of Israel,son of Jeshaiah; a Levitical chief treasurer whose descendants returned from exile
 · Joseph the husband of Mary and foster-father of Jesus,a Jewish man from Arimathea in whose grave the body of Jesus was laid,two different men listed as ancestors of Jesus,a man nominated with Matthias to take the place of Judas Iscariot as apostle,a son of Jacob and Rachel; the father of Ephraim and Manasseh and ruler of Egypt,a brother of Jesus; a son of Mary,a man who was a companion of Paul,son of Jacob and Rachel; patriarch of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh,a tribe, actually two tribes named after Joseph's sons, Ephraim and Manasseh,father of Igal, of Issachar, who helped spy out Canaan,son of Asaph the Levite; worship leader under Asaph and King David,a man who put away his heathen wife; an Israelite descended from Binnui,priest and head of the house of Shebaniah under High Priest Joiakim in the time of Nehemiah
 · Josiah the son who succeeded King Amon of Judah; the father of Jeconiah; an ancestor of Jesus,son and successor of Amon, King of Judah,son of Zephaniah; custodian of the temple treasures that were returned from Babylon
 · Jotham the son who succeeded King Uzziah of Judah; the father of Ahaz; an ancestor of Jesus,the youngest son of Jerubbaal (Gideon),son and successor of King Azariah of Judah,son of Jahdai of Judah
 · Judah the son of Jacob and Leah; founder of the tribe of Judah,a tribe, the land/country,a son of Joseph; the father of Simeon; an ancestor of Jesus,son of Jacob/Israel and Leah; founder of the tribe of Judah,the tribe of Judah,citizens of the southern kingdom of Judah,citizens of the Persian Province of Judah; the Jews who had returned from Babylonian exile,"house of Judah", a phrase which highlights the political leadership of the tribe of Judah,"king of Judah", a phrase which relates to the southern kingdom of Judah,"kings of Judah", a phrase relating to the southern kingdom of Judah,"princes of Judah", a phrase relating to the kingdom of Judah,the territory allocated to the tribe of Judah, and also the extended territory of the southern kingdom of Judah,the Province of Judah under Persian rule,"hill country of Judah", the relatively cool and green central highlands of the territory of Judah,"the cities of Judah",the language of the Jews; Hebrew,head of a family of Levites who returned from Exile,a Levite who put away his heathen wife,a man who was second in command of Jerusalem; son of Hassenuah of Benjamin,a Levite in charge of the songs of thanksgiving in Nehemiah's time,a leader who helped dedicate Nehemiah's wall,a Levite musician who helped Zechariah of Asaph dedicate Nehemiah's wall
 · Manasseh the tribe of Manasseh.
 · Mary mother of Jesus and wife of Joseph,a woman from Magdala in Galilee,the mother of James and Joses,the wife of Cleophas,the sister of Lazarus and Martha in Bethany,the mother of John Mark who was a nephew of Barnabas,a Christian woman in Rome who helped Paul
 · Matthan a son of Eleazar; the father of Jacob; an ancestor of Jesus.


Topik/Tema Kamus: Joseph | Rehoboam | Jesus, The Christ | Genealogy | JESUS CHRIST, 4A | GENEALOGY, 1-7 | GENEALOGY, 8 part 2 | MOSES | TEXT AND MANUSCRIPTS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT | BEGOTTEN | DISCREPANCIES, BIBLICAL | Virgin Birth | Mary | Miracles | JOSEPH, HUSBAND OF MARY | Ozias | Jesse | Faith | GENEALOGY, 8 part 1 | Ram | selebihnya
Daftar Isi

Catatan Kata/Frasa
Robertson , Vincent , Wesley , JFB , Clarke , Calvin , Defender , TSK

Catatan Kata/Frasa
Poole , Lightfoot , PBC , Haydock , Gill

Catatan Ayat / Catatan Kaki
NET Notes , Geneva Bible

Catatan Rentang Ayat
Maclaren , MHCC , Matthew Henry , Barclay , Constable , College , McGarvey , Lapide

Lainnya
Evidence

kecilkan semua
Tafsiran/Catatan -- Catatan Kata/Frasa (per frasa)

Robertson: Mat 1:1 - The Book The Book ( biblos ). There is no article in the Greek, but the following genitives make it definite. It is our word Bible that is here used, the Bo...

The Book ( biblos ).

There is no article in the Greek, but the following genitives make it definite. It is our word Bible that is here used, the Book as Sir Walter Scott called it as he lay dying. The usual word for book is a diminutive form (biblion ), a little book or roll such as we have in Luk 4:17, "The roll of the prophet Isaiah."The pieces of papyrus (papuros ), our paper, were pasted together to make a roll of varying lengths according to one’ s needs. Matthew, of course, is not applying the word book to the Old Testament, probably not to his own book, but to "the genealogical table of Jesus Christ"(biblos geneseōs Iēsou Christou ), "the birth roll of Jesus Christ"Moffatt translates it. We have no means of knowing where the writer obtained the data for this genealogy. It differs radically from that in Luke 3:23-38. One can only give his own theory of the difference. Apparently in Matthew we have the actual genealogy of Joseph which would be the legal pedigree of Jesus according to Jewish custom. In Luke we apparently have the actual genealogy of Mary which would be the real line of Jesus which Luke naturally gives as he is writing for the Gentiles.

Robertson: Mat 1:1 - Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ. Both words are used. The first is the name (Iēsous ) given by the angel to Mary (Mat 1:21) which describes the mission of the child....

Jesus Christ.

Both words are used. The first is the name (Iēsous ) given by the angel to Mary (Mat 1:21) which describes the mission of the child. The second was originally a verbal adjective (christos ) meaning anointed from the verb to anoint (chriō ). It was used often in the Septuagint as an adjective like "the anointed priest"(1Ki 2:10) and then as a substantive to translate the Hebrew word "Messiah"(Messias ). So Andrew said to Simon: "We have found the Messiah, which is, being interpreted, Christ"(Joh 1:41). In the Gospels it is sometimes "the Anointed One,""the Messiah,"but finally just a proper name as here, Jesus Christ. Paul in his later Epistles usually has it "Christ Jesus."

Robertson: Mat 1:1 - The Son of David, the son of Abraham The Son of David, the son of Abraham ( huiou Daueid huiou Abraam ). Matthew proposes to show that Jesus Christ is on the human side the son of David,...

The Son of David, the son of Abraham ( huiou Daueid huiou Abraam ).

Matthew proposes to show that Jesus Christ is on the human side the son of David, as the Messiah was to be, and the son of Abraham, not merely a real Jew and the heir of the promises, but the promise made to Abraham. So Matthew begins his line with Abraham while Luke traces his line back to Adam. The Hebrew and Aramaic often used the word son (bēn ) for the quality or character, but here the idea is descent. Christians are called sons of God because Christ has bestowed this dignity upon us (Rom 8:14; Rom 9:26; Gal 3:26; Gal 4:5-7). Mat 1:1 is the description of the list in verses 2-17. The names are given in three groups, Abraham to David (Mat 1:2-6), David to Babylon Removal (Mat 1:6-11), Jechoniah to Jesus (Mat 1:12-16). The removal to Babylon (metoikesias Babulōnos ) occurs at the end of Mat 1:11, the beginning of Mat 1:12, and twice in the resume in Mat 1:17. This great event is used to mark off the two last divisions from each other. It is a good illustration of the genitive as the case of genus or kind. The Babylon removal could mean either to Babylon or from Babylon or, indeed, the removal of Babylon. But the readers would know the facts from the Old Testament, the removal of the Jews to Babylon. Then Mat 1:17 makes a summary of the three lists, fourteen in each by counting David twice and omitting several, a sort of mnemonic device that is common enough. Matthew does not mean to say that there were only fourteen in actual genealogy. The names of the women (Thamar, Rahab, Ruth, Bathsheba the wife of Uriah) are likewise not counted. But it is a most interesting list.

Robertson: Mat 1:2 - Begat Begat ( egennēsen ). This word comes, like some of the early chapters of Genesis, with regularity through Mat 1:16, until the birth of Jesus is rea...

Begat ( egennēsen ).

This word comes, like some of the early chapters of Genesis, with regularity through Mat 1:16, until the birth of Jesus is reached when there is a sudden change. The word itself does not always mean immediate parentage, but merely direct descent. In Mat 1:16 we have "Joseph the husband of Mary, from whom was begotten Jesus who is called Christ"(ton Iōsēph ton andra Marias ex hēs egennēthē Iēsous ho legomenos Christos ). The article occurs here each time with the object of "begat,"but not with the subject of the verb to distinguish sharply the proper names. In the case of David the King (Mat 1:6) and Joseph the husband of Mary (Mat 1:16) the article is repeated. The mention of the brethren of Judah (Mat 1:2) and of both Phares and Zara (Mat 1:3) may show that Matthew was not copying a family pedigree but making his own table. All the Greek manuscripts give Mat 1:16 as above save the Ferrar Group of minuscules which are supported by the Sinaitic Syriac Version. Because of this fact Von Soden, whose text Moffatt translates, deliberately prints his text " Jacob begat Jesus "(Iōsēph de egennēsen Iēsoun ). But the Sinaitic Syriac gives the Virgin Birth of Jesus in Mat 1:18-25. Hence it is clear that "begat"here in Mat 1:16 must merely mean line of descent or the text has been tampered with in order to get rid of the Virgin Birth idea, but it was left untouched in Mat 1:18-25. I have a full discussion of the problem in chapter XIV of Studies in the Text of the New Testament. The evidence as it now stands does not justify changing the text of the Greek uncials to suit the Sinaitic Syriac. The Virgin Birth of Jesus remains in Mat 1:16. The spelling of these Hebrew names in English is usually according to the Hebrew form, not the Greek. In the Greek itself the Hebrew spelling is often observed in violation of the Greek rules for the ending of words with no consonants save n, r, s. But the list is not spelled consistently in the Greek, now like the Hebrew as in Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, now like the Greek as in Judah, Solomon, Hezekiah, though the Hebrew style prevails.

Robertson: Mat 1:18 - The birth of Jesus Christ The birth of Jesus Christ ( tou [Iēsou ] Christou hē genesis ). In the Greek Jesus Christ comes before birth as the important matter after Mat...

The birth of Jesus Christ ( tou [Iēsou ] Christou hē genesis ).

In the Greek Jesus Christ comes before birth as the important matter after Mat 1:16. It is not certain whether "Jesus"is here a part of the text as it is absent in the old Syriac and the Old Latin while the Washington Codex has only "Christ."The Vatican Codex has "Christ Jesus."But it is plain that the story of the birth of Jesus Christ is to be told briefly as follows, "on this wise"(houtōs ), the usual Greek idiom. The oldest and best manuscripts have the same word genealogy (genesis ) used in Mat 1:1, not the word for birth (begotten) as in Mat 1:16 (gennēsis ). "It is in fact the word Genesis. The evangelist is about to describe, not the genesis of the heaven and the earth, but the genesis of Him who made the heaven and the earth, and who will yet make a new heaven and a new earth"(Morison).

Robertson: Mat 1:18 - Betrothed to Joseph Betrothed to Joseph ( Mnēsteutheisēs tōi Iōsēph ). Matthew proceeds to explain his statement in Mat 1:16 which implied that Joseph, though ...

Betrothed to Joseph ( Mnēsteutheisēs tōi Iōsēph ).

Matthew proceeds to explain his statement in Mat 1:16 which implied that Joseph, though the legal father of Jesus in the royal line, was not the actual father of Mary’ s Son. Betrothal with the Jews was a serious matter, not lightly entered into and not lightly broken. The man who betrothed a maiden was legally husband (Gen 29:21; Deu 22:23.) and "an informal cancelling of betrothal was impossible"(McNeile). Though they did not live together as husband and wife till actual marriage, breach of faithfulness on the part of the betrothed was treated as adultery and punished with death. The New Testament in Braid Scots actually has "mairry’ t till Joseph"for "betrothed to Joseph."Matthew uses the genitive absolute construction here, a very common Greek idiom.

Robertson: Mat 1:18 - Of the Holy Ghost Of the Holy Ghost ( ek pneumatos hagiou ). The discovery that Mary was pregnant was inevitable and it is plain that she had not told Joseph. She "was...

Of the Holy Ghost ( ek pneumatos hagiou ).

The discovery that Mary was pregnant was inevitable and it is plain that she had not told Joseph. She "was found with child"(heurethē en gastri echousa ). This way of putting it, the usual Greek idiom, plainly shows that it was the discovery that shocked Joseph. He did not as yet know what Matthew plainly asserts that the Holy Ghost, not Joseph and not any man, was responsible for the pregnancy of Mary. The problem of the Virgin Birth of Jesus has been a disturbing fact to some through all the ages and is today to those who do not believe in the pre-existence of Christ, the Son of God, before his Incarnation on earth. This is the primal fact about the Birth of Christ. The Incarnation of Christ is clearly stated by Paul (2Co 8:9; Phi 2:5-11; and involved in Col 1:15-19) and by John (Joh 1:14; Joh 17:5). If one frankly admits the actual pre-existence of Christ and the real Incarnation, he has taken the longest and most difficult step in the matter of the supernatural Birth of Christ. That being true, no merely human birth without the supernatural element can possibly explain the facts. Incarnation is far more than the Indwelling of God by the Holy Spirit in the human heart. To admit real incarnation and also full human birth, both father and mother, creates a greater difficulty than to admit the Virgin Birth of Jesus begotten by the Holy Spirit, as Matthew here says, and born of the Virgin Mary. It is true that only Matthew and Luke tell the story of the supernatural birth of Jesus, though Joh 1:14 seems to refer to it. Mark has nothing whatever concerning the birth and childhood of Jesus and so cannot be used as a witness on the subject. Both Matthew and Luke present the birth of Jesus as not according to ordinary human birth. Jesus had no human father. There is such a thing in nature as parthenogenesis in the lower orders of life. But that scientific fact has no bearing here. We see here God sending his Son into the world to be the world’ s Saviour and he gave him a human mother, but not a human father so that Jesus Christ is both Son of God and Son of Man, the God Man. Matthew tells the story of the birth of Jesus from the standpoint of Joseph as Luke gives it from the standpoint of Mary. The two narratives harmonize with each other. One credits these most wonderful of all birth narratives according as he believes in the love and power of Almighty God to do what he wills. There is no miracle with God who has all power and all knowledge. The laws of nature are simply the expression of God’ s will, but he has not revealed all his will in the laws that we discover. God is Spirit. He is Person. He holds in his own power all life. Joh 3:16 is called the Little Gospel because it puts briefly the love of God for men in sending his own Son to live and die for us.

Robertson: Mat 1:19 - A Righteous Man A Righteous Man ( dikaios ). Or just, not benignant or merciful. The same adjective is used of Zacharias and Elizabeth (Luk 1:6) and Simeon (Luk 2:25...

A Righteous Man ( dikaios ).

Or just, not benignant or merciful. The same adjective is used of Zacharias and Elizabeth (Luk 1:6) and Simeon (Luk 2:25). "An upright man,"the Braid Scots has it. He had the Jewish conscientiousness for the observance of the law which would have been death by stoning (Deu 22:23). Though Joseph was upright, he would not do that. "As a good Jew he would have shown his zeal if he had branded her with public disgrace"(McNeile).

Robertson: Mat 1:19 - And yet not willing And yet not willing ( kai mē thelōn ). So we must understand kai here, "and yet."Matthew makes a distinction here between "willing"(thelōn )...

And yet not willing ( kai mē thelōn ).

So we must understand kai here, "and yet."Matthew makes a distinction here between "willing"(thelōn ) and "wishing"(eboulēthē ), that between purpose (thelō ) and desire (boulomai ) a distinction not always drawn, though present here. It was not his purpose to "make her a public example"(deigmatisai ), from the root (deiknumi to show), a rare word (Col 2:15). The Latin Vulgate has it traducere , the Old Latin divulgare , Wycliff pupplische (publish), Tyndale defame , Moffatt disgrace , Braid Scots "Be i the mooth o’ the public."The substantive (deigmatismos ) occurs on the Rosetta Stone in the sense of "verification."There are a few instances of the verb in the papyri though the meaning is not clear (Moulton and Milligan’ s Vocabulary ). The compound form appears (paradeigmatizō ) in Heb 6:6 and there are earlier instances of this compound than of the uncompounded, curiously enough. But new examples of the simple verb, like the substantive, may yet be found. The papyri examples mean to furnish a sample (P Tebt. 5.75), to make trial of (P Ryl. I. 28.32). The substantive means exposure in (P Ryl. I. 28.70). At any rate it is clear that Joseph "was minded to put her away privily."He could give her a bill of divorcement (apolusai ), the gēt laid down in the Mishna, without a public trial. He had to give her the writ (gēt ) and pay the fine (Deu 24:1). So he proposed to do this privately (lathrai ) to avoid all the scandal possible. One is obliged to respect and sympathize with the motives of Joseph for he evidently loved Mary and was appalled to find her untrue to him as he supposed. It is impossible to think of Joseph as the actual father of Jesus according to the narrative of Matthew without saying that Matthew has tried by legend to cover up the illegitimate birth of Jesus. The Talmud openly charges this sin against Mary. Joseph had "a short but tragic struggle between his legal conscience and his love"(McNeile).

Robertson: Mat 1:20 - An angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream An angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream ( aggelos kuriou kat' onar ephanē autōi ). This expression (aggelos kuriou ) is without the ar...

An angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream ( aggelos kuriou kat' onar ephanē autōi ).

This expression (aggelos kuriou ) is without the article in the New Testament except when, as in Mat 1:24, there is reference to the angel previously mentioned. Sometimes in the Old Testament Jehovah Himself is represented by this phrase. Surely Joseph needed God’ s help if ever man did. If Jesus was really God’ s Son, Joseph was entitled to know this supreme fact that he might be just to both Mary and her Child. It was in a dream, but the message was distinct and decisive for Joseph. He is called "Son of David"as had been shown by Matthew in Mat 1:16. Mary is called his "wife"(tēn gunaika sou ). He is told "not to become afraid"(ingressive first aorist passive subjunctive in prohibition, (mē phobēthēis ), "to take to his side"(paralabein , ingressive aorist active infinitive) her whom he had planned (enthumēthentos , genitive absolute again, from en and thumos ) to send away with a writ of divorce. He had pondered and had planned as best he knew, but now God had called a halt and he had to decide whether he was willing to shelter Mary by marrying her and, if necessary, take upon himself whatever stigma might attach to her. Joseph was told that the child was begotten of the Holy Spirit and thus that Mary was innocent of any sin. But who would believe it now if he told it of her? Mary knew the truth and had not told him because she could not expect him to believe it.

Robertson: Mat 1:21 - Thou shalt call his name Jesus Thou shalt call his name Jesus ( Kalesies to onoma autou Iēsoun ). The rabbis named six whose names were given before birth: "Isaac, Ishmael, Moses...

Thou shalt call his name Jesus ( Kalesies to onoma autou Iēsoun ).

The rabbis named six whose names were given before birth: "Isaac, Ishmael, Moses, Solomon, Josiah, and the name of the Messiah, whom may the Holy One, blessed be His name, bring in our day."The angel puts it up to Joseph as the putative father to name the child. "Jesus is the same as Joshua, a contraction of Jehoshuah (Num 13:16; 1Ch 7:27), signifying in Hebrew, ‘ Jehovah is helper,’ or ‘ Help of Jehovah’ "(Broadus). So Jesus is the Greek form of Joshua (Heb 4:8). He is another Joshua to lead the true people of God into the Promised Land. The name itself was common enough as Josephus shows. Jehovah is Salvation as seen in Joshua for the Hebrews and in Jesus for all believers. "The meaning of the name, therefore, finds expression in the title Saviour applied to our Lord (Luk 1:47; Luk 2:11; Joh 4:42)"(Vincent). He will save (sōsei ) his people from their sins and so be their Saviour (Sōtēr ). He will be prophet, priest, and king, but "Saviour"sums it all up in one word. The explanation is carried out in the promise, "for he is the one who (autos ) will save (sōsei with a play on the name Jesus) his people from their sins."Paul will later explain that by the covenant people, the children of promise, God means the spiritual Israel, all who believe whether Jews or Gentiles. This wonderful word touches the very heart of the mission and message of the Messiah. Jesus himself will show that the kingdom of heaven includes all those and only those who have the reign of God in their hearts and lives.

Robertson: Mat 1:21 - From their sins From their sins ( apo tōn hamartiōn autōn ). Both sins of omission and of commission. The substantive (hamartia ) is from the verb (hamartanei...

From their sins ( apo tōn hamartiōn autōn ).

Both sins of omission and of commission. The substantive (hamartia ) is from the verb (hamartanein ) and means missing the mark as with an arrow. How often the best of us fall short and fail to score. Jesus will save us away from (apo ) as well as out of (ex ) our sins. They will be cast into oblivion and he will cover them up out of sight.

Robertson: Mat 1:22 - That it may be fulfilled That it may be fulfilled ( hina plērōthēi ). Alford says that "it is impossible to interpret hina in any other sense than in order that."That...

That it may be fulfilled ( hina plērōthēi ).

Alford says that "it is impossible to interpret hina in any other sense than in order that."That was the old notion, but modern grammarians recognize the non-final use of this particle in the Koiné and even the consecutive like the Latin ut . Some even argue for a causal use. If the context called for result, one need not hesitate to say so as in Mar 11:28; Joh 9:36; 1Jo 1:9; Rev 9:20; Rev 13:13. See discussion in my Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research , pp. 997-9. All the same it is purpose here, God’ s purpose, Matthew reports the angel as saying, spoken "by (hupo , immediate agent) the Lord through (dia , intermediate agent) the prophet."

Robertson: Mat 1:22 - "All this has happened" "All this has happened" ( touto de holon gegonen , present perfect indicative) , stands on record as historical fact. But the Virgin Birth of Jesus is...

"All this has happened" ( touto de holon gegonen , present perfect indicative)

, stands on record as historical fact. But the Virgin Birth of Jesus is not due to this interpretation of Isa 7:14. It is not necessary to maintain (Broadus) that Isaiah himself saw anything more in his prophecy than that a woman then a virgin, would bear a son and that in the course of a few years Ahaz would be delivered from the king of Syria and Israel by the coming of the Assyrians. This historical illustration finds its richest fulfilment in the birth of Jesus from Mary. "Words of themselves are empty. They are useful only as vessels to convey things from mind to mind"(Morison). The Hebrew word for young woman is translated by virgin (parthenos ), but it is not necessary to conclude that Isaiah himself contemplated the supernatural birth of Jesus. We do not have to say that the idea of the Virgin Birth of Jesus came from Jewish sources. Certainly it did not come from the pagan myths so foreign to this environment, atmosphere and spirit. It is far simpler to admit the supernatural fact than try to explain the invention of the idea as a myth to justify the deification of Jesus. The birth, life, and death of Jesus throw a flood of light on the Old Testament narrative and prophecies for the early Christians. In Matthew and John in particular we often see "that the events of Christ’ s life were divinely ordered for the express purpose of fulfilling the Old Testament"(McNeile). See note on Mat 2:15, Mat 2:23; Mat 4:14-17; Mat 8:17; Mat 12:17-21; Mat 13:35; Mat 21:4.; Joh 12:38.; Joh 13:18; Joh 19:24, Joh 19:28, Joh 19:36.

Robertson: Mat 1:23 - They shall call They shall call ( kalesousin ). Men, people, will call his name Immanuel, God with us. "The interest of the evangelist, as of all New Testament write...

They shall call ( kalesousin ).

Men, people, will call his name Immanuel, God with us. "The interest of the evangelist, as of all New Testament writers, in prophecy, was purely religious"(Bruce). But surely the Language of Isaiah has had marvellous illustration in the Incarnation of Christ. This is Matthew’ s explanation of the meaning of Immanuel, a descriptive appellation of Jesus Christ and more than a mere motto designation. God’ s help, Jesus=the Help of God, is thus seen. One day Jesus will say to Philip: "He that has seen me has seen the Father"(Joh 14:9).

Robertson: Mat 1:24 - Took unto him his wife Took unto him his wife ( parelaben tēn gunaika autou ). The angel had told him not to be afraid to "take to his side"Mary his wife (Mat 1:20). So w...

Took unto him his wife ( parelaben tēn gunaika autou ).

The angel had told him not to be afraid to "take to his side"Mary his wife (Mat 1:20). So when he awoke from his sleep he promptly obeyed the angel and "took his wife home"(Moffatt). One can only imagine the relief and joy of Mary when Joseph nobly rose to his high duty toward her. I have tried to sketch Mary’ s problems in Mary the Mother of Jesus: Her Problems and Her Glory.

Robertson: Mat 1:25 - And knew her not And knew her not ( kai ouk eginōsken autēn ). Note the imperfect tense, continuous or linear action. Joseph lived in continence with Mary till th...

And knew her not ( kai ouk eginōsken autēn ).

Note the imperfect tense, continuous or linear action. Joseph lived in continence with Mary till the birth of Jesus. Matthew does not say that Mary bore no other children than Jesus. "Her firstborn"is not genuine here, but is a part of the text in Luk 2:7. The perpetual virginity of Mary is not taught here. Jesus had brothers and sisters and the natural meaning is that they were younger children of Joseph and Mary and not children of Joseph by a previous marriage. So Joseph "called his name Jesus"as the angel had directed and the child was born in wedlock. Joseph showed that he was an upright man in a most difficult situation.

Vincent: Mat 1:1 - Christ Christ ( Χριστός ) Properly an adjective, not a noun, and meaning anointed (Χρίω , to anoint). It is a translation of the Hebre...

Christ ( Χριστός )

Properly an adjective, not a noun, and meaning anointed (Χρίω , to anoint). It is a translation of the Hebrew Messiah, the king and spiritual ruler from David's race, promised under that name in the Old Testament (Psa 2:2; Dan 9:25, Dan 9:26). Hence Andrew says to Simon, " We have found the Messiah, which is, being interpreted, Christ (Joh 1:41; compare Act 4:27; Act 10:38; Act 19:28). To us " Christ " has become a proper name, and is therefore written without the definite article; but, in the body of the gospel narratives, since the identity of Jesus with the promised Messiah is still in question with the people, the article is habitually used, and the name should therefore be translated " the Christ." After the resurrection, when the recognition of Jesus as Messiah has become general, we find the word beginning to be used as a proper name, with or without the article. In this passage it omits the article, because it occurs in the heading of the chapter, and expresses the evangelist's own faith in Jesus as the Messiah.

Anointing was applied to kings (1Sa 9:16; 1Sa 10:1), to prophets (1Ki 19:16), and to priests (Exo 29:29; Exo 40:15; Lev 16:32) at their inauguration. " The Lord's anointed" was a common title of the king (1Sa 12:3, 1Sa 12:5; 2Sa 1:14, 2Sa 1:16). Prophets are called " Messiahs," or anointed ones (1Ch 16:22; Psa 105:15). Cyrus is also called " the Lord's Anointed," because called to the throne to deliver the Jews out of captivity (Isa 45:1). Hence the word" Christ" was representative of our Lord, who united in himself the offices of king, prophet, and priest.

It is interesting to see how anointing attaches to our Lord in other and minor particulars. Anointing was an act of hospitality and a sign of festivity and cheerfulness. Jesus was anointed by the woman when a guest in the house of Simon the Pharisee, and rebuked his host for omitting this mark of respect toward hint (Luk 7:35, Luk 7:46). In the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb 1:8, Heb 1:9), the words of the Messianic psalm (Psa 45:7) are applied to Jesus, " God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows."

Anointing was practised upon the sick (Mar 6:13; Luk 10:34 :; Jam 5:14). Jesus, " the Great Physician," is described by Isaiah (Isa 61:1, Isa 61:2; compare Luk 4:18) as anointed by God to bind up the broken-hearted, and to give the mournful the oil of joy for mourning. He himself anointed the eyes of the blind man (Joh 9:6, Joh 9:11); and the twelve, in his name, " anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them" (Mar 6:13).

Anointing was practised upon the dead. Of her who brake the alabaster upon his head at Bethany, Jesus said, " She hath anointed my body aforehand for the burying" (Mar 14:8; see, also, Luk 23:56).

Vincent: Mat 1:6 - David the king David the king ( τὸν Δαυεὶδ τὸν βασιλέα , " the David, the king" ) Both words are thus emphasized: the David fr...

David the king ( τὸν Δαυεὶδ τὸν βασιλέα , " the David, the king" )

Both words are thus emphasized: the David from whom Christ, if he were the Messiah, must have descended; the king with whom the Messiah's genealogy entered upon the kingly dignity. In this genealogy, where the generations are divided symmetrically into three sets of fourteen, the evangelist seems to connect the last of each set with a critical epoch in the history of Israel: the first reaching from the origin of the race to the commencement of the monarchy (" David the king " ) ; the second, from the commencement of the monarchy to the captivity in Babylon; the third and last, from the captivity to the coming of " the Christ." The same emphatic or demonstrative use of the article occurs with the name of Joseph (Mat 1:16), marking his peculiar relation to Jesus as the husband of Mary: the Joseph, the husband of Mary.

Vincent: Mat 1:18 - Espoused Espoused ( μνηστευθείσης : Rev., betrothed; Tynd., maryed ) The narrative implies a distinction between betrothal and marriage....

Espoused ( μνηστευθείσης : Rev., betrothed; Tynd., maryed )

The narrative implies a distinction between betrothal and marriage. From the moment of her betrothal a woman was treated as if actually married. The union could be dissolved only by regular divorce. Breach of faithfulness was regarded as adultery, and was punishable with death (Deu 22:23, Deu 22:24), and the woman's property became virtually that of her betrothed, unless he had expressly renounced it; but, even in that ease, he was her natural heir.

Vincent: Mat 1:19 - Not willing - was minded Not willing ( μὴ θέλων ) - was minded (ἐβουλήθη ) These two words, describing the working of Joseph's mind, and evidently ...

Not willing ( μὴ θέλων ) - was minded (ἐβουλήθη )

These two words, describing the working of Joseph's mind, and evidently intended to express different phases of thought, open the question of their distinctive meanings in the New Testament, where they frequently occur (θέλω much oftener than βούλομαι ), and where the rendering, in so many eases by the same words, furnishes no clue to the distinction. The original words are often used synonymously in eases where no distinction is emphasized; but their use in other eases reveals a radical and recognized difference. An interchange is inadmissible when the greater force of the expression requires θέλειν . For instance, βαούλεσθαι , would be entirely inappropriate at Mat 8:3, " I will, be thou cleansed;" or at Rom 7:15.

The distinction, which is abundantly illustrated in Homer, is substantially maintained by the classical writers throughout, and in the New Testament.

Θέλειν is the stronger word, and expresses a purpose or determination or decree, the execution of which is, or is believed to be, in the power of him who wills. Βούλεσθαι expresses wish, inclination, or disposition, whether one desires to do a thing himself or wants some one else to do it. Θέλειν , therefore, denotes the active resolution, the will urging on to action. Βούλεσθαι is to have a mind, to desire, sometimes a little stronger, running into the sense of purpose. Θέλειν indicates the impulse of the will; βούλεσθαι , its tendency. Βούλεσθαι can always be rendered by θέλειν , but θέλειν cannot always be expressed by βούλεσθαι .

Thus, Agamemnon says, " I would not (οὐκ ἔθελον ) receive the ransom for the maid ( i.e., I refused to receive), because I greatly desire (βούλομαι ) to have her at home" (Homer, " II.," 1:112). So Demosthenes: " It is fitting that you should be willing (ἐθέλειν ) to listen to those who wish (βουλομένων ) to advise" (" Olynth.," 1:1). That is to say, It is in your power to determine whether or not you will listen to those who desire to advise you, but whose power to do so depends on your consent. Again: " If the gods will it (θέλωσι ) and you wish it (βούλησθε )" (Demosth., " Olynth.," 2:20).

In the New Testament, as observed above, though the words are often interchanged, the same distinction is recognized. Thus, Mat 2:18, " Rachael would not (ἤθελε ) be comforted;" obstinately and positively refused. Joseph, having the right and power under the (assumed) circumstances to make Mary a public example, resolved (θέλων ) to spare her this exposure. Then the question arose - What should he do? On this he thought, and, having thought (ἐνθυμηθέντος ) , his mind inclined (tendency), he was minded (ἐβουλήθη ) to put her away secretly.

Some instances of the interchanged use of the two words are the following: Mar 15:15, " Pilate willing " (βουλόμενος ); compare Luk 23:20, " Pilate willing " (θέλων ). Act 27:43, " The centurion willing " (βουλόμενος ) ; Mat 27:17, " Whom will ye that I release" (θέλετε ); so Mat 27:21. Joh 18:39, " Will ye that I release" (βούλεσθε ); Mat 14:5, " When he would have put him to death" (θέλων ). Mar 6:48, " He would have passed by them" (ἤθελε ); Act 19:30, " Paul would have entered" (βουλόμενος ). Act 18:27, " He was disposed to pass" (βουλόμενος ). Tit 3:8, " I will that thou affirm" (βούλομαι ) . Mar 6:25, " I will that thou give me" (θέλω ), etc., etc.

In the New Testament θέλω occurs in the following senses:

1. A decree or determination of the will. ( a ) Of God (Mat 12:7; Rom 9:16, Rom 9:18; Act 18:21; 1Co 4:19; 1Co 12:18; 1Co 15:38). ( b ) Of Christ (Mat 8:3; Joh 17:24; Joh 5:21; Joh 21:22). ( c ) Of men (Act 25:9). Festus, having the power to gratify the Jews, and determining to do so, says to Paul, who has the right to decide, " Wilt thou go up to Jerusalem?" Joh 6:67, Others of the disciples had decided to leave Jesus. Christ said to the twelve, " Will ye also go away?" Is that your determination? Joh 7:17, If any man sets his will, is determined to do God's will. Joh 8:44, The lusts of your father your will is set to do. Act 24:6.

2. A wish or desire. Very many of the passages, however, which are cited under this head (as by Grimm) may fairly be interpreted as implying something stronger than a wish; notably Mar 14:36, of Christ in Gethsemane. Our Lord would hardly have used what thou wilt in so feeble a sense as that of a desire or wish on God's part. Mar 10:43, " Whosoever will be great," expresses more than the desire for greatness. It is the purpose of the life. Mat 27:15, It was given to the Jews to decide what prisoner should be released. Luk 1:62, The name of the infant John was referred to Zacharias' decision. Joh 17:24, Surely Christ does more than desire that those whom the Father has given him shall be with him. Luk 9:54, It is for Jesus to command fire upon the Samaritan villages if he so wills. (See, also, Joh 15:7; 1Co 4:21; Mat 16:25; Mat 19:17; Joh 21:22; Mat 13:28; Mat 17:12.) In the sense of wish or desire may fairly be cited 2Co 11:12; Mat 12:38; Luk 8:20; Luk 23:8; Joh 12:21; Gal 4:20; Mat 7:12; Mar 10:35.

3. A liking (Mar 12:38; Luk 20:46; Mat 27:43). (See note there.)

Βούλομαι occurs in the following senses:

1. Inclination or disposition (Act 18:27; Act 19:30; Act 25:22; Act 28:18; 2Co 1:15).

2. Stronger, with the idea of purpose (1Ti 6:9; Jam 1:18; Jam 3:4; 1Co 12:11; Heb 6:17).

In most, if not all of these cases, we might expect θέλειν ; but in this use of βούλομαι there is an implied emphasis on the element of free choice or self-determination, which imparts to the desire or inclination a decretory force. This element is in the human will by gift and consent. In the divine will it is inherent. At this point the Homeric usage may be compared in its occasional employment of βούλομαι to express determination, but only with reference to the gods, in whom to wish is to will. Thus, " Whether Apollo will (βου.λεται ) ward off the plague" (" II.," 1:67). " Apollo willed (βούλετο ) victory to the Trojans" (" Il.," 7:21).

Vincent: Mat 1:19 - To make a public example To make a public example ( δειγματίσαι ) The word is kindred to δείκνυμι , to exhibit, display, point out. Here, therefor...

To make a public example ( δειγματίσαι )

The word is kindred to δείκνυμι , to exhibit, display, point out. Here, therefore, to expose Mary to public shame (Wyc., publish her; Tynd., defame her). The word occurs in Col 2:15, of the victorious Saviour displaying the vanquished powers of evil as a general displays his trophies or captives in a triumphal procession. " He made a show of them openly." A compound of the same word (παραδειγματίζω ) appears in Heb 6:6, " They crucify the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. "

Vincent: Mat 1:21 - Shalt call Shalt call Thus committing the office of a father to Joseph. The naming of the unborn Messiah would accord with popular notions. The Rabbis had a...

Shalt call

Thus committing the office of a father to Joseph. The naming of the unborn Messiah would accord with popular notions. The Rabbis had a saying concerning the six whose names were given before their birth: " Isaac, Ishmael, Moses, Solomon, Josiah, and the name of the Messiah, whom may the Holy One, blessed be His name, bring quickly in our days."

Vincent: Mat 1:21 - Jesus Jesus ( Ιησοῦν ) The Greek form of a Hebrew name, which had been borne by two illustrious individuals in former periods of the Jewish his...

Jesus ( Ιησοῦν )

The Greek form of a Hebrew name, which had been borne by two illustrious individuals in former periods of the Jewish history - Joshua, the successor of Moses, and Jeshua, the high-priest, who with Zerubbabel took so active a part in the re-establishment of the civil and religious polity of the Jews on their return from Babylon. Its original and full form is Jehoshua, becoming by contraction Joshua or Jeshua. Joshua, the son of Nun, the successor of Moses, was originally named Hoshea ( saving ) , which was altered by Moses into Jehoshua ( Jehovah ( our ) Salvation ) (Num 13:16). The meaning of the name, therefore, finds expression in the title Saviour, applied to our Lord (Luk 1:47; Luk 2:11; Joh 4:42).

Joshua, the son of Nun, is a type of Christ in his office of captain and deliverer of his people, in the military aspect of his saving work (Rev 19:11-16). As God's revelation to Moses was in the character of a law-giver, his revelation to Joshua was in that of the Lord of Hosts (Jos 5:13, Jos 5:14). Under Joshua the enemies of Israel were conquered, and the people established in the Promised Land. So Jesus leads his people in the fight with sin and temptation. He is the leader of the faith which overcomes the world (Heb 12:2). Following him, we enter into rest.

The priestly office of Jesus is foreshadowed in the high-priest Jeshua, who appears in the vision of Zechariah (Zec 3:1-10; compare Ezr 2:2) in court before God, under accusation of Satan, and clad in filthy garments. Jeshua stands not only for himself, but as the representative of sinning and suffering Israel. Satan is defeated. The Lord rebukes him, and declares that he will redeem and restore this erring people; and in token thereof he commands that the accused priest be clad in clean robes and crowned with the priestly mitre.

Thus in this priestly Jeshua we have a type of our " Great High-Priest, touched with the feeling of our infirmities, and in all points tempted and tried like as we are;" confronting Satan in the wilderness; trying conclusions with him upon the victims of his malice - the sick, the sinful, and the demon-ridden. His royal robes are left behind. He counts not " equality with God a thing to be grasped at," but " empties himself," taking the " form of a servant," humbling himself and becoming " obedient even unto death" (Phi 2:6, Phi 2:7, Rev.). He assumes the stained garments of our humanity. He who " knew no sin" is " made to be sin on our behalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in him" (2Co 5:21). He is at once priest and victim. He pleads for sinful man before God's throne. He will redeem him. He will rebuke the malice and cast down the power of Satan. He will behold him" as lightning fall from heaven" (Luk 10:18). He will raise and save and purify men of weak natures, rebellious wills, and furious passions - cowardly braggarts and deniers like Peter, persecutors like Saul of Tarsus, charred brands - and make them witnesses of his grace and preachers of his love and power. His kingdom shall be a kingdom of priests, and the song of his redeemed church shall be, " unto him that loveth us, and loosed us from our sins by his own blood, and made us to be a kingdom, to be priests unto his God and Father; to him be the glory and the dominion forever and ever. Amen" (Rev 1:5, Rev 1:6, in Rev.).

It is no mere fancy which sees a suggestion and a foreshadowing of the prophetic work of Jesus in the economy of salvation, in a third name closely akin to the former. Hoshea, which we know in our English Bible as Hosea, was the original name of Joshua (compare Rom 9:25, Rev.) and means saving. He is, in a peculiar sense, the prophet of grace and salvation, placing his hope in God's personal coming as the refuge and strength of humanity; in the purification of human life by its contact with the divine. The great truth which he has to teach is the love of Jehovah to Israel as expressed in the relation of husband, an idea which pervades his prophecy, and which is generated by his own sad domestic experience. He foreshadows Jesus in his pointed warnings against sin, his repeated offers of divine mercy, and his patient, forbearing love, as manifested in his dealing with an unfaithful and dissolute wife, whose soul he succeeded in rescuing from sin and death (Hosea 1-3). So long as he lived, he was one continual, living prophecy of the tenderness of God toward sinners; a picture of God's love for us when alien from him, and with nothing in us to love. The faithfulness of the prophetic teacher thus blends in Hosea, as in our Lord, with the compassion and sympathy and sacrifice of the priest.

Vincent: Mat 1:21 - He He ( αὐτὸς ) Emphatic; and so rightly in Rev., " For it is He that shall save his people."

He ( αὐτὸς )

Emphatic; and so rightly in Rev., " For it is He that shall save his people."

Vincent: Mat 1:21 - sins Their sins ( ἁμαρτιῶν ) Akin to ἁμαρτάνω , to miss a mark; as a warrior who throws his spear and fails to strike his adv...

Their sins ( ἁμαρτιῶν )

Akin to ἁμαρτάνω , to miss a mark; as a warrior who throws his spear and fails to strike his adversary, or as a traveller who misses his way. In this word, therefore, one of a large group which represent sin under different phases, sin is conceived as a failing and missing the true end and scope of our lives, which is God.

Vincent: Mat 1:22 - Through Through the prophet ( διά ) So the Rev. rightly, instead of by. In quotations from the Old Testament, the writers habitually use the prepo...

Through the prophet ( διά )

So the Rev. rightly, instead of by. In quotations from the Old Testament, the writers habitually use the preposition διὰ ( through ) to denote the instrumentality through which God works or speaks, while they reserve ὑπὸ ( by ) to express the primary agency of God himself. So here the prophecy in Mat 1:23was spoken by the Lord, but was communicated to men through his prophet.

Vincent: Mat 1:23 - The The virgin ( ἡ παρθένος ) Note the demonstrative force of the article, pointing to a particular person. Not, some virgin or o...

The virgin ( ἡ παρθένος )

Note the demonstrative force of the article, pointing to a particular person. Not, some virgin or other.

Vincent: Mat 1:23 - They shall call They shall call ( καλὲσουσιν ) In Mat 1:21, it is thou shalt call. The original of Isaiah (Isa 7:14) has she shall call; but Matt...

They shall call ( καλὲσουσιν )

In Mat 1:21, it is thou shalt call. The original of Isaiah (Isa 7:14) has she shall call; but Matthew generalizes the singular into the plural, and quotes the prophecy in a form suited to its larger and final fulfilment: men shall call his name Immanuel, as they shall come to the practical knowledge that God will indeed dwell with men upon the earth.

Vincent: Mat 1:23 - Immanuel Immanuel (Hebrew, ( Hebrew, God is with us ) To protect and save. A comment is furnished by Isa 8:10, " Devise a device, but it shall come to na...

Immanuel (Hebrew, ( Hebrew, God is with us )

To protect and save. A comment is furnished by Isa 8:10, " Devise a device, but it shall come to naught; speak a word, but it shall not stand, for with us is God. " Some suppose that Isaiah embodied the purport of his message in the names of his children: Maher-shalal-hash-baz ( speed-prey ) , a warning of the coming of the fierce Assyrians; Shear-Jashub ( a remnant shall return ) , a reminder of God's mercy to Israel in captivity, and Immanuel ( God is with us), a promise of God's presence and succor. However this may be, the promise of the name is fulfilled in Jesus (compare " Lo, I am with you alway," Mat 28:20) by his helpful and saving presence with his people in their sorrow, their conflict with sin, and their struggle with death.

Vincent: Mat 1:24 - The his sleep The or his sleep ( τοῦ ὕπνου ) The force of the definite article; the sleep in which he had the vision. So Rev., " Arose from ...

The or his sleep ( τοῦ ὕπνου )

The force of the definite article; the sleep in which he had the vision. So Rev., " Arose from his sleep."

Wesley: Mat 1:1 - The book of the generation of Jesus Christ That is, strictly speaking, the account of his birth and genealogy. This title therefore properly relates to the verses that immediately follow: but a...

That is, strictly speaking, the account of his birth and genealogy. This title therefore properly relates to the verses that immediately follow: but as it sometimes signifies the history of a person, in that sense it may belong to the whole book. If there were any difficulties in this genealogy, or that given by St. Luke, which could not easily be removed, they would rather affect the Jewish tables, than the credit of the evangelists: for they act only as historians setting down these genealogies, as they stood in those public and allowed records. Therefore they were to take them as they found them. Nor was it needful they should correct the mistakes, if there were any. For these accounts sufficiently answer the end for which they are recited. They unquestionably prove the grand point in view, that Jesus was of the family from which the promised seed was to come. And they had more weight with the Jews for this purpose, than if alterations had been made by inspiration itself. For such alterations would have occasioned endless disputes between them and the disciples of our Lord. The son of David, the son of Abraham - He is so called, because to these he was more peculiarly promised; and of these it was often foretold the Messiah should spring. Luk 3:31.

Wesley: Mat 1:3 - Of Thamar St. Matthew adds the names of those women also, that were remarkable in the sacred history.

St. Matthew adds the names of those women also, that were remarkable in the sacred history.

Wesley: Mat 1:4 - Naasson Who was prince of the tribe of Judah, when the Israelites entered into Canaan.

Who was prince of the tribe of Judah, when the Israelites entered into Canaan.

Wesley: Mat 1:5 - Obed begat Jesse The providence of God was peculiarly shown in this, that Salmon, Boaz, and Obed, must each of them have been near a hundred years old, at the birth of...

The providence of God was peculiarly shown in this, that Salmon, Boaz, and Obed, must each of them have been near a hundred years old, at the birth of his son here recorded.

Wesley: Mat 1:6 - David the king Particularly mentioned under this character, because his throne is given to the Messiah.

Particularly mentioned under this character, because his throne is given to the Messiah.

Wesley: Mat 1:8 - Jehoram begat Uzziah Jehoahaz, Joash, and Amaziah coming between. So that he begat him mediately, as Christ is mediately the son of David and of Abraham. So the progeny of...

Jehoahaz, Joash, and Amaziah coming between. So that he begat him mediately, as Christ is mediately the son of David and of Abraham. So the progeny of Hezekiah, after many generations, are called the sons that should issue from him, which he should beget, Isa 39:7.

Wesley: Mat 1:11 - Josiah begat Jeconiah Mediately, Jehoiakim coming between.

Mediately, Jehoiakim coming between.

Wesley: Mat 1:11 - And his brethren That is, his uncles. The Jews term all kinsmen brethren.

That is, his uncles. The Jews term all kinsmen brethren.

Wesley: Mat 1:11 - About the time they were carried away Which was a little after the birth of Jeconiah.

Which was a little after the birth of Jeconiah.

Wesley: Mat 1:16 - The husband of Mary Jesus was generally believed to be the son of Joseph. It was needful for all who believed this, to know, that Joseph was sprung from David. Otherwise ...

Jesus was generally believed to be the son of Joseph. It was needful for all who believed this, to know, that Joseph was sprung from David. Otherwise they would not allow Jesus to be the Christ. Jesus, who is called Christ - The name Jesus respects chiefly the promise of blessing made to Abraham: the name Christ, the promise of the Messiah's kingdom, which was made to David. It may be farther observed, that the word Christ in Greek, and Messiah in Hebrew, signify anointed, and imply the prophetic, priestly, and royal characters, which were to meet in the Messiah. Among the Jews, anointing was the ceremony whereby prophets, priests, and kings were initiated into those offices. And if we look into ourselves, we shall find a want of Christ in all these respects. We are by nature at a distance from God, alienated from him, and incapable of a free access to him. Hence we want a mediator, an intercessor, in a word, a Christ, in his priestly office. This regards our state with respect to God. And with respect to ourselves, we find a total darkness, blindness, ignorance of God, and the things of God. Now here we want Christ in his prophetic office, to enlighten our minds, and teach us the whole will of God. We find also within us a strange misrule of appetites and passions. For these we want Christ in his royal character, to reign in our hearts, and subdue all things to himself.

Wesley: Mat 1:17 - So all the generations Observe, in order to complete the three fourteens, David ends the first fourteen, and begins the second (which reaches to the captivity) and Jesus end...

Observe, in order to complete the three fourteens, David ends the first fourteen, and begins the second (which reaches to the captivity) and Jesus ends the third fourteen. When we survey such a series of generations, it is a natural and obvious reflection, how like the leaves of a tree one passeth away, and another cometh! Yet the earth still abideth. And with it the goodness of the Lord which runs from generation to generation, the common hope of parents and children. Of those who formerly lived upon earth, and perhaps made the most conspicuous figure, how many are there whose names are perished with them? How many, of whom only the names are remaining? Thus are we likewise passing away! And thus shall we shortly be forgotten! Happy are we, if, while we are forgotten by men, we are remembered by God! If our names, lost on earth, are at length found written in the book of life!

Wesley: Mat 1:19 - A just man A strict observer of the law: therefore not thinking it right to keep her.

A strict observer of the law: therefore not thinking it right to keep her.

Wesley: Mat 1:21 - Jesus That is, a Saviour. It is the same name with Joshua (who was a type of him) which properly signifies, The Lord, Salvation.

That is, a Saviour. It is the same name with Joshua (who was a type of him) which properly signifies, The Lord, Salvation.

Wesley: Mat 1:21 - His people Israel. And all the Israel of God.

Israel. And all the Israel of God.

Wesley: Mat 1:23 - They shall call his name Emmanuel To be called, only means, according to the Hebrew manner of speaking, that the person spoken of shall really and effectually be what he is called, and...

To be called, only means, according to the Hebrew manner of speaking, that the person spoken of shall really and effectually be what he is called, and actually fulfil that title. Thus, Unto us a child is born - and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Prince of Peace - That is, he shall be all these, though not so much nominally, as really, and in effect. And thus was he called Emmanuel; which was no common name of Christ, but points out his nature and office; as he is God incarnate, and dwells by his Spirit in the hearts of his people. It is observable, the words in Isaiah are, Thou (namely, his mother) shalt call; but here, They - that is, all his people, shall call - shall acknowledge him to be Emmanuel, God with us.

Wesley: Mat 1:23 - Which being interpreted This is a clear proof that St. Matthew wrote his Gospel in Greek, and not in Hebrew. Isa 7:14.

This is a clear proof that St. Matthew wrote his Gospel in Greek, and not in Hebrew. Isa 7:14.

Wesley: Mat 1:25 - He knew her not, till after she had brought forth It cannot be inferred from hence, that he knew her afterward: no more than it can be inferred from that expression, 2Sa 6:23, Michal had no child till...

It cannot be inferred from hence, that he knew her afterward: no more than it can be inferred from that expression, 2Sa 6:23, Michal had no child till the day of her death, that she had children afterward. Nor do the words that follow, the first-born son, alter the case. For there are abundance of places, wherein the term first born is used, though there were no subsequent children. Luk 2:7.

JFB: Mat 1:1 - The book of the generation An expression purely Jewish; meaning, "table of the genealogy." In Gen 5:1 the same expression occurs in this sense. We have here, then, the title, no...

An expression purely Jewish; meaning, "table of the genealogy." In Gen 5:1 the same expression occurs in this sense. We have here, then, the title, not of this whole Gospel of Matthew, but only of the first seventeen verses.

JFB: Mat 1:1 - of Jesus Christ For the meaning of these glorious words, see on Mat 1:16; Mat 1:21. "Jesus," the name given to our Lord at His circumcision (Luk 2:21), was that by wh...

For the meaning of these glorious words, see on Mat 1:16; Mat 1:21. "Jesus," the name given to our Lord at His circumcision (Luk 2:21), was that by which He was familiarly known while on earth. The word "Christ"--though applied to Him as a proper name by the angel who announced His birth to the shepherds (Luk 2:11), and once or twice used in this sense by our Lord Himself (Mat 23:8, Mat 23:10; Mar 9:41) --only began to be so used by others about the very close of His earthly career (Mat 26:68; Mat 27:17). The full form, "Jesus Christ," though once used by Himself in His Intercessory Prayer (Joh 17:3), was never used by others till after His ascension and the formation of churches in His name. Its use, then, in the opening words of this Gospel (and in Mat 1:17-18) is in the style of the late period when our Evangelist wrote, rather than of the events he was going to record.

JFB: Mat 1:1 - the son of David, the son of Abraham As Abraham was the first from whose family it was predicted that Messiah should spring (Gen 22:18), so David was the last. To a Jewish reader, accordi...

As Abraham was the first from whose family it was predicted that Messiah should spring (Gen 22:18), so David was the last. To a Jewish reader, accordingly, these behooved to be the two great starting-points of any true genealogy of the promised Messiah; and thus this opening verse, as it stamps the first Gospel as one peculiarly Jewish, would at once tend to conciliate the writer's people. From the nearest of those two fathers came that familiar name of the promised Messiah, "the son of David" (Luk 20:41), which was applied to Jesus, either in devout acknowledgment of His rightful claim to it (Mat 9:27; Mat 20:31), or in the way of insinuating inquiry whether such were the case (see on Joh 4:29; Mat 12:23).

JFB: Mat 1:2 - Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren Only the fourth son of Jacob is here named, as it was from his loins that Messiah was to spring (Gen 49:10).

Only the fourth son of Jacob is here named, as it was from his loins that Messiah was to spring (Gen 49:10).

JFB: Mat 1:3-6 - And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; and Phares begat Esrom; and Esrom begat Aram; 4. And Aram begat Aminadab; and Aminadab begat Naasson; and Naasson begat Salmon; 5. And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse; 6. And Jesse begat David the king; and David the king begat Solomon of her of Urias Four women are here introduced; two of them Gentiles by birth--Rachab and Ruth; and three of them with a blot at their names in the Old Testament--Tha...

Four women are here introduced; two of them Gentiles by birth--Rachab and Ruth; and three of them with a blot at their names in the Old Testament--Thamar, Rachab, and Bath-sheba. This feature in the present genealogy--herein differing from that given by Luke--comes well from him who styles himself in his list of the Twelve, what none of the other lists do, "Matthew the publican"; as if thereby to hold forth, at the very outset, the unsearchable riches of that grace which could not only fetch in "them that are afar off," but teach down even to "publicans and harlots," and raise them to "sit with the princes of his people." David is here twice emphatically styled "David the king," as not only the first of that royal line from which Messiah was to descend, but the one king of all that line from which the throne that Messiah was to occupy took its name--"the throne of David." The angel Gabriel, in announcing Him to His virgin-mother, calls it "the throne of David His father," sinking all the intermediate kings of that line, as having no importance save as links to connect the first and the last king of Israel as father and son. It will be observed that Rachab is here represented as the great-grandmother of David (see Rth 4:20-22; 1Ch 2:11-15) --a thing not beyond possibility indeed, but extremely improbable, there being about four centuries between them. There can hardly be a doubt that one or two intermediate links are omitted.

JFB: Mat 1:7-8 - And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa; 8. And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias Or Uzziah. Three kings are here omitted--Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah (1Ch 3:11-12). Some omissions behooved to be made, to compress the whole into thr...

Or Uzziah. Three kings are here omitted--Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah (1Ch 3:11-12). Some omissions behooved to be made, to compress the whole into three fourteens (Mat 1:17). The reason why these, rather than other names, are omitted, must be sought in religious considerations--either in the connection of those kings with the house of Ahab (as LIGHTFOOT, EBRARD, and ALFORD view it); in their slender right to be regarded as true links in the theocratic chain (as LANGE takes it); or in some similar disqualification.

JFB: Mat 1:11 - And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren Jeconiah was Josiah's grandson, being the son of Jehoiakim, Josiah's second son (1Ch 3:15); but Jehoiakim might well be sunk in such a catalogue, bein...

Jeconiah was Josiah's grandson, being the son of Jehoiakim, Josiah's second son (1Ch 3:15); but Jehoiakim might well be sunk in such a catalogue, being a mere puppet in the hands of the king of Egypt (2Ch 36:4). The "brethren" of Jechonias here evidently mean his uncles--the chief of whom, Mattaniah or Zedekiah, who came to the throne (2Ki 24:17), is, in 2Ch 36:10, as well as here, called "his brother."

JFB: Mat 1:11 - about the time they were carried away to Babylon Literally, "of their migration," for the Jews avoided the word "captivity" as too bitter a recollection, and our Evangelist studiously respects the na...

Literally, "of their migration," for the Jews avoided the word "captivity" as too bitter a recollection, and our Evangelist studiously respects the national feeling.

JFB: Mat 1:12 - And after they were brought to Babylon After the migration of Babylon.

After the migration of Babylon.

JFB: Mat 1:12 - Jechonias begat Salathiel So 1Ch 3:17. Nor does this contradict Jer 22:30, "Thus saith the Lord, Write ye this man (Coniah, or Jeconiah) childless"; for what follows explains i...

So 1Ch 3:17. Nor does this contradict Jer 22:30, "Thus saith the Lord, Write ye this man (Coniah, or Jeconiah) childless"; for what follows explains in what sense this was meant--"for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David." He was to have seed, but no reigning child.

JFB: Mat 1:12 - and Salathiel Or Shealtiel.

Or Shealtiel.

JFB: Mat 1:12 - begat Zorobabel So Ezr 3:2; Neh 12:1; Hag 1:1. But it would appear from 1Ch 3:19 that Zerubbabel was Salathiel's grandson, being the son of Pedaiah, whose name, for s...

So Ezr 3:2; Neh 12:1; Hag 1:1. But it would appear from 1Ch 3:19 that Zerubbabel was Salathiel's grandson, being the son of Pedaiah, whose name, for some reason unknown, is omitted.

JFB: Mat 1:13-15 - And Zorobabel begat Abiud, &c. None of these names are found in the Old Testament; but they were doubtless taken from the public or family registers, which the Jews carefully kept, ...

None of these names are found in the Old Testament; but they were doubtless taken from the public or family registers, which the Jews carefully kept, and their accuracy was never challenged.

JFB: Mat 1:16 - And Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus From this it is clear that the genealogy here given is not that of Mary, but of Joseph; nor has this ever been questioned. And yet it is here studious...

From this it is clear that the genealogy here given is not that of Mary, but of Joseph; nor has this ever been questioned. And yet it is here studiously proclaimed that Joseph was not the natural, but only the legal father of our Lord. His birth of a virgin was known only to a few; but the acknowledged descent of his legal father from David secured that the descent of Jesus Himself from David should never be questioned. See on Mat 1:20.

JFB: Mat 1:16 - who is called Christ Signifying "anointed." It is applied in the Old Testament to the kings (1Sa 24:6, 1Sa 24:10); to the priests (Lev 4:5, Lev 4:16, &c.); and to the prop...

Signifying "anointed." It is applied in the Old Testament to the kings (1Sa 24:6, 1Sa 24:10); to the priests (Lev 4:5, Lev 4:16, &c.); and to the prophets (1Ki 19:16) --these all being anointed will oil, the symbol of the needful spiritual gifts to consecrate them to their respective offices; and it was applied, in its most sublime and comprehensive sense, to the promised Deliverer, inasmuch as He was to be consecrated to an office embracing all three by the immeasurable anointing of the Holy Ghost (Isa 61:1; compare Joh 3:34).

JFB: Mat 1:17 - So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away Or migration.

Or migration.

JFB: Mat 1:17 - into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon The migration of Babylon.

The migration of Babylon.

JFB: Mat 1:17 - unto Christ are fourteen generations That is, the whole may be conveniently divided into three fourteens, each embracing one marked era, and each ending with a notable event, in the Israe...

That is, the whole may be conveniently divided into three fourteens, each embracing one marked era, and each ending with a notable event, in the Israelitish annals. Such artificial aids to memory were familiar to the Jews, and much larger gaps than those here are found in some of the Old Testament genealogies. In Ezr 7:1-5 no fewer than six generations of the priesthood are omitted, as will appear by comparing it with 1Ch 6:3-15. It will be observed that the last of the three divisions of fourteen appears to contain only thirteen distinct names, including Jesus as the last. LANGE thinks that this was meant as a tacit hint that Mary was to be supplied, as the thirteenth link of the last chain, as it is impossible to conceive that the Evangelist could have made any mistake in the matter. But there is a simpler way of accounting for it. As the Evangelist himself (Mat 1:17) reckons David twice--as the last of the first fourteen and the first of the second--so, if we reckon the second fourteen to end with Josiah, who was coeval with the "carrying away into captivity" (Mat 1:11), and third to begin with Jeconiah, it will be found that the last division, as well as the other two, embraces fourteen names, including that of our Lord.

JFB: Mat 1:18 - Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise Or, "thus."

Or, "thus."

JFB: Mat 1:18 - When as his mother Mary was espoused Rather, "betrothed."

Rather, "betrothed."

JFB: Mat 1:18 - to Joseph, before they came together, she was found Discovered to be.

Discovered to be.

JFB: Mat 1:18 - with child of the Holy Ghost It was, of course, the fact only that was discovered; the explanation of the fact here given is the Evangelist's own. That the Holy Ghost is a living ...

It was, of course, the fact only that was discovered; the explanation of the fact here given is the Evangelist's own. That the Holy Ghost is a living conscious Person is plainly implied here, and is elsewhere clearly taught (Act 5:3-4, &c.): and that, in the unity of the Godhead, He is distinct both from the Father and the Son, is taught with equal distinctness (Mat 28:19; 2Co 13:14). On the miraculous conception of our Lord, see on Luk 1:35.

JFB: Mat 1:19 - Then Joseph her husband Compare Mat 1:20, "Mary, thy wife." Betrothal was, in Jewish law, valid marriage. In giving Mary up, therefore, Joseph had to take legal steps to effe...

Compare Mat 1:20, "Mary, thy wife." Betrothal was, in Jewish law, valid marriage. In giving Mary up, therefore, Joseph had to take legal steps to effect the separation.

JFB: Mat 1:19 - being a just man, and not willing to make her a public example To expose her (see Deu 22:23-24)

To expose her (see Deu 22:23-24)

JFB: Mat 1:19 - was minded to put her away privily That is, privately by giving her the required writing of divorcement (Deu 24:1), in presence of only two or three witnesses, and without cause assigne...

That is, privately by giving her the required writing of divorcement (Deu 24:1), in presence of only two or three witnesses, and without cause assigned, instead of having her before a magistrate. That some communication had passed between him and his betrothed, directly or indirectly, on the subject, after she returned from her three months' visit to Elizabeth, can hardly be doubted. Nor does the purpose to divorce her necessarily imply disbelief, on Joseph's part, of the explanation given him. Even supposing him to have yielded to it some reverential assent--and the Evangelist seems to convey as much, by ascribing the proposal to screen her to the justice of his character--he might think it altogether unsuitable and incongruous in such circumstances to follow out the marriage.

JFB: Mat 1:20 - But while he thought on these things Who would not feel for him after receiving such intelligence, and before receiving any light from above? As he brooded over the matter alone, in the s...

Who would not feel for him after receiving such intelligence, and before receiving any light from above? As he brooded over the matter alone, in the stillness of the night, his domestic prospects darkened and his happiness blasted for life, his mind slowly making itself up to the painful step, yet planning how to do it in the way least offensive--at the last extremity the Lord Himself interposes.

JFB: Mat 1:20 - behold, the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, Joseph thou son of David This style of address was doubtless advisedly chosen to remind him of what all the families of David's line so early coveted, and thus it would prepar...

This style of address was doubtless advisedly chosen to remind him of what all the families of David's line so early coveted, and thus it would prepare him for the marvellous announcement which was to follow.

JFB: Mat 1:20 - fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost Though a dark cloud now overhangs this relationship, it is unsullied still.

Though a dark cloud now overhangs this relationship, it is unsullied still.

JFB: Mat 1:21 - And she shall bring forth a son Observe, it is not said, "she shall bear thee a son," as was said to Zacharias of his wife Elizabeth (Luk 1:13).

Observe, it is not said, "she shall bear thee a son," as was said to Zacharias of his wife Elizabeth (Luk 1:13).

JFB: Mat 1:21 - and thou As his legal father.

As his legal father.

JFB: Mat 1:21 - shalt call his name JESUS From the Hebrew meaning "Jehovah the Saviour"; in Greek JESUS--to the awakened and anxious sinner sweetest and most fragrant of all names, expressing ...

From the Hebrew meaning "Jehovah the Saviour"; in Greek JESUS--to the awakened and anxious sinner sweetest and most fragrant of all names, expressing so melodiously and briefly His whole saving office and work!

JFB: Mat 1:21 - for he shall save The "He" is here emphatic--He it is that shall save; He personally, and by personal acts (as WEBSTER and WILKINSON express it).

The "He" is here emphatic--He it is that shall save; He personally, and by personal acts (as WEBSTER and WILKINSON express it).

JFB: Mat 1:21 - his people The lost sheep of the house of Israel, in the first instance; for they were the only people He then had. But, on the breaking down of the middle wall ...

The lost sheep of the house of Israel, in the first instance; for they were the only people He then had. But, on the breaking down of the middle wall of partition, the saved people embraced the "redeemed unto God by His blood out of every kindred and people and tongue and nation."

JFB: Mat 1:21 - from their sins In the most comprehensive sense of salvation from sin (Rev 1:5; Eph 5:25-27).

In the most comprehensive sense of salvation from sin (Rev 1:5; Eph 5:25-27).

JFB: Mat 1:22 - Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet (Isa 7:14).

JFB: Mat 1:22 - saying As follows.

As follows.

JFB: Mat 1:23 - Behold, a virgin It should be "the virgin" meaning that particular virgin destined to this unparalleled distinction.

It should be "the virgin" meaning that particular virgin destined to this unparalleled distinction.

JFB: Mat 1:23 - shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which, being interpreted, is, God with us Not that He was to have this for a proper name (like "Jesus"), but that He should come to be known in this character, as God manifested in the flesh, ...

Not that He was to have this for a proper name (like "Jesus"), but that He should come to be known in this character, as God manifested in the flesh, and the living bond of holy and most intimate fellowship between God and men from henceforth and for ever.

JFB: Mat 1:24 - Then Joseph, being raised from sleep And all his difficulties now removed.

And all his difficulties now removed.

JFB: Mat 1:24 - did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife With what deep and reverential joy would this now be done on his part; and what balm would this minister to his betrothed one, who had till now lain u...

With what deep and reverential joy would this now be done on his part; and what balm would this minister to his betrothed one, who had till now lain under suspicions of all others the most trying to a chaste and holy woman--suspicions, too, arising from what, though to her an honor unparalleled, was to all around her wholly unknown!

JFB: Mat 1:25 - And knew her not till she had brought forth her first-born son: and he called his name JESUS The word "till" does not necessarily imply that they lived on a different footing afterwards (as will be evident from the use of the same word in 1Sa ...

The word "till" does not necessarily imply that they lived on a different footing afterwards (as will be evident from the use of the same word in 1Sa 15:35; 2Sa 6:23; Mat 12:20); nor does the word "first-born" decide the much-disputed question, whether Mary had any children to Joseph after the birth of Christ; for, as LIGHTFOOT says, "The law, in speaking of the first-born, regarded not whether any were born after or no, but only that none were born before." (See on Mat 13:55-56).

Clarke: Mat 1:1 - The book of the generation of Jesus Christ The book of the generation of Jesus Christ - I suppose these words to have been the original title to this Gospel; and that they signify, according ...

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ - I suppose these words to have been the original title to this Gospel; and that they signify, according to the Hebrew Phraseology, not only the account of the genealogy of Christ, as detailed below, hut the history of his birth, acts, sufferings, death, resurrection, and ascension

The phrase, book of the generation, ספר תולדות sepher toledoth , is frequent in the Jewish writings, and is translated by the Septuagint, βιβλος γενεσεως, as here, by the evangelist; and regularly conveys the meaning given to it above; e.g. This is the book of the generations of Adam, Gen 5:1. That is, the account of the life of Adam and certain of his immediate descendants. Again. These are the generations of Jacob, Gen 37:2. That is, the account or history of Jacob, his son Joseph, and the other remarkable branches of the family. And again. These are the generations of Aaron and Moses, Num 3:1. That is, the history of the life and acts of these persons, and some of their immediate descendants. The same form of expression is also used, Gen 2:4, when giving the history of the creation of heaven and earth

Some have translated βιβλος γενεσεως, The book of the genealogy ; and consider it the title of this chapter only; but the former opinion seems better founded

Clarke: Mat 1:1 - Jesus Christ Jesus Christ - See on Mat 1:16, Mat 1:21 (note)

Jesus Christ - See on Mat 1:16, Mat 1:21 (note)

Clarke: Mat 1:1 - The son of David, the son of Abraham The son of David, the son of Abraham - No person ever born could boast, in a direct line, a more illustrious ancestry than Jesus Christ. Among his p...

The son of David, the son of Abraham - No person ever born could boast, in a direct line, a more illustrious ancestry than Jesus Christ. Among his progenitors, the regal, sacerdotal, and prophetic offices, existed in all their glory and splendor . David, the most renowned of sovereigns, was king and prophet: Abraham, the most perfect character in all antiquity, whether sacred or profane, was priest and prophet: but the three offices were never united except in the person of Christ; he alone was prophet, priest, and king; and possessed and executed these offices in such a supereminent degree as no human being ever did, or ever could do. As the principal business of the prophet was to make known the will of God to men, according to certain partial communications received from Heaven; so Jesus, who lay in the bosom of the Father, and who was intimately and thoroughly acquainted with all the mysteries of the eternal world, came to declare the Divine nature and its counsels to mankind; see Joh 1:18. As the business of the priest was to offer sacrifices to God, to make atonement for the sins of the people; so Christ was constituted a high priest, to make, by the sacrifice of himself, an atonement for the sins of the whole world; see 1Jo 2:2, and the whole Epistle to the Hebrews. As the office of king was to reign over, protect, and defend the people committed to his care by the Divine Providence; so Christ is set as a king upon Sion, having the heathen for his inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for his possession, Psa 2:6, Psa 2:8, etc. Of the righteousness, peace, and increase of whose government, there shall be no end, Isa 9:7. This three-fold office, Christ executes not only in a general sense, in the world at large; but, in a particular sense, in every Christian soul. He is first a prophet, to teach the heart of man the will of God; to convict the conscience of sin, righteousness, and judgment; and fully to illustrate the way of salvation. He is next a priest, to apply that atonement to the guilty conscience, the necessity of which, as a prophet, he had previously made known. And lastly, as a king, he leads captivity captive, binds and casts out the strong man armed, spoils his goods, extends the sway of the scepter of righteousness, subdues and destroys sin, and reigns Lord over all the powers and faculties of the human soul; so that As sin reigned unto death, Even so does grace reign through righteousness, unto eternal life, by Jesus Christ our Lord. Rom 5:21

It is remarkable, that the evangelist names David before Abraham, though the latter was many generations older: the reason seems to be this, that David was not only the most illustrious of our Lord’ s predecessors, as being both king and prophet; but because that promise, which at first was given to Abraham, and afterwards, through successive generations, confirmed to the Jewish people, was at last determined and restricted to the family of David. Son of David, was an epithet by which the Messiah was afterwards known among the Jews; and, under this title, they were led to expect him by prophetic authority. See Psa 89:3, Psa 89:4; Psa 132:10, Psa 132:11, compared with Act 13:23, and Isa 11:1; Jer 23:5. Christ was prophesied of under the very name of David. See Eze 34:23, Eze 34:24; Eze 37:24, Eze 37:25.

Clarke: Mat 1:2 - Abraham begat Isaac Abraham begat Isaac - In this genealogy, those persons only, among the ancestors of Christ, which formed the direct line, as specified: hence no men...

Abraham begat Isaac - In this genealogy, those persons only, among the ancestors of Christ, which formed the direct line, as specified: hence no mention is made of Ishmael, the son of Abraham, nor of Esau, the son of Isaac; and of all the twelve patriarchs, or sons of Jacob, Judah alone is mentioned.

Clarke: Mat 1:3 - Phares and Zara Phares and Zara - The remarkable history of these twins may be seen, Genesis 38: Some of the ancients were of opinion, that the evangelist refers to...

Phares and Zara - The remarkable history of these twins may be seen, Genesis 38: Some of the ancients were of opinion, that the evangelist refers to the mystery of the youngest being preferred to the eldest, as prefiguring the exaltation of the Christian Church over the synagogue. Concerning the women whose names are recorded in this genealogy, see the note at the end of the chapter, (Mat 1:25 (note)).

Clarke: Mat 1:8 - Joram begat Ozias Joram begat Ozias - This is the Uzziah, king of Judah, who was struck with the leprosy for his presumption in entering the temple to offer incense b...

Joram begat Ozias - This is the Uzziah, king of Judah, who was struck with the leprosy for his presumption in entering the temple to offer incense before the Lord. See 2Ch 26:16, etc. Ozias was not the immediate son of Joram: there were three kings between them, Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah, which swell the fourteen generations to seventeen: but it is observed that omissions of this kind are not uncommon in the Jewish genealogies. In Ezr 7:3, Azariah is called the son of Meraioth, although it is evident, from 1Ch 6:7-9, that there were six descendants between them. This circumstance the evangelist was probably aware of; but did not see it proper to attempt to correct what he found in the public accredited genealogical tables; as he knew it to be of no consequence to his argument, which was merely to show that Jesus Christ as surely descended, in an uninterrupted line from David, as David did from Abraham. And this he has done in the most satisfactory manner; nor did any person in those days pretend to detect any inaccuracy in his statement; though the account was published among those very people whose interest it was to expose the fallacy, in vindication of their own obstinate rejection of the Messiah, if any such fallacy could have been proved. But as they were silent, modern and comparatively modern unbelievers may for ever hold their peace. The objections raised on this head are worthy of no regard; yet the following statement deserves notice

St. Matthew took up the genealogies just as he found them in the public Jewish records, which, though they were in the main correct, yet were deficient in many particulars. The Jews themselves give us sufficient proof of this. The Talmud, title Kiddushim , mentions ten classes of persons who returned from the Babylonish captivity

I.    כהני Cohaney , priests

II.    לוי Levey , Levites

III.    ישראל Yishrael , Israelites

IV.    חלולי Chululey , common persons, as to the priesthood; such whose fathers were priests, but their mothers were such as the priests should not marry

V.    גירי Girey , proselytes

VI.    חרורי Charurey , freed-men, or servants who had been liberated by their masters

VII.    ממזירי Mamzirey , spurious, such as were born in unlawful wedlock

VIII.    נתיני Nethiney , Nethinim

IX.    שתוקי Shetukey , bastards, persons whose mothers, though well known, could not ascertain the fathers of their children, because of their connections with different men

X.    אסופי Asuphey , such as were gathered up out of the streets, whose fathers and mothers were utterly unknown

Such was the heterogeneous mass brought up from Babylon to Jerusalem; and although we learn from the Jews, that great care was taken to separate the spurious from the true-born Israelites, and canons were made for that purpose, yet it so happened, that sometimes a spurious family had got into high authority, and therefore must not be meddled with. See several cases in Lightfoot. On this account, a faithful genealogist would insert in his roll such only as were indisputable. "It is therefore easy to guess,"says Dr. Lightfoot, "whence Matthew took the last fourteen generations of this genealogy, and Luke the first forty names of his: namely, from the genealogical rolls, at that time well known, and laid up in the public κειμηλια, repositories, and in the private also. And it was necessary indeed, in so noble and sublime a subject, and a thing that would be so much inquired into by the Jewish people, as the lineage of the Messiah would be, that the evangelists should deliver a truth, not only that could not be gainsayed, but also might be proved and established from certain and undoubted rolls of ancestors."See Horae Talmudicae .

Clarke: Mat 1:11 - Josias begat Jechonias, etc. Josias begat Jechonias, etc. - There are three considerable difficulties in this verse 1.    Josias was not the father of Jechonias; ...

Josias begat Jechonias, etc. - There are three considerable difficulties in this verse

1.    Josias was not the father of Jechonias; he was only the grandfather of that prince: 1Ch 3:14-16

2.    Jechonias had no brethren; at least, none are on record

3.    Josias died 20 years before the Babylonish captivity took place, and therefore Jechonias and his brethren could not have been begotten about the time they were carried away to Babylon

To this may be added a fourth difficulty, viz. there are only thirteen in this 2nd class of generations; or forty-one, instead of forty-two, in the whole. But all these difficulties disappear, by adopting a reading found in many MSS. Ιωσιας δε εγεννησε τον Ιωακειμ· Ιωακειμ δε εγεννησε τον Ιεχονιαν . And Josias begat Jehoiakim, or Joakim, and Joakim begat Jechonias. For this reading, see the authorities in Griesbach. Josiah was the immediate father of Jehoiakim (called also Eliakeim and Joakim) and his brethren, who were Johanan, Zedekiah, and Shallum: see 1Ch 3:15. Joakim was the father of Joachin or Jechonias, about the time of the first Babylonish captivity: for we may reckon three Babylonish captivities. The first happened in the fourth year of Joakim, son of Josiah, about A. M. 3398. In this year, Nebuchadnezzar, having taken Jerusalem, led a great number of captives to Babylon. The second captivity happened under Jechoniah, son of Joakim; who, having reigned three months, was taken prisoner in 3405, and was carried to Babylon, with a great number of the Jewish nobility. The third captivity took place under Zedekiah, A. M. 3416. And thus, says Calmet, Mat 1:11 should be read: Josias begat Joakim and his brethren: and Joakim begat Jechonias about the time of the first Babylonish captivity; and Jechonias begat Salathiel, after they were brought to Babylon. Thus, with the necessary addition of Joakim, the three classes, each containing fourteen generations, are complete. And to make this the more evident, I shall set down each of these three generations in a separate column, with the additional Joakim, that the reader may have them all at one view

1 Abraham1 Solomon1 Jechonias
2 Isaac2 Rehoboam2 Salathiel
3 Jacob3 Abia3 Zorobabel
4 Judah4 Asa4 Abiud
5 Pharez5 Josaphat5 Eliakim
6 Esrom6 Joram6 Azor
7 Aram7 Ozias7 Sadoc
8 Aminadab8 Joatham8 Achim
9 Naason9 Achaz9 Eliud
10 Salmon10 Ezekias10 Eleazar
11 Booz11 Manasses11 Matthan
12 Obed12 Amon12 Jacob
13 Jesse13 Josias13 Joseph
14 david14 joachim14 jesus

In all forty-two generations.

Clarke: Mat 1:12 - Jechonias begat Salathiel Jechonias begat Salathiel - After Jechonias was brought to Babylon, he was put in prison by Nebuchadnezzar, where he continued till the death of thi...

Jechonias begat Salathiel - After Jechonias was brought to Babylon, he was put in prison by Nebuchadnezzar, where he continued till the death of this prince, and the accession of Evilmerodach, who brought him out of prison, in which he had been detained thirty-seven years, and restored him to such favor that his throne (seat) was exalted above all the kings which were with him in Babylon: Jer 52:31, Jer 52:32. But though he thus became a royal favorite, he was never restored to his kingdom. And, according to the prophecy of Jeremiah, Jer 22:30, no man of his seed sat upon the throne of David; yet the regal line was continued through his son Salathiel, who died in Babylon: but Zorobabel, his son, returned from captivity, and by him the race of David was continued, according to Matthew, by Abiud; and, according to Luke, by Rhesa. See on Luk 3:23 (note), etc

The term carrying away to Babylon, μετοικεσια, from μετοικεω, to change a habitation, or place of residence, would be more properly translated by the word transportation, which is here peculiarly appropriate: the change was not voluntary; they were forced away.

Clarke: Mat 1:16 - Jesus, who is called Christ Jesus, who is called Christ - As the word Χριστος Christ, signifies the anointed or anointer, from χριω, to anoint, it answers exactly...

Jesus, who is called Christ - As the word Χριστος Christ, signifies the anointed or anointer, from χριω, to anoint, it answers exactly to the Hebrew משיח mashiach , which we pronounce Messiah or Messias; this word comes from the root משח mashac , signifying the same thing. As the same person is intended by both the Hebrew and Greek appellation, it should be regularly translated The Messiah, or The Christ; whichever is preferred, the demonstrative article should never be omitted

Priests, prophets, and kings, among the Jews, were anointed in order to the legitimate exercise of their respective offices. Hence the word Χριστος Christ, or משיח Mashiach , became a name of dignity, and often signified the same as king. See Isa 45:1; Psa 105:15; Lev 4:3; Lev 6:20; 1Sa 2:10. The words משיח Mashiach and מלך melec , Χριστος and βασιλευς, Christ and king, are frequently interchanged. 1Sa 2:10; Psa 2:2, Psa 2:6; Luk 23:2; and see the Scholia of Rosenmuller on this place. The reason of this may be seen in the following note, which I extract from the comment on Exo 29:7

"It appears from Isa 61:1, that anointing with oil, in consecrating a person to any important office, whether civil or religious, was considered as an emblem of the communication of the gifts and graces of the Holy Spirit. This ceremony was used on three occasions, viz. the installation of prophets, priests, and kings, into their respective offices. But why should such an anointing be deemed necessary? Because the common sense of men taught them that all good, whether spiritual or secular, must come from God, its origin and cause. Hence it was taken for granted

1.    That no man could foretell events, unless inspired by the Spirit of God. And therefore the prophet was anointed, to signify the communication of the Spirit of wisdom and knowledge

2.    That no person could offer an acceptable sacrifice to God for the sins of men, or profitably minister in holy things, unless enlightened, influenced, and directed, by the Spirit of grace and holiness. Hence the priest was anointed, to signify his being divinely qualified for the due performance of his sacred functions

3.    That no man could enact just and equitable laws, which should have the prosperity of the community and the welfare of the individual continually in view, or could use the power confided to him only for the suppression of vice and the encouragement of virtue, but that man who was ever under the inspiration of the Almighty

Hence kings were inaugurated by anointing with oil. Two of these offices only exist in all civilized nations, the sacerdotal and regal; and, in some countries, the priest and king are still consecrated by anointing. In the Hebrew language משח mashach signifies to anoint; and משיח mashiach , the anointed person. But as no man was ever dignified by holding the three offices, so no person ever had the title Mashiach, the anointed one, but Jesus, The Christ. He alone is King of kings, and Lord of lords: the king who governs the universe, and rules in the hearts of his followers; the prophet, to instruct men in the way wherein they should go; and the great high priest, to make atonement for their sins. Hence he is called the Messias, a corruption of the word המשיח ha -mashiach , The anointed One, in Hebrew; which gave birth to ὁ Χριστος ho Christos , which has precisely the same signification in Greek: of him, Melchisedeck, Abraham, Aaron, David, and others, were illustrious types. But none of these had the title of The Messiah, or The Anointed of God. This does, and ever will, belong exclusively to Jesus, The Christ."

Clarke: Mat 1:17 - Fourteen generations Fourteen generations - See the note on Mat 1:11. The Jews had a sort of technical method of summing up generations in this way. In Synopsis Sohar, p...

Fourteen generations - See the note on Mat 1:11. The Jews had a sort of technical method of summing up generations in this way. In Synopsis Sohar, p. 132, n. 18, we have the following words; "From Abraham to Solomon were fifteen generations; and then the moon was at the full. From Solomon to Zedekiah were other fifteen generations; the moon was then in the wane, and Zedekiah’ s eyes were put out."That is, the regal state came to its zenith of light and glory in the time of Solomon; but decreased gradually, till it became nearly extinct in the days of Zedekiah. See Schoetgen.

Clarke: Mat 1:18 - Espoused to Joseph Espoused to Joseph - The word μνηστευθεισης, from μνηστευω, to contract, or betroth, refers to the previous marriage agreemen...

Espoused to Joseph - The word μνηστευθεισης, from μνηστευω, to contract, or betroth, refers to the previous marriage agreement, in which the parties mutually bound themselves to each other; without which, no woman was ever married among the Jews. Among the Hindoos, a woman is espoused often a whole year, and even longer before the marriage takes place

Clarke: Mat 1:18 - Before they came together Before they came together - The woman was espoused at her own, or her father’ s house; and, generally, some time elapsed before she was taken h...

Before they came together - The woman was espoused at her own, or her father’ s house; and, generally, some time elapsed before she was taken home to the house of her husband: Deu 20:7; Jdg 14:7, Jdg 14:8. This custom has been immemorially observed among the inhabitants of Ireland, who have not only this, but many Asiatic customs, which, added to various authentic historic proofs, are collateral evidences that they received the Christian religion, not from the popes of Rome, but through the means of Asiatic missionaries

Among the Jews, the espousal, though the marriage had not been consummated, was considered as perfectly legal and binding on both sides; and hence a breach of this contract was considered as a case of adultery, and punished exactly in the same way. See Deu 22:25, Deu 22:28. Nor could a contract of this kind, though there was no cohabitation, be broken but by a regular divorce, as Mr. Selden, in his Uxor Hebraica, has proved at large from the Jewish rabbins

Clarke: Mat 1:18 - She was found with child She was found with child - Her situation was the most distressing and humiliating that can be conceived. Nothing but the fullest consciousness of he...

She was found with child - Her situation was the most distressing and humiliating that can be conceived. Nothing but the fullest consciousness of her own integrity, and the strongest confidence in God, could have supported her in such trying circumstances, where her reputation, her honor, and her life were at stake. What conversation passed between her and Joseph, on this discovery, we are not informed; but the issue proves that it was not satisfactory to him: nor could he resolve to consider her as his wife, till God had sent his angel to bear the most unequivocal testimony to the virgin’ s innocence. His whole conduct, on this occasion, was exceedingly benevolent and humane. He might at once have taken the advantage of the law, Deu 22:23, Deu 22:24, and had her stoned to death.

Clarke: Mat 1:19 - To make her a public example To make her a public example - Παραδειγματισαι, to expose her to public infamy; from παρα, near, and δεικνυμαι, I sho...

To make her a public example - Παραδειγματισαι, to expose her to public infamy; from παρα, near, and δεικνυμαι, I show, or expose; what is oddly, though emphatically, called in England, showing up - exposing a character to public view. Though Joseph was a righteous man, δικαιος, and knew that the law required that such persons as he supposed his wife to be should be put to death, yet, as righteousness is ever directed by mercy, he determined to put her away or divorce her privately, i.e. without assigning any cause, that her life might be saved; and, as the offense was against himself, he had a right to pass it by if he chose. Some have supposed that the term δικαιος should be translated merciful, and it certainly often has this signification; but here it is not necessary.

Clarke: Mat 1:20 - That which is conceived (or formed) in her That which is conceived (or formed) in her - So I think γεννηθεν should be translated in this place: as it appears that the human nature o...

That which is conceived (or formed) in her - So I think γεννηθεν should be translated in this place: as it appears that the human nature of Jesus Christ was a real creation in the womb of the virgin, by the power of the Holy Spirit. The angel of the Lord mentioned here was probably the angel Gabriel, who, six months before, bad been sent to Zacharias and Elisabeth, to announce the birth of Christ’ s forerunner, John the Baptist. See Luk 1:36.

Clarke: Mat 1:21 - Jesus Jesus - The same as Joshua, יהושע Yehoshua , from ישע yasha , he saved, delivered, put in a state of safety. See on Exo 13:9 (note); Num 1...

Jesus - The same as Joshua, יהושע Yehoshua , from ישע yasha , he saved, delivered, put in a state of safety. See on Exo 13:9 (note); Num 13:16 (note), and in the preface to Joshua

Clarke: Mat 1:21 - He shall save his people from their sins He shall save his people from their sins - This shall be his great business in the world: the great errand on which he is come, viz. to make an aton...

He shall save his people from their sins - This shall be his great business in the world: the great errand on which he is come, viz. to make an atonement for, and to destroy, sin: deliverance from all the power, guilt, and pollution of sin, is the privilege of every believer in Christ Jesus. Less than this is not spoken of in the Gospel; and less than this would be unbecoming the Gospel. The perfection of the Gospel system is not that it makes allowances for sin, but that it makes an atonement for it: not that it tolerates sin, but that it destroys it. In Mat 1:1, he is called Jesus Christ, on which Dr. Lightfoot properly remarks, "That the name of Jesus, so often added to the name of Christ in the New Testament, is not only that Christ might be thereby pointed out as the Savior, but also that Jesus might be pointed out as the true Christ or Messiah, against the unbelief of the Jews."This observation will be of great use in numberless places of the New Testament. See Act 2:36; Act 8:35; 1Co 16:22; 1Jo 2:22; 1Jo 4:15, etc.

Clarke: Mat 1:22 - By the prophet By the prophet - Isaiah is added here by several MSS., versions, and fathers. The prophecy is taken from Isa 7:14.

By the prophet - Isaiah is added here by several MSS., versions, and fathers. The prophecy is taken from Isa 7:14.

Clarke: Mat 1:23 - Behold, a virgin shall be with child Behold, a virgin shall be with child - We have already seen, from the preceding verse, that this prophecy is taken from Isa 7:14; but it may be nece...

Behold, a virgin shall be with child - We have already seen, from the preceding verse, that this prophecy is taken from Isa 7:14; but it may be necessary to consider the circumstances of the original promise more particularly. At the time referred to, the kingdom of Judah, under the government of Ahaz, was reduced very low. Pekah, king of Israel, had slain in Judea 120,000 persons in one day, and carried away captives 200,000, including women and children, together with much spoil. To add to their distress, Rezin, king of Syria, being confederate with Pekah, had taken Elath, a fortified city of Judah, and carried the inhabitants away captive to Damascus. In this critical conjuncture, need we wonder that Ahaz was afraid that the enemies who were now united against him must prevail, destroy Jerusalem, and the kingdom of Judah, and annihilate the family of David! To meet and remove this fear, apparently well grounded, Isaiah is sent from the Lord to Ahaz, swallowed up now both by sorrow and by unbelief, in order to assure him that the counsels of his enemies should not stand; and that they should be utterly discomfited. To encourage Ahaz, he commands him to ask a sign or miracle, which should be a pledge in hand, that God should, in due time, fulfill the predictions of his servant, as related in the context. On Ahaz humbly refusing to ask any sign, it is immediately added, Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign: Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a son; and shall call his name Immanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat, etc. Both the Divine and human nature of our Lord, as well as the miraculous conception, appear to be pointed out in the prophecy quoted here by the evangelist: - He shall be called עמנו־אל IM -MENU -EL ; literally, The Strong God with Us: similar to those words in the New Testament: - The Word which was God - was made flesh, and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth: Joh 1:1, Joh 1:14. And, God was manifested in the flesh: 1Ti 3:16. So that we are to understand, God with us, to imply God incarnated - God in human nature. This seems farther evident from the words of the prophet, Isa 7:15. Butter and honey shall he eat - he shall be truly man, grow up and be nourished in a human, natural way; which refers to his being With Us, i.e. incarnated. To which the prophet adds, That he may know to refuse the evil and choose the good: - or rather, According to his knowledge, לדעתו le -daato , reprobating the evil, and choosing the good. This refers to him as God; and is the same idea given by this prophet, Isa 53:11 : By (or in) his knowledge (the knowledge of Christ crucified, בדעתו be -daato ) shall my righteous servant sanctify many; for he shall bear their offenses. Now this union of the Divine and human nature is termed a sign or miracle, אות oth , i.e. something which exceeds the power of nature to produce. And this miraculous union was to be brought about in a miraculous way: Behold a Virgin shall conceive: the word is very emphatic, העלמה ha -almah , The virgin; the only one that ever was, or ever shall be, a mother in this way. But the Jews, and some called Christians, who have espoused their desperate cause, assert, that "the word עלמה almah does not signify a Virgin only; for it is applied, Pro 30:19, to signify a young married woman."I answer, that this latter text is no proof of the contrary doctrine: the words דרך גבר בעלמה derec geber be -almah , the way of a man with a maid, cannot be proved to mean that for which it is produced: beside, one of De Rossi’ s MSS. reads בעלמיו be -almaiu , the way of a strong, or stout, man ( גבר geber ) In His Youth; and in this reading the Syriac, Septuagint, Vulgate, and Arabic agree, which are followed by the first version in the English language, as it stands in a MS. in my own possession - the weie of a man in his waring youthe ; so that this place, the only one that can with any probability of success be produced, were the interpretation contended for correct, which I am by no means disposed to admit, proves nothing. Beside, the consent of so many versions in the opposite meaning deprives it of much of its influence in this question

The word עלמה almah , comes from עלם alam , to lie hid, be concealed; and we are told that "virgins were so called, because they were concealed or closely kept up in their fathers’ houses, till the time of their marriage."This is not correct: see the case of Rebecca, Gen 24:43 (note), and my note there: that of Rachel, Gen 29:6, Gen 29:9, and the note there also: and see the case of Miriam, the sister of Moses, Exo 2:8, and also the Chaldee paraphrase on Lam 1:4, where the virgins are represented as going out in the dance. And see also the whole history of Ruth. This being concealed, or kept at home, on which so much stress is laid, is purely fanciful; for we find that young unmarried women drew water, kept sheep, gleaned publicly in the fields, etc., etc., and the same works they perform among the Turcomans to the present day. This reason, therefore, does not account for the radical meaning of the word; and we must seek it elsewhere. Another well known and often used root in the Hebrew tongue will cast light on this subject. This is גלה galah , which signifies to reveal, make manifest, or uncover, and is often applied to matrimonial connections, in different parts of the Mosaic law: עלם alam , therefore, may be considered as implying the concealment of the virgin, as such, till lawful marriage had taken place. A virgin was not called עלמה almah , because she was concealed by being kept at home in her father’ s house, which is not true, but literally and physically, because, as a woman, she had not been uncovered - she had not known man. This fully applies to the blessed virgin: see Luk 1:34. "How can this be, seeing I know no man?"and this text throws much light on the subject before us. This also is in perfect agreement with the ancient prophecy, "The seed of the woman shall bruise the head of the serpent,"Gen 3:15; for the person who was to destroy the work of the devil was to be the progeny of the woman, without any concurrence of the man. And, hence, the text in Genesis speaks as fully of the virgin state of the person, from whom Christ, according to the flesh, should come, as that in the prophet, or this in the evangelist. According to the original promise, there was to be a seed, a human being, who should destroy sin; but this seed or human being must come from the woman Alone; and no woman Alone, could produce such a human being, without being a virgin. Hence, A virgin shall bear a son, is the very spirit and meaning of the original text, independently of the illustration given by the prophet; and the fact recorded by the evangelist is the proof of the whole. But how could that be a sign to Ahaz, which was to take place so many hundreds of years after? I answer, the meaning of the prophet is plain: not only Rezin and Pekah should be unsuccessful against Jerusalem at that time, which was the fact; but Jerusalem, Judea, and the house of David, should be both preserved, notwithstanding their depressed state, and the multitude of their adversaries, till the time should come when a Virgin should bear a son. This is a most remarkable circumstance - the house of David could never fail, till a virgin should conceive and bear a son - nor did it: but when that incredible and miraculous fact did take place, the kingdom and house of David became extinct! This is an irrefragable confutation of every argument a Jew can offer in vindication of his opposition to the Gospel of Christ. Either the prophecy in Isaiah has been fulfilled, or the kingdom and house of David are yet standing. But the kingdom of David, we know, is destroyed: and where is the man, Jew or Gentile, that can show us a single descendant of David on the face of the earth? The prophecy could not fail - the kingdom and house of David have failed; the virgin, therefore, must have brought forth her son - and this son is Jesus, the Christ. Thus Moses, Isaiah, and Matthew concur; and facts, the most unequivocal, have confirmed the whole! Behold the wisdom and providence of God

Notwithstanding what has been said above, it may be asked, In what sense could this name Immanuel be applied to Jesus Christ, if he be not truly and properly God? Could the Spirit of truth ever design that Christians should receive him as an angel or a mere man, and yet, in the very beginning of the Gospel history, apply a character to him which belongs only to the most high God? Surely no. In what sense, then, is Christ God With Us? Jesus is called Immanuel, or God with us, in his incarnation. - God united to our nature - God with man - God in man. - God with us, by his continual protection. - God with us, by the influences of his Holy Spirit - in the holy sacrament - in the preaching of his word - in private prayer. And God with us, through every action of our life, that we begin, continue, and end in his name. He is God with us, to comfort, enlighten, protect, and defend us in every time of temptation and trial, in the hour of death, in the day of judgment; and God with us, and in us, and we with and in him, to all eternity.

Clarke: Mat 1:25 - Her first - born son Her first - born son - Τον υιον αυτης τον πρω - οτοκον . Literally, That son of hers, the first-born one. That Mary might h...

Her first - born son - Τον υιον αυτης τον πρω - οτοκον . Literally, That son of hers, the first-born one. That Mary might have had other children, any person may reasonably and piously believe; that she had others, many think exceedingly probable, and that this text is at least an indirect proof of it. However this may be, the perpetual virginity of Mary should not be made an article of faith. God has not made it one: indeed it can hardly bear the light of several texts in the Gospels

Clarke: Mat 1:25 - He knew her not He knew her not - Had no matrimonial intercourse with her - Till she had brought forth that son of hers, of whom the evangelist had been just speaki...

He knew her not - Had no matrimonial intercourse with her - Till she had brought forth that son of hers, of whom the evangelist had been just speaking, the first-born, the eldest of the family, to whom the birthright belonged, and who was miraculously born before she knew any man, being yet in a state of virginity. See on Mat 13:55 (note). The virginity of Mary, previously to the birth of Christ, is an article of the utmost consequence to the Christian system; and therefore it is an article of faith: her perpetual virginity is of no consequence; and the learned labor spent to prove it has produced a mere castle in the air. The thing is possible; but it never has been, and never can be proved

Clarke: Mat 1:25 - He called his name Jesus He called his name Jesus - This name was given by the command of God, see Mat 1:16, and was imposed on Christ when eight days old; for then, accordi...

He called his name Jesus - This name was given by the command of God, see Mat 1:16, and was imposed on Christ when eight days old; for then, according to the Jewish law, he was circumcised: thus he had the name of Savior given when he first began to shed that blood without which there could be no remission of sins

The goodness of God is manifested, not only in his giving his Son to save a lost world, but also in the choice of the persons who were his progenitors: among whom we find, First, Saints, to excite our courage: Abraham, remarkable for his faith; Isaac, for his obedience; and Jacob, for his fervor and constancy

Secondly, Penitent Sinners, to excite our confidence: such as David, Manasses, etc

Thirdly, Sinners, of whose repentance and salvation we hear nothing; to put us on our guard. Who can read the account of idolatrous Solomon, who, from the whole evidence of the sacred history, died In his sins, without trembling

Four Women are mentioned in this genealogy: two of these were adulteresses, Tamar and Bathsheba; and two were Gentiles, Rahab and Ruth, and strangers to the covenant of promise; to teach us that Jesus Christ came to save sinners, and that, though strangers to his people, we are not on that account excluded from a salvation which God has designed for all men. He is not the God of the Jews only; he is also the God of the Gentiles

The state of the royal family of David, the circumstances of the holy virgin and her spouse Joseph, the very remarkable prophecy of Isaiah, the literal and circumstantial fulfillment of it, the names given to our blessed Lord, the genealogical scroll of the family, etc., etc., are all so many proofs of the wisdom, goodness, and providence of God. Every occurrence seems, at first view, to be abandoned to fortuitous influence, and yet the result of each shows that God managed the whole. These circumstances are of the greatest importance; nor can the Christian reader reflect on them without an increase of his faith and his piety.

Calvin: Mat 1:1 - The book of the generation As all are not agreed about these two genealogies, which are given by Matthew and Luke, we must first see whether both trace the genealogy of Christ ...

As all are not agreed about these two genealogies, which are given by Matthew and Luke, we must first see whether both trace the genealogy of Christ from Joseph, or whether Matthew only traces it from Joseph, and Luke from Mary. Those who are of this latter opinion have a plausible ground for their distinction in the diversity of the names: and certainly, at first sight, nothing seems more improbable than that Matthew and Luke, who differ so widely from each other, give one and the same genealogy. For from David to Salathiel, and again from Zerubbabel till Joseph, the names are totally different.

Again, it is alleged, that it would have been idle to bestow so great pains on a thing of no use, in relating a second time the genealogy of Joseph, who after all was not the father of Christ. “Why this repetition,” say they, “which proves nothing that contributes much to the edification of faith? If nothing more be known than this, that Joseph was one of the descendants and family of David, the genealogy of Christ will still remain doubtful.” In their opinion, therefore, it would have been superfluous that two Evangelists should apply themselves to this subject. They excuse Matthew for laying down the ancestry of Joseph, on the ground, that he did it for the sake of many persons, who were still of opinion that he was the father of Christ. But it would have been foolish to hold out such an encouragement to a dangerous error: and what follows is at total variance with the supposition. For as soon as he comes to the close of the genealogy, Matthew points out that Christ was conceived in the womb of the virgin, not from the seed of Joseph, but by the secret power of the Spirit. If their argument were good, Matthew might be charged with folly or inadvertence, in laboring to no purpose to establish the genealogy of Joseph.

But we have not yet replied to their objection, that the ancestry of Joseph has nothing to do with Christ. The common and well-known reply is, that in the person of Joseph the genealogy of Mary also is included, because the law enjoined every man to marry from his own tribe. It is objected, on the other hand, that at almost no period had that law been observed: but the arguments on which that assertion rests are frivolous. They quote the instance of the eleven tribes binding themselves by an oath, that they would not give a wife to the Benjamites, (Jud 21:1.) If this matter, say they, had been settled by law, there would have been no need for a new enactment. I reply, this extraordinary occurrence is erroneously and ignorantly converted by them into a general rule: for if one tribe had been cut off, the body of the people must have been incomplete if some remedy had not been applied to a case of extreme necessity. We must not, therefore, look to this passage for ascertaining the common law.

Again, it is objected, that Mary, the mother of Christ, was Elisabeth’s cousin, though Luke has formerly stated that she was of the daughters of Aaron, (Luk 1:5.) The reply is easy. The daughters of the tribe of Judah, or of any other tribe, were at liberty to marry into the tribe of the priesthood: for they were not prevented by that reason, which is expressed in the law, that no woman should “remove her inheritance” to those who were of a different tribe from her own, (Num 36:6.) Thus, the wife of Jehoiada, the high priest, is declared by the sacred historian to have belonged to the royal family, —

“Jehoshabeath, the daughter of Jehoram,
the wife of Jehoiada the priest,”
(2Ch 22:11.)

It was, therefore, nothing wonderful or uncommon, if the mother of Elisabeth were married to a priest. Should any one allege, that this does not enable us to decide, with perfect certainty, that Mary was of the same tribe with Joseph, because she was his wife, I grant that the bare narrative, as it stands, would not prove it without the aid of other circumstances.

But, in the first place, we must observe, that the Evangelists do not speak of events known in their own age. When the ancestry of Joseph had been carried up as far as David, every one could easily make out the ancestry of Mary. The Evangelists, trusting to what was generally understood in their own day, were, no doubt, less solicitous on that point: for, if any one entertained doubts, the research was neither difficult nor tedious. 85 Besides, they took for granted, that Joseph, as a man of good character and behavior, had obeyed the injunction of the law in marrying a wife from his own tribe. That general rule would not, indeed, be sufficient to prove Mary’s royal descent; for she might have belonged to the tribe of Judah, and yet not have been a descendant of the family of David.

My opinion is this. The Evangelists had in their eye godly persons, who entered into no obstinate dispute, but in the person of Joseph acknowledged the descent of Mary; particularly since, as we have said, no doubt was entertained about it in that age. One matter, however, might appear incredible, that this very poor and despised couple belonged to the posterity of David, and to that royal seed, from which the Redeemer was to spring. If any one inquire whether or not the genealogy traced by Matthew and Luke proves clearly and beyond controversy that Mary was descended from the family of David, I own that it cannot be inferred with certainty; but as the relationship between Mary and Joseph was at that time well known, the Evangelists were more at ease on that subject. Meanwhile, it was the design of both Evangelists to remove the stumbling-block arising from the fact, that both Joseph and Mary were unknown, and despised, and poor, and gave not the slightest indication of royalty.

Again, the supposition that Luke passes by the descent of Joseph, and relates that of Mary, is easily refuted; for he expressly says, that Jesus was supposed to be the son of Joseph, etc. Certainly, neither the father nor the grandfather of Christ is mentioned, but the ancestry of Joseph himself is carefully explained. I am well aware of the manner in which they attempt to solve this difficulty. The word son, they allege, is put for son-in-law, and the interpretation they give to Joseph being called the son of Heli is, that he had married Heli’s daughter. But this does not agree with the order of nature, and is nowhere countenanced by any example in Scripture.

If Solomon is struck out of Mary’s genealogy, Christ will no longer be Christ; for all inquiry as to his descent is founded on that solemn promise,

“I will set up thy seed after thee; I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son,”
(2Sa 7:12.)

“The Lord hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it; Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne,”
(Psa 132:11.)

Solomon was, beyond controversy, the type of this eternal King who was promised to David; nor can the promise be applied to Christ, except in so far as its truth was shadowed out in Solomon, (1Ch 28:5.) Now if the descent is not traced to him, how, or by what argument, shall he be proved to be “the son of David”? Whoever expunges Solomon from Christ’s genealogy does at the same time, obliterate and destroy those promises by which he must be acknowledged to be the son of David. In what way Luke, tracing the line of descent from Nathan, does not exclude Solomon, will afterwards be seen at the proper place.

Not to be too tedious, those two genealogies agree substantially with each other, but we must attend to four points of difference. The first is; Luke ascends by a retrograde order, from the last to the first, while Matthew begins with the source of the genealogy. The second is; Matthew does not carry his narrative beyond the holy and elect race of Abraham, 86 while Luke proceeds as far as Adam. The third is; Matthew treats of his legal descent, and allows himself to make some omissions in the line of ancestors, choosing to assist the reader’s memory by arranging them under three fourteens; while Luke follows the natural descent with greater exactness. The fourth and last is; when they are speaking of the same persons, they sometimes give them different names.

It would be superfluous to say more about the first point of difference, for it presents no difficulty. The second is not without a very good reason: for, as God had chosen for himself the family of Abraham, from which the Redeemer of the world would be born, and as the promise of salvation had been, in some sort, shut up in that family till the coming of Christ, Matthew does not pass beyond the limits which God had prescribed. We must attend to what Paul says,

“that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers,”
(Rom 15:8)

with which agrees that saying of Christ, “Salvation is of the Jews,” (Joh 4:22.) Matthew, therefore, presents him to our contemplation as belonging to that holy race, to which he had been expressly appointed. In Matthew’s catalogue we must look at the covenant of God, by which he adopted the seed of Abraham as his people, separating them, by a “middle wall of partition,” (Eph 2:14,) from the rest of the nations. Luke directed his view to a higher point; for though, from the time that God had made his covenant with Abraham, a Redeemer was promised, in a peculiar manner, to his seed, yet we know that, since the transgression of the first man, all needed a Redeemer, and he was accordingly appointed for the whole world. It was by a wonderful purpose of God, that Luke exhibited Christ to us as the son of Adam, while Matthew confined him within the single family of Abraham. For it would be of no advantage to us, that Christ was given by the Father as “the author of eternal salvations” (Heb 5:9,) unless he had been given indiscriminately to all. Besides, that saying of the Apostle would not be true, that “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever,” (Heb 13:8,) if his power and grace had not reached to all ages from the very creation of the world. Let us know; therefore, that to the whole human race there has been manifested and exhibited salvation through Christ; for not without reason is he called the son of Noah, and the son of Adam. But as we must seek him in the word of God, the Spirit wisely directs us, through another Evangelist, to the holy race of Abraham, to whose hands the treasure of eternal life, along with Christ, was committed for a time, (Rom 3:1.)

We come now to the third point of difference. Matthew and Luke unquestionably do not observe the same order; for immediately after David the one puts Solomon, and the other, Nathan; which makes it perfectly clear that they follow different lines. This sort of contradiction is reconciled by good and learned interpreters in the following manner. Matthew, departing from the natural lineage, which is followed by Luke, reckons up the legal genealogy. I call it the legal genealogy, because the right to the throne passed into the hands of Salathiel. Eusebius, in the first book of his Ecclesiastical History, adopting the opinion of Africanus, prefers applying the epithet legal to the genealogy which is traced by Luke. But it amounts to the same thing: for he means nothing more than this, that the kingdom, which had been established in the person of Solomon, passed in a lawful manner to Salathiel. But it is more correct and appropriate to say, that Matthew has exhibited the legal order: because, by naming Solomon immediately after David, he attends, not to the persons from whom in a regular line, according to the flesh, Christ derived his birth, but to the manner in which he was descended from Solomon and other kings, so as to be their lawful successor, in whose hand God would “stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever,” (2Sa 7:13.)

There is probability in the opinion that, at the death of Ahaziah, the lineal descent from Solomon was closed. As to the command given by David — for which some persons quote the authority of Jewish Commentators — that should the line from Solomon fail, the royal power would pass to the descendants of Nathan, I leave it undetermined; holding this only for certain, that the succession to the kingdom was not confused, but regulated by fixed degrees of kindred. Now, as the sacred history relates that, after the murder of Ahaziah, the throne was occupied, and all the seed-royal destroyed “by his mother Athaliah, (2Kg 11:1,) it is more than probable that this woman, from an eager desire of power, had perpetrated those wicked and horrible murders that she might not be reduced to a private rank, and see the throne transferred to another. If there had been a son of Ahaziah still alive, the grandmother would willingly have been allowed to reign in peace, without envy or danger, under the mask of being his tutor. When she proceeds to such enormous crimes as to draw upon herself infamy and hatred, it is a proof of desperation arising from her being unable any longer to keep the royal authority in her house.

As to Joash being called “the son of Ahaziah,” (2Ch 22:11,) the reason is, that he was the nearest relative, and was justly considered to be the true and direct heir of the crown. Not to mention that Athaliah (if we shall suppose her to be his grandmother) would gladly have availed herself of her relation to the child, will any person of ordinary understanding think it probable, that an actual son of the king could be so concealed by “Jehoiada the priest,” as not to excite the grandmother to more diligent search? If all is carefully weighed, there will be no hesitation in concluding, that the next heir of the crown belonged to a different line. And this is the meaning of Jehoiada’s words,

Behold, the king’s son shall reign, as the Lord hath said of the sons of David,”
(2Ch 23:3.)

He considered it to be shameful and intolerable, that a woman, who was a stranger by blood, should violently seize the scepter, which God had commanded to remain in the family of David.

There is no absurdity in supposing, that Luke traces the descent of Christ from Nathan: for it is possible that the line of Solomon, so far as relates to the succession of the throne, may have been broken off. It may be objected, that Jesus cannot be acknowledged as the promised Messiah, if he be not a descendant of Solomon, who was an undoubted type of Christ But the answer is easy. Though he was not naturally descended from Solomon, yet he was reckoned his son by legal succession, because he was descended from kings.

The fourth point of difference is the great diversity of the names. Many look upon this as a great difficulty: for from David till Joseph, with the exception of Salathiel and Zerubbabel, none of the names are alike in the two Evangelists. The excuse commonly offered, that the diversity arose from its being very customary among the Jews to have two names, appears to many persons not quite satisfactory. But as we are now unacquainted with the method, which was followed by Matthew in drawing up and arranging the genealogy, there is no reason to wonder, if we are unable to determine how far both of them agree or differ as to individual names. It cannot be doubted that, after the Babylonish captivity, the same persons are mentioned under different names. In the case of Salathiel and Zerubbabel, the same names, I think, were purposely retained, on account of the change which had taken place in the nation: because the royal authority was then extinguished. Even while a feeble shadow of power remained, a striking change was visible, which warned believers, that they ought to expect another and more excellent kingdom than that of Solomon, which had flourished but for a short time.

It is also worthy of remark, that the additional number in Luke’s catalogue to that of Matthew is nothing strange; for the number of persons in the natural line of descent is usually greater than in the legal line. Besides, Matthew chose to divide the genealogy of Christ into three departments, and to make each department to contain fourteen persons. In this way, he felt himself at liberty to pass by some names, which Luke could not with propriety omit, not having restricted himself by that rule.

Thus have I discussed the genealogy of Christ, as far as it appeared to be generally useful. If any one is tickled 87 by a keener curiosity, I remember Paul’s admonition, and prefer sobriety and modesty to trifling and useless disputes. It is a noted passage, in which he enjoins us to avoid excessive keenness in disputing about “genealogies, as unprofitable and vain,” ( Titus 3:9.)

It now remains to inquire, lastly, why Matthew included the whole genealogy of Christ in three classes, and assigned to each class fourteen persons. Those who think that he did so, in order to aid the memory of his readers, state a part of the reason, but not the whole. It is true, indeed, that a catalogue, divided into three equal numbers, is more easily remembered. But it is also evident that this division is intended to point out a threefold condition of the nation, from the time when Christ was promised to Abraham, to “the fullness of the time” (Gal 4:4) when he was “manifested in the flesh,” (1Ti 3:16.) Previous to the time of David, the tribe of Judah, though it occupied a higher rank than the other tribes, held no power. In David the royal authority burst upon the eyes of all with unexpected splendor, and remained till the time of Jeconiah. After that period, there still lingered in the tribe of Judah a portion of rank and government, which sustained the expectations of the godly till the coming of the Messiah.

1.The book of the generation Some commentators give themselves unnecessary trouble, in order to excuse Matthew for giving to his whole history this title, which applies only to the half of a single chapter. For this ἐπιγραφή, or title, does not extend to the whole book of Matthew: but the wordβίβλος , book, is put for catalogue: as if he had said, “Here follows the catalogue of the generation of Christ.” It is with reference to the promise, that Christ is called the son of David, the son of Abraham: for God had promised to Abraham that he would give him a seed, “in whom all the families of the earth should be blessed,” (Gen 12:3.) David received a still clearer promise, that God would “stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever,” (2Sa 7:13;) that one of his posterity would be king “as long as the sun and moon endure,” (Psa 72:5;) and that “his throne should be as the days of heaven,” (Psa 89:29.) And so it became a customary way of speaking among the Jews to call Christ the son of David

Calvin: Mat 1:2 - Jacob begat Judah and his brethren 2.Jacob begat Judah and his brethren While Matthew passes by in silence Ishmael, Abraham’s first-born, and Esau, who was Jacob’s elder brother, h...

2.Jacob begat Judah and his brethren While Matthew passes by in silence Ishmael, Abraham’s first-born, and Esau, who was Jacob’s elder brother, he properly assigns a place in the genealogy to the Twelve Patriarchs, on all of whom God had bestowed a similar favor of adoption. He therefore intimates, that the blessing promised in Christ does not refer to the tribe of Judah alone, but belongs equally to all the children of Jacob, whom God gathered into his Church, while Ishmael and Esau were treated as strangers. 88

Calvin: Mat 1:3 - Judah begat Pharez and Zarah by Tamar 3.Judah begat Pharez and Zarah by Tamar This was a prelude to that emptying of himself, 89 of which Paul speaks, (Phi 2:7). The Son of God might have...

3.Judah begat Pharez and Zarah by Tamar This was a prelude to that emptying of himself, 89 of which Paul speaks, (Phi 2:7). The Son of God might have kept his descent unspotted and pure from every reproach or mark of infamy. But he came into the world to

“empty himself, and take upon him the form of a servant,”
(Phi 2:7)

to be

“a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people,”
(Psa 22:6)

and at length to undergo the accursed death of the cross. He therefore did not refuse to admit a stain into his genealogy, arising from incestuous intercourse which took place among his ancestors. Though Tamar was not impelled by lust to seek connection with her father-in-law, yet it was in an unlawful manner that she attempted to revenge the injury which she had received. Judah again intended to commit fornication, and unknowingly to himself, met with his daughter-in-law. 90 But the astonishing goodness of God strove with the sin of both; so that, nevertheless, this adulterous seed came to possess the scepter. 91

Calvin: Mat 1:6 - Begat David the King 6.Begat David the King In this genealogy, the designation of King is bestowed on David alone, because in his person God exhibited a type of the fut...

6.Begat David the King In this genealogy, the designation of King is bestowed on David alone, because in his person God exhibited a type of the future leader of his people, the Messiah. The kingly office had been formerly held by Saul; but, as he reached it through tumult and the ungodly wishes of the people, the lawful possession of the office is supposed to have commenced with David, more especially in reference to the covenant of God, who promised that “his throne should be established for ever,” (2Sa 7:16.) When the people shook off the yoke of God, and unhappily and wickedly asked a king, saying, “Give us a king to judge us,” (1Sa 8:5,) Saul was granted for short time. But his kingdom was shortly afterwards established by God, as a pledge of true prosperity, in the hand of David. Let this expression, David the King, be understood by us as pointing out the prosperous condition of the people, which the Lord had appointed.

Meanwhile, the Evangelist adds a human disgrace, which might almost bring a stain on the glory of this divine blessing. David the King begat Solomon by her that had been the wife of Uriah; by Bathsheba, whom he wickedly tore from her husband, and for the sake of enjoying whom, he basely surrendered an innocent man to be murdered by the swords of the enemy, (2Sa 11:15.) This taint, at the commencement of the kingdom, ought to have taught the Jews not to glory in the flesh. It was the design of God to show that, in establishing this kingdom, nothing depended on human merits.

Comparing the inspired history with the succession described by Matthew, it is evident that he has omitted three kings. 92 Those who say that he did so through forgetfulness, cannot be listened to for a moment. Nor is it probable that they were thrown out, because they were unworthy to occupy a place in the genealogy of Christ; for the same reason would equally apply to many others, who are indiscriminately brought forward by Matthew, along with pious and holy persons. A more correct account is, that he resolved to confine the list of each class to fourteen kings, and gave himself little concern in making the selection, because he had an adequate succession of the genealogy to place before the eyes of his readers, down to the close of the kingdom. As to there being only thirteen in the list, it probably arose from the blunders and carelessness of transcribers. Epiphanius, in his First Book against Heresies, assigns this reason, that the name of Jeconiah had been twice put down, and unlearned 93 persons ventured to strike out the repetition of it as superfluous; which, he tells us, ought not to have been done, because Jehoiakim, the father of king Jehoiakim, had the name Jeconiah, in common with his son, (1Ch 3:17; 2Kg 24:15; Jer 27:20.) Robert Stephens quotes a Greek manuscript, in which the name of Jehoiakim is introduced. 94

Calvin: Mat 1:12 - After the Babylonish exile 12.After the Babylonish exile That is, after the Jews were carried into captivity: for the Evangelist means, that the descendants of David, from bein...

12.After the Babylonish exile That is, after the Jews were carried into captivity: for the Evangelist means, that the descendants of David, from being kings, then became exiles and slaves. As that captivity was a sort of destruction, it came to be wonderfully arranged by Divine providence, not only that the Jews again united in one body, but even that some vestiges of dominion remained in the family of David. For those who returned home submitted, of their own accord, to the authority of Zerubbabel. In this manner, the fragments of the royal scepter 95 lasted till the coming of Christ was at hand, agreeably to the prediction of Jacob, “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come,” (Gen 49:10.) And even during that wretched and melancholy dispersion, the nation never ceased to be illuminated by some rays of the grace of God. The Greek word μετοικεσία, which the old translator renders transmigration, and Erasmus renders exile, literally signifies a change of habitation. The meaning is, that the Jews were compelled to leave their country, and to dwell as “strangers in a land that was not theirs,” (Gen 15:13.)

Calvin: Mat 1:16 - Jesus, who is called Christ 16.Jesus, who is called Christ By the surname Christ, Anointed, Matthew points out his office, to inform the readers that this was not a private pe...

16.Jesus, who is called Christ By the surname Christ, Anointed, Matthew points out his office, to inform the readers that this was not a private person, but one divinely anointed to perform the office of Redeemer. What that anointing was, and to what it referred, I shall not now illustrate at great length. As to the word itself, it is only necessary to say that, after the royal authority was abolished, it began to be applied exclusively to Him, from whom they were taught to expect a full recovery of the lost salvation. So long as any splendor of royalty continued in the family of David, the kings were wont to be called χριστοί, anointed. 96 But that the fearful desolation which followed might not throw the minds of the godly into despair, it pleased God to appropriate the name of Messiah, Anointed, to the Redeemer alone: as is evident from Daniel, (Dan 9:25.) The evangelical history everywhere shows that this was an ordinary way of speaking, at the time when the Son of God was “manifested in the flesh,” (1Ti 3:16.)

Calvin: Mat 1:18 - Now the birth of Jesus Christ 18.Now the birth of Jesus Christ Matthew does not as yet relate the place or manner of Christ’s birth, but the way in which his heavenly generation...

18.Now the birth of Jesus Christ Matthew does not as yet relate the place or manner of Christ’s birth, but the way in which his heavenly generation was made known to Joseph. First, he says that Mary was found to be with child by the Holy Spirit Not that this secret work of God was generally known: but the historian mixes up, with the knowledge of men, 97 the power of the Spirit, which was still unknown. He points out the time: When she was espoused to Joseph, and before they came together So far as respects conjugal fidelity, from the time that a young woman was betrothed to a man, she was regarded by the Jews as his lawful wife. When a “damsel betrothed to an husband” was convicted of being unchaste, the law condemned both of the guilty parties as adulterers:

“the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city;
and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbor’s wife,”
(Deu 22:23.)

The phrase employed by the Evangelist, before they came together, is either a modest appellation for conjugal intercourse, or simply means, “before they came to dwell together as husband and wife, and to make one home and family.” The meaning will thus be, that the virgin had not yet been delivered by her parents into the hands of her husband, but still remained under their roof.

Calvin: Mat 1:19 - As he was a just man 19.As he was a just man Some commentators explain this to mean, that Joseph, because he was a just man, determined to spare his wife: 98 taking ju...

19.As he was a just man Some commentators explain this to mean, that Joseph, because he was a just man, determined to spare his wife: 98 taking justice to be only another name for humanity, or, a gentle and merciful disposition. But others more correctly read the two clauses as contrasted with each other: that Joseph was a just man, but yet that he was anxious about the reputation of his wife. That justice, on which a commendation is here bestowed, consisted in hatred and abhorrence of crime. Suspecting his wife of adultery, and even convinced that she was an adulterer, he was unwilling to hold out the encouragement of lenity to such a crime. 99 And certainly he is but a pander 100 to his wife, who connives at her unchastity. Not only is such wickedness regarded with abhorrence by good and honorable minds, but that winking at crime which I have mentioned is marked by the laws with infamy.

Joseph, therefore, moved by an ardent love of justice, condemned the crime of which he supposed his wife to have been guilty; while the gentleness of his disposition prevented him from going to the utmost rigor of law. It was a moderate and calmer method to depart privately, and remove to a distant place. 101 Hence we infer, that he was not of so soft and effeminate a disposition, as to screen and promote uncleanness under the pretense of merciful dealing: he only made some abatement from stern justice, so as not to expose his wife to evil report. Nor ought we to have any hesitation in believing, that his mind was restrained by a secret inspiration of the Spirit. We know how weak jealousy is, and to what violence it hurries its possessor. Though Joseph did not proceed to rash and headlong conduct, yet he was wonderfully preserved from many imminent dangers, which would have sprung out of his resolution to depart.

The same remark is applicable to Mary’s silence. Granting that modest reserve prevented her from venturing to tell her husband, that she was with child by the Holy Spirit, it was not so much by her own choice, as by the providence of God that she was restrained. Let us suppose her to have spoken. The nature of the case made it little short of incredible. Joseph would have thought himself ridiculed, and everybody would have treated the matter as a laughing-stock: after which the Divine announcement, if it had followed, would have been of less importance. The Lord permitted his servant Joseph to be betrayed by ignorance into an erroneous conclusion, that, by his own voice, he might bring him back to the right path.

Yet it is proper for us to know, that this was done more on our account than for his personal advantage: for every necessary method was adopted by God, to prevent unfavorable suspicion from falling on the heavenly message. When the angel approaches Joseph, who is still unacquainted with the whole matter, wicked men have no reason to charge him with being influenced by prejudice to listen to the voice of God. He was not overcome by the insinuating address of his wife. His previously formed opinion was not shaken by entreaties. He was not induced by human arguments to take the opposite side. But, while the groundless accusation of his wife was still rankling in his mind, God interposed between them, that we might regard Joseph as a more competent witness, and possessing greater authority, as a messenger sent to us from heaven. We see how God chose to employ an angel in informing his servant Joseph, that to others he might be a heavenly herald, and that the intelligence which he conveyed might not be borrowed from his wife, or from any mortal.

The reason why this mystery was not immediately made known to a greater number of persons appears to be this. It was proper that this inestimable treasure should remain concealed, and that the knowledge of it should be imparted to none but the children of God. Nor is it absurd to say, that the Lord intended, as he frequently does, to put the faith and obedience of his own people to the trial. Most certainly, if any man shall maliciously refuse to believe and obey God in this matter, he will have abundant reason to be satisfied with the proofs by which this article of our faith is supported. For the same reason, the Lord permitted Mary to enter into the married state, that under the veil of marriage, till the full time for revealing it, the heavenly conception of the virgin might be concealed. Meanwhile, the knowledge of it was withheld from unbelievers, as their ingratitude and malice deserved.

Calvin: Mat 1:20 - And while he was considering these things // The angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream // Son of David, fear not 20.And while he was considering these things We see here how seasonably, and, as we would say, at the very point, the Lord usually aids his people. H...

20.And while he was considering these things We see here how seasonably, and, as we would say, at the very point, the Lord usually aids his people. Hence too we infer that, when he appears not to observe our cares and distresses, we are still under his eye. He may, indeed, hide himself, and remain silent; but, when our patience has been subjected to the trial, he will aid us at the time which his own wisdom has selected. How slow or late soever his assistance may be thought to be, it is for our advantage that it is thus delayed.

The angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream This is one of two ordinary kinds of revelations mentioned in the book of Numbers, where the Lord thus speaks:

“If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream. My servant Moses is not so. With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speechess,”
(Num 12:6.)

But we must understand that dreams of this sort differ widely from natural dreams; for they have a character of certainty engraven on them, and are impressed with a divine seal, so that there is not the slightest doubt of their truth. The dreams which men commonly have, arise either from the thoughts of the day, or from their natural temperament, or from bodily indisposition, or from similar causes: while the dreams which come from God are accompanied by the testimony of the Spirit, which puts beyond a doubt that it is God who speaks.

Son of David, fear not This exhortation shows, that Joseph was perplexed with the fear of sharing in the criminality of his wife, by enduring her adultery. The angel removes his suspicion of guilt, with the view of enabling him to dwell with his wife with a safe conscience. The appellation, Son of David, was employed on the present occasion, in order to elevate his mind to that lofty mystery; for he belonged to that family, and was one of the surviving few, 102 from whom the salvation promised to the world could proceed. When he heard the name of David, from whom he was descended, Joseph ought to have remembered that remarkable promise of God which related to the establishment of the kingdom, so as to acknowledge that there was nothing new in what was now told him. The predictions of the prophets were, in effect, brought forward by the angel, to prepare the mind of Joseph for receiving the present favor.

Calvin: Mat 1:21 - And thou shalt call his name === JESUS. I have already explained briefly, but as far as was necessary, the meaning of that word. At present I shall only add, that the words of the angel set aside the dream of those who derive it from the essential name of God, Jehovah; for the angel expresses the reason why the Son of God is so called, Because he shall SAVE his people; which suggests quite a different etymology from what they have contrived. It is justly and appropriately added, they tell us, that Christ will be the author of salvation, because he is the Eternal God. But in vain do they attempt to escape by this subterfuge; for the nature of the blessing which God bestows upon us is not all that is here stated. This office was conferred upon his Son from the fact, from the command which had been given to him by the Father, from the office with which he was invested when he came down to us from heaven. Besides, the two words ᾿Ιησοῦς and יהוה , Jesus and Jehovah, agree but in two letters, and differ in all the rest; which makes it exceedingly absurd to allege any affinity whatever between them, as if they were but one name. Such mixtures I leave to the alchymists, or to those who closely resemble them, the Cabalists who contrive for us those trifling and affected refinements.

When the Son of God came to us clothed in flesh, he received from the Father a name which plainly told for what purpose he came, what was his power, and what we had a right to expect from him. for the name Jesus is derived from the Hebrew verb, in the Hiphil conjugation, הושיע , which signifies to save In Hebrew it is pronounced differently, Jehoshua; but the Evangelists, who wrote in Greek, followed the customary mode of pronunciation; for in the writings of Moses, and in the other books of the Old Testament, the Hebrew word יהושוע , Jehoshua, or Joshua, is rendered by the Greek translators ᾿Ιησοῦς, Jesus But I must mention another instance of the ignorance of those who derive — or, I would rather say, who forcibly tear — the name Jesus from Jehovah They hold it to be in the highest degree improper that any mortal man should share this name in common with the Son of God, and make a strange outcry that Christ would never allow his name to be so profaned. As if the reply were not at hand, that the name Jesus was quite as commonly used in those days as the name Joshua Now, as it is sufficiently clear that the name Jesus presents to us the Son of God as the Author of salvation, let us examine more closely the words of the angel.

===He shall save his people from their sins 21.And thou shalt call his name === JESUS. I have already explained briefly, but as far as was necessary, the meaning of that word. At present I shal...

21.And thou shalt call his name === JESUS. I have already explained briefly, but as far as was necessary, the meaning of that word. At present I shall only add, that the words of the angel set aside the dream of those who derive it from the essential name of God, Jehovah; for the angel expresses the reason why the Son of God is so called, Because he shall SAVE his people; which suggests quite a different etymology from what they have contrived. It is justly and appropriately added, they tell us, that Christ will be the author of salvation, because he is the Eternal God. But in vain do they attempt to escape by this subterfuge; for the nature of the blessing which God bestows upon us is not all that is here stated. This office was conferred upon his Son from the fact, from the command which had been given to him by the Father, from the office with which he was invested when he came down to us from heaven. Besides, the two words ᾿Ιησοῦς and יהוה , Jesus and Jehovah, agree but in two letters, and differ in all the rest; which makes it exceedingly absurd to allege any affinity whatever between them, as if they were but one name. Such mixtures I leave to the alchymists, or to those who closely resemble them, the Cabalists who contrive for us those trifling and affected refinements.

When the Son of God came to us clothed in flesh, he received from the Father a name which plainly told for what purpose he came, what was his power, and what we had a right to expect from him. for the name Jesus is derived from the Hebrew verb, in the Hiphil conjugation, הושיע , which signifies to save In Hebrew it is pronounced differently, Jehoshua; but the Evangelists, who wrote in Greek, followed the customary mode of pronunciation; for in the writings of Moses, and in the other books of the Old Testament, the Hebrew word יהושוע , Jehoshua, or Joshua, is rendered by the Greek translators ᾿Ιησοῦς, Jesus But I must mention another instance of the ignorance of those who derive — or, I would rather say, who forcibly tear — the name Jesus from Jehovah They hold it to be in the highest degree improper that any mortal man should share this name in common with the Son of God, and make a strange outcry that Christ would never allow his name to be so profaned. As if the reply were not at hand, that the name Jesus was quite as commonly used in those days as the name Joshua Now, as it is sufficiently clear that the name Jesus presents to us the Son of God as the Author of salvation, let us examine more closely the words of the angel.

===He shall save his people from their sins The first truth taught us by these words is, that those whom Christ is sent to save are in themselves lost. But he is expressly called the Savior of the Church. If those whom God admits to fellowship with himself were sunk in death and ruin till they were restored to life by Christ, what shall we say of “strangers” (Eph 2:12) who have never been illuminated by the hope of life? When salvation is declared to be shut up in Christ, it clearly implies that the whole human race is devoted to destruction. The cause of this destruction ought also to be observed; for it is not unjustly, or without good reason, that the Heavenly Judge pronounces us to be accursed. The angel declares that we have perished, and are overwhelmed by an awful condemnation, because we stand excluded from life by our sins. Thus we obtain a view of our corruption and depravity; for if any man lived a perfectly holy life, he might do without Christ as a Redeemer. But all to a man need his grace; and, therefore, it follows that they are the slaves of sin, and are destitute of true righteousness.

Hence, too, we learn in what way or manner Christ saves; he delivers us from sins This deliverance consists of two parts. Having made a complete atonement, he brings us a free pardon, which delivers us from condemnation to death, and reconciles us to God. Again, by the sanctifying influences of his Spirit, he frees us from the tyranny of Satan, that we may live “unto righteousness,” (1Pe 2:24.) Christ is not truly acknowledged as a Savior, till, on the one hand, we learn to receive a free pardon of our sins, and know that we are accounted righteous before God, because we are free from guilt; and till, on the other hand, we ask from him the Spirit of righteousness and holiness, having no confidence whatever in our own works or power. By Christ’s people the angel unquestionably means the Jews, to whom he was appointed as Head and King; but as the Gentiles were shortly afterwards to be ingrafted into the stock of Abraham, (Rom 11:17,) this promise of salvation is extended indiscriminately to all who are incorporated by faith in the “one body” (1Co 12:20) of the Church.

Calvin: Mat 1:22 - Now all this was done 22.Now all this was done It is ignorant and childish trifling to argue, that the name Jesus is given to the Son of God, because he is called Imman...

22.Now all this was done It is ignorant and childish trifling to argue, that the name Jesus is given to the Son of God, because he is called Immanuel For Matthew does not confine this assertion to the single fact of the name, but includes whatever is heavenly and divine in the conception of Christ; and that is the reason why he employs the general term all We must now see how appropriately the prediction of Isaiah is applied. It is a well-known and remarkable passage, (Isa 7:14,) but perverted by the Jews with their accustomed malice; though the hatred of Christ and of truth, which they thus discover, is as blind and foolish as it is wicked. To such a pitch of impudence have many of their Rabbins proceeded, as to explain it in reference to King Hezekiah, who was then about fifteen years of age. And what, I ask, must be their rage for lying, when, in order to prevent the admission of clear light, they invert the order of nature, and shut up a youth in his mother’s womb, that he may be born sixteen years old? But the enemies of Christ deserve that God should strike them with a spirit of giddiness and insensibility, should

“pour out upon them a spirit of deep sleep and close their eyes,”
(Isa 29:10.)

Others apply it to a creature of their own fancy, some unknown son of Ahaz, whose birth Isaiah predicted. But with what propriety was he called Immanuel, or the land subjected to his sway, who closed his life in a private station and without honor? for shortly afterwards the prophet tells us that this child, whoever he was, would be ruler of the land. Equally absurd is the notion that this passage relates to the prophet’s son. On this subject we may remark, that Christian writers have very strangely misapprehended the prediction contained in the next chapter, by applying it to Christ. The prophet there says, that, instructed by a vision, he “went unto the prophetess; and she conceived, and bare a son,” and that the child whom she bore was named by Divine command, ”Maher-shalal-hash-baz,” “Making speed to the spoil, hasten the prey,” (Isa 8:3.) All that is there described is approaching war, accompanied by fearful desolation; which makes it very manifest that the subjects are totally different.

Let us now, therefore, investigate the true meaning of this passage. The city of Jerusalem is besieged. Ahaz trembles, and is almost dead with terror. The prophet is sent to assure him that God will protect the city. But a simple promise is not sufficient to compose his agitated mind. The prophet is sent to him, saying,

“Ask thee a sign of the Lord thy God;
ask it either in the depth, or in the height above,”
(Isa 7:11.)

That wicked hypocrite, concealing his unbelief, disdains to ask a sign. The prophet rebukes him sharply, and at length adds,

“The Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel,”
(Isa 7:14.)

We expound this as relating to Christ in the following manner: “You, the whole posterity of David, as far as lies in your power, endeavor to nullify the grace which is promised to you;” (for the prophet expressly calls them, by way of disgrace, the house of David, Isa 7:13;) “but your base infidelity will never prevent the truth of God from proving to be victorious. God promises that the city will be preserved safe and unhurt from its enemies. If his word is not enough, he is ready to give you the confirmation of such a sign as you may demand. You reject both favors, and spurn them from you; but God will remain steady to his engagement. For the promised Redeemer will come, in whom God will show himself to be fully present to his people.”

The Jews reply, that Isaiah would have been at variance with everything like reason or probability, if he had given to the men of that age a sign, which was not to be exhibited till after the lapse of nearly eight hundred years. And then they assume the airs of haughty triumph, 103 as if this objection of the Christians had originated in ignorance or thoughtlessness, and were now forgotten and buried. But the solution, I think, is easy; provided we keep in view that a covenant of adoption was given to the Jews, on which the other acts of the divine kindness depended. There was then a general promise, by which God adopted the children of Abraham as a nation, and on which were founded all the special promises. Again, the foundation of this covenant was the Messiah. Now we hold, that the reason for delivering the city was, that it was the sanctuary of God, and out of it the Redeemer would come. But for this, Jerusalem would a hundred times have perished.

Let pious readers now consider, when the royal family had openly rejected the sign which God had offered to them, if it was not suitable that the prophet should pass all at once to the Messiah, and address them in this manner: “Though this age is unworthy of the deliverance of which God has given me a promise, yet God is mindful of his covenant, and will rescue this city from its enemies. While he grants no particular sign to testify his grace, this one sign ought to be deemed more than sufficient to meet your wishes. from the stock of David the Messiah will arise.” Yet it must be observed that, when the prophet reminds unbelievers of the general covenant, it is a sort of reproof, because they did not accept of a particular sign. I have now, I think, proved that, when the door was shut against every kind of miracle, the prophet made an appropriate transition to Christ, for the purpose of leading unbelievers to reflect, that the only cause of the deliverance was the covenant that had been made with their fathers. And by this remarkable example has God been pleased to testify to all ages, that he followed with uninterrupted kindness the children of Abraham, only because in Christ, and not through their own merits, he had made with them a gracious covenant.

There is another piece of sophistry by which the Jews endeavor to parry our argument. Immediately after the words in question, the prophet adds:

“Before the child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings,”
(Isa 7:16.)

Hence they infer, that the promised birth of the child would be delayed for a very short time; otherwise, it would not agree with the rapidly approaching change of the kingdoms, which, the prophet announeed, would take place before that child should have passed half the period of infancy. I reply, when Isaiah has given a sign of the future Savior, and declared that a child will be born, who is the true Immanuel, or — to use Paul’s language — God manifest in the flesh, (1Ti 3:16,) he proceeds to speak, in general terms, of all the children of his own time. A strong proof of this readily presents itself; for, after having spoken of the general promise of God, he returns to the special promise, which he had been commissioned to declare. The former passage, which relates to a final and complete redemption, describes one particular child, to whom alone belongs the name of God; while the latter passage, which relates to a special benefit then close at hand, determines the time by the childhood of those who were recently born, or would be born shortly afterwards.

Hitherto, if I mistake not, I have refuted, by strong and conclusive arguments, the calumnies of the Jews, by which they endeavor to prevent the glory of Christ from appearing, with resplendent luster, in this prediction. It now remains for us to refute their sophistical reasoning about the Hebrew word עלמה , virgin 104 They wantonly persecute Matthew for proving that Christ was born of a virgin, 105 while the Hebrew noun merely signifies a young woman; and ridicule us for being led astray by the wrong translation 106 of a word, to believe that he was born by the Holy Spirit, of whom the prophet asserts no more than that he would be the son of a young woman. And, first, they display an excessive eagerness for disputation, by laboring 107 to prove that a word, which is uniformly applied in Scripture to virgins, denotes here a young woman who had known a man. The etymology too agrees with Matthew’s translation of the word: for it means hiding, 108 which expresses the modesty that becomes a virgin. 109 They produce a passage from the book of Proverbs, “the way of a man with a maids,” בעלמה , (Pro 30:19.) But it does not at all support their views. Solomon speaks there of a young woman who has obtained the affections of a young man: but it does not follow as a matter of course, that the young man has seduced the object of his regard; or rather, the probability leans much more strongly to the other side. 110

But granting all that they ask as to the meaning of the word, the subject demonstrates, and compels the acknowledgment, that the prophet is speaking of a miraculous and extraordinary birth. He exclaims that he is bringing a sign from the Lord, and not an ordinary sign, but one superior to every other.

The Lord himself shall give you a sign.
Behold, a virgin shall conceive,
(Isa 7:14.)

If he were only to say, that a woman would bear a child, how ridiculous would that magnificent preface have been? Thus we see, that the insolence of the Jews exposes not only themselves, but the sacred mysteries of God, to scorn.

Besides, a powerful argument may be drawn from the whole strain of the passage. Behold, a virgin shall conceive Why is no mention made of a man? It is because the prophet draws our attention to something very uncommon. Again, the virgin is commanded to name the child. Thou shalt call his name Immanuel In this respect, also, the prophet expresses something extraordinary: for, though it is frequently related in Scripture, that the names were given to children by their mothers, yet it was done by the authority of the fathers. When the prophet addresses his discourse to the virgin, he takes away from men, in respect to this child, that authority which is conferred upon them by the order of nature. Let this, therefore, be regarded as an established truth, that the prophet here refers to a remarkable miracle of God, and recommends it to the attentive and devout consideration of all the godly, — a miracle which is basely profaned by the Jews, who apply to the ordinary method of conception what is said in reference to the secret power of the Spirit.

Calvin: Mat 1:23 - His name Immanuel 23.His name Immanuel The phrase, God is with us, is no doubt frequently employed in Scripture to denote, that he is present with us by his assistan...

23.His name Immanuel The phrase, God is with us, is no doubt frequently employed in Scripture to denote, that he is present with us by his assistance and grace, and displays the power of his hand in our defense. But here we are instructed as to the manner in which God communicates with men. For out of Christ we are alienated from him; but through Christ we are not only received into his favor, but are made one with him. When Paul says, that the Jews under the law were nigh to God, (Eph 2:17,) and that a deadly enmity (Eph 2:15) subsisted between him and the Gentiles, he means only that, by shadows and figures, God then gave to the people whom he had adopted the tokens of his presence. That promise was still in force, “The Lord thy God is among you,” (Deu 7:21,) and, “This is my rest for ever,” (Psa 132:14.) But while the familiar intercourse between God and the people depended on a Mediator, what had not yet fully taken place was shadowed out by symbols. His seat and residence is placed “between the Cherubim,” (Psa 80:1,) because the ark was the figure and visible pledge of his glory.

But in Christ the actual presence of God with his people, and not, as before, his shadowy presence, has been exhibited. 111 This is the reason, why Paul says, that “in him dwelleth all the fullness of the Godhead bodily,” (Col 2:9.) And certainly he would not be a properly qualified Mediator, if he did not unite both natures in his person, and thus bring men into an alliance with God. Nor is there any force in the objection, about which the Jews make a good deal of noise, that the name of God is frequently applied to those memorials, by which he testified that he was present with believers.

For it cannot be denied, that this name, Immanuel, contains an implied contrast between the presence of God, as exhibited in Christ, with every other kind of presence, which was manifested to the ancient people before his coming. If the reason of this name began to be actually true, when Christ appeared in the flesh, it follows that it was not completely, but only in part, that God was formerly united with the Fathers.

Hence arises another proof, that Christ is God manifested in the flesh, (1Ti 3:16.) He discharged, indeed, the office of Mediator from the beginning of the world; but as this depended wholly on the latest revelation, he is justly called Immanuel at that time, when clothed, as it were, with a new character, he appears in public as a Priest, to atone for the sins of men by the sacrifice of his body, to reconcile them to the Father by the price of his blood, and, in a word, to fulfill every part of the salvation of men. 112 The first thing which we ought to consider in this name is the divine majesty of Christ, so as to yield to him the reverence which is due to the only and eternal God. But we must not, at the same time, forget the fruit which God intended that we should collect and receive from this name. For whenever we contemplate the one person of Christ as God-man, we ought to hold it for certain that, if we are united to Christ by faith, we possess God.

In the words, they shall call, there is a change of the number. But this is not at all at variance with what I have already said. True, the prophet addresses the virgin alone, and therefore uses the second person, Thou shalt call But from the time that this name was published, all the godly have an equal right to make this confession, that God has given himself to us to be enjoyed in Christ. 113

Calvin: Mat 1:24 - Joseph, being raised from sleep 24.Joseph, being raised from sleep The ready performance, which is here described, serves not less to attest the certainty of Joseph’s faith, than ...

24.Joseph, being raised from sleep The ready performance, which is here described, serves not less to attest the certainty of Joseph’s faith, than to commend his obedience. For, if every scruple had not been removed, and his conscience fully pacified, he would never have proceeded so cheerfully, on a sudden change of opinion, to take unto him his wife, whose society, he lately thought, would pollute him. 114 The dream must have carried some mark of Divinity, which did not allow his mind to hesitate. Next followed the effect of faith. Having learned the will of God, he instantly prepared himself to obey.

Calvin: Mat 1:25 - And knew her not 25.And knew her not This passage afforded the pretext for great disturbances, which were introduced into the Church, at a former period, by Helvidius...

25.And knew her not This passage afforded the pretext for great disturbances, which were introduced into the Church, at a former period, by Helvidius. The inference he drew from it was, that Mary remained a virgin no longer than till her first birth, and that afterwards she had other children by her husband. Jerome, on the other hand, earnestly and copiously defended Mary’s perpetual virginity. Let us rest satisfied with this, that no just and well-grounded inference can be drawn from these words of the Evangelist, as to what took place after the birth of Christ. He is called first-born; but it is for the sole purpose of informing us that he was born of a virgin. 115 It is said that Joseph knew her not till she had brought forth her first-born son: but this is limited to that very time. What took place afterwards, the historian does not inform us. Such is well known to have been the practice of the inspired writers. Certainly, no man will ever raise a question on this subject, except from curiosity; and no man will obstinately keep up the argument, except from an extreme fondness for disputation.

Defender: Mat 1:1 - The book Compare this with "the book of the generations of Adam," (Gen 5:1), the only other place in the Bible where this phrase is found. This seems symbolic....

Compare this with "the book of the generations of Adam," (Gen 5:1), the only other place in the Bible where this phrase is found. This seems symbolic. The Old Testament describes the effect of the first Adam on the human race, whereas the New Testament deals with the symbolic "second Adam" and His work for mankind.

Defender: Mat 1:1 - generation This word (Greek genesis) is obviously the word from which we get the title of the first book of the Bible. It is only used once in the New Testament ...

This word (Greek genesis) is obviously the word from which we get the title of the first book of the Bible. It is only used once in the New Testament (the very first verse) except for Jam 3:6, where it is translated "nature." However, it is used in the Greek Septuagint translation of the Old Testament as the translation toledoth ("generations"), which is the key word in identifying the different original documents from which Moses compiled Genesis (see Gen 2:4, note; Gen 5:1, note).

Defender: Mat 1:1 - the son The use of "son" in this opening verse of the New Testament reminds us that God had promised a very special son to both David and Abraham (2Sa 7:12-16...

The use of "son" in this opening verse of the New Testament reminds us that God had promised a very special son to both David and Abraham (2Sa 7:12-16; Gen 22:18; Isa 9:6)."

Defender: Mat 1:3 - Thamar It is significant that four women are mentioned in this royal genealogy of Jesus - Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and the wife of Uriah (Mat 1:3, Mat 1:5, Mat 1:...

It is significant that four women are mentioned in this royal genealogy of Jesus - Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and the wife of Uriah (Mat 1:3, Mat 1:5, Mat 1:6). All four were special examples of God's grace. Tamar may have been a Canaanite who posed as a harlot to seduce Judah (Gen 38:13-18). Rahab was also a Canaanite and had been a prostitute (Jos 2:1). Ruth was a Moabitess (Rth 1:4), a member of a nation committed to idolatry and opposition to the people of God. A Hittite woman, Bathsheba, (Uriah's wife), committed adultery with King David (2Sa 11:2-5). All of these women could, by the law, have been excommunicated from Israel, executed or both. God, however, not only redeemed them, bringing them to saving faith in Him, but even included (and mentioned) them in the human genealogy of the royal line leading to Jesus."

Defender: Mat 1:8 - begat At this point, "begat" should be understood in an ancestral, rather than immediate paternal, sense. Three names have been omitted between Jehoram and ...

At this point, "begat" should be understood in an ancestral, rather than immediate paternal, sense. Three names have been omitted between Jehoram and Uzziah - Ahaziah, Joash and Amaziah (2Ch 22:1, 2Ch 22:11; 2Ch 24:1, 2Ch 24:27). The apparent reason for doing this was as a memory device: to have three groups of fourteen generations from Abraham to Christ (Mat 1:17). Some have attempted to justify placing gaps of several thousand years in the genealogies of Genesis 11 on the basis of this three-generation gap in Matthew's genealogy. Such reasoning is indefensible, however, because Matthew's short gap is easily filled in from other Scriptures (1Ch 3:11, 1Ch 3:12). The only basis for arbitrarily assumed huge gaps in Genesis is the supposed need to conform to the secular chronologies proposed by evolutionary archaeologists."

Defender: Mat 1:11 - begat Jehoiakim is omitted here between Josiah and Jechoniah (2Ch 36:4), who is also called Coniah and Jehoiachin (see note on Mat 1:8).

Jehoiakim is omitted here between Josiah and Jechoniah (2Ch 36:4), who is also called Coniah and Jehoiachin (see note on Mat 1:8).

Defender: Mat 1:11 - Jechonias It was Jechoniah whose sins caused God to cut his seed off from ever sitting on David's throne (Jer 22:24-30). Yet God had also promised that David wo...

It was Jechoniah whose sins caused God to cut his seed off from ever sitting on David's throne (Jer 22:24-30). Yet God had also promised that David would "never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel" (Jer 33:17). Thus, Jechoniah's royal line of descendants is listed here to show the legal right of Joseph, the foster father of Jesus, to David's throne (Mat 1:16). Neither Joseph nor any others of Jechoniah's seed could ever have the spiritual right to the throne. That right must be carried through Mary's ancestry (see note on Luk 3:23)."

Defender: Mat 1:16 - of whom Note that Matthew was careful here to avoid saying that Joseph "begat" Christ, departing from the formula used for the other ancestors of Jesus. Thus,...

Note that Matthew was careful here to avoid saying that Joseph "begat" Christ, departing from the formula used for the other ancestors of Jesus. Thus, Matthew shows that Jesus had the legal right to the throne of David since Joseph was his foster father. The spiritual right to be king of Israel however, had to come from David by another route altogether.

Defender: Mat 1:16 - Christ The name "Christ," meaning "anointed" is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew messiah. Christ was not part of Jesus' name (though He is frequently calle...

The name "Christ," meaning "anointed" is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew messiah. Christ was not part of Jesus' name (though He is frequently called Jesus Christ), but His title. He is Jesus the Christ, properly speaking."

Defender: Mat 1:18 - espoused According to Jewish law at the time, the espousal was almost equivalent to marriage, except for the consummation, and could be dissolved only by a leg...

According to Jewish law at the time, the espousal was almost equivalent to marriage, except for the consummation, and could be dissolved only by a legal divorce. Infidelity during that period on the part of the bride might even be punishable by death (Deu 22:23, Deu 22:24). Joseph, however, was a "just man" (Mat 1:19), who loved Mary and was unwilling to have her humiliated even by a public divorce.

Defender: Mat 1:18 - before they came together The miracle of the incarnation of the Lord Jesus was not His virgin birth, for it was a normal human birth in every way, but rather His miraculous con...

The miracle of the incarnation of the Lord Jesus was not His virgin birth, for it was a normal human birth in every way, but rather His miraculous conception. This was the woman's seed (Gen 3:15), the "new thing in the earth" (Jer 31:22) and the prophesied virgin conception of Isa 7:14. It is explicitly recorded here in Mat 1:18-25 and also in Luk 1:26-38, then further implied in Joh 1:14, Gal 4:4 and other Scriptures."

Defender: Mat 1:21 - JESUS The Hebrew for "JESUS" is Yehoshua, meaning "Jehovah saves." The name also may be contracted simply to Yeshua, which is the Hebrew word for "salvation...

The Hebrew for "JESUS" is Yehoshua, meaning "Jehovah saves." The name also may be contracted simply to Yeshua, which is the Hebrew word for "salvation," frequently used in the Old Testament. It is also equivalent to "Joshua." Appropriately, this is the first use of "save" in the New Testament."

Defender: Mat 1:23 - a virgin This is a quotation from Isa 7:14, the great prophecy of the virgin birth. The Greek word for "virgin" is parthenos, which never has any other meaning...

This is a quotation from Isa 7:14, the great prophecy of the virgin birth. The Greek word for "virgin" is parthenos, which never has any other meaning. The Hebrew word is almah, and there has been some unjustified controversy as to whether this word has only this meaning. Its quotation here by Matthew to use parthenos, guided by divine inspiration, settles this question. Isaiah prophesied the virgin birth (or better, the miraculous conception) of Jesus, and Matthew records the fulfillment."

Defender: Mat 1:25 - knew her not Mary remained a virgin after her marriage to Joseph until after the birth of Jesus. Later, however, she did have other sons (Mat 12:46)."

Mary remained a virgin after her marriage to Joseph until after the birth of Jesus. Later, however, she did have other sons (Mat 12:46)."

TSK: Mat 1:1 - generation // the son of David // the son of Abraham generation : Gen 2:4, Gen 5:1; Isa 53:8; Luke 3:23-38; Rom 9:5 the son of David : Mat 9:27, Mat 15:22, Mat 22:42-45; 2Sa 7:13, 2Sa 7:16; Psa 89:36, Ps...

TSK: Mat 1:2 - Abraham // Isaac begat // Jacob begat Abraham : Gen 21:2-5; Jos 24:2, Jos 24:3; 1Ch 1:28; Isa 51:2; Luk 3:34; Act 7:8; Rom 9:7-9; Heb 11:11, Heb 11:17, Heb 11:18 Isaac begat : Gen 25:26; J...

TSK: Mat 1:3 - Judas // Thamar // and Phares // Aram Judas : Gen 38:27, Gen 38:29, Gen 38:30, Gen 46:12, Judah, Pharez, Zarah, Num 26:20,Num 26:21; 1Ch 2:3, 1Ch 2:4, Zerah, 1Ch 9:6 Thamar : Gen 38:6, Gen...

Judas : Gen 38:27, Gen 38:29, Gen 38:30, Gen 46:12, Judah, Pharez, Zarah, Num 26:20,Num 26:21; 1Ch 2:3, 1Ch 2:4, Zerah, 1Ch 9:6

Thamar : Gen 38:6, Gen 38:11, Gen 38:24-26, Tamar

and Phares : Gen 46:12; Num 26:21; Rth 4:18; 1Ch 2:5, 1Ch 4:1, Hezron, Luk 3:33

Aram : Rth 4:19; 1Ch 2:9, Ram

TSK: Mat 1:4 - Aminadab // Naasson Aminadab : Rth 4:19, Rth 4:20; 1Ch 2:10-12, Amminadab Naasson : Num 1:7, Num 2:3, Num 7:12, Num 7:17, Num 10:14, Nahshon, Luk 3:32

Aminadab : Rth 4:19, Rth 4:20; 1Ch 2:10-12, Amminadab

Naasson : Num 1:7, Num 2:3, Num 7:12, Num 7:17, Num 10:14, Nahshon, Luk 3:32

TSK: Mat 1:5 - Salmon // Rachab // Booz // Obed begat Salmon : Rth 4:21; 1Ch 2:11, 1Ch 2:12, Salma, Boaz Rachab : Josh. 2:1-22, Jos 6:22-25; Heb 11:31; Jam 2:25, Rahab Booz : Rth 1:4, Rth 1:16, Rth 1:17, ...

Salmon : Rth 4:21; 1Ch 2:11, 1Ch 2:12, Salma, Boaz

Rachab : Josh. 2:1-22, Jos 6:22-25; Heb 11:31; Jam 2:25, Rahab

Booz : Rth 1:4, Rth 1:16, Rth 1:17, Rth 1:22, 2:1-4:22

Obed begat : Luk 3:32

TSK: Mat 1:6 - Jesse // Solomon // her // Urias Jesse : Rth 4:22; 1Sa 16:1, 1Sa 16:11-13, 1Sa 17:12, 1Sa 17:58, 1Sa 20:30,1Sa 20:31, 1Sa 22:8; 2Sa 23:1; 1Ch 2:15; Psa 72:20; Isa 11:1; Act 13:22, Act...

TSK: Mat 1:7 - Roboam // Abia // Asa Roboam : 1Ki 11:43, 12:1-24; 1Ch 3:10; 2Ch 9:31, 2Ch 13:7, Rehoboam Abia : 1Ki 14:31, Abijam, 2Ch 12:1, Abijah Asa : 1Kings 15:8-23; 2Chr. 14:1-16:14

Roboam : 1Ki 11:43, 12:1-24; 1Ch 3:10; 2Ch 9:31, 2Ch 13:7, Rehoboam

Abia : 1Ki 14:31, Abijam, 2Ch 12:1, Abijah

Asa : 1Kings 15:8-23; 2Chr. 14:1-16:14

TSK: Mat 1:8 - Josaphat // Joram // Ozias Josaphat : 1Ki 15:24, 22:2-50; 2Ki 3:1; 2Chr. 17:1-20:37, Jehoshaphat Joram : 1Ki 22:50; 2Ki 8:16, Jehoram, 1Ch 3:11; 2Ch 21:1 Ozias : 2Ki 14:21, 2Ki ...

Josaphat : 1Ki 15:24, 22:2-50; 2Ki 3:1; 2Chr. 17:1-20:37, Jehoshaphat

Joram : 1Ki 22:50; 2Ki 8:16, Jehoram, 1Ch 3:11; 2Ch 21:1

Ozias : 2Ki 14:21, 2Ki 15:1-6, Azariah, 2Chr. 26:1-23, Uzziah

TSK: Mat 1:9 - Joatham // Achaz // Ezekias Joatham : 2Ki 15:7, 2Ki 15:32-38; 1Ch 3:11-13; 2Ch 26:21, 2Ch 27:1-9, Jotham Achaz : 2Ki 15:38, 16:1-20; 2Ch 27:9, 28:1-27; Isa 7:1-13, Ahaz Ezekias :...

Joatham : 2Ki 15:7, 2Ki 15:32-38; 1Ch 3:11-13; 2Ch 26:21, 2Ch 27:1-9, Jotham

Achaz : 2Ki 15:38, 16:1-20; 2Ch 27:9, 28:1-27; Isa 7:1-13, Ahaz

Ezekias : 2Ki 16:20, 18:1-20:21; 2Ch 28:27, 29:1-32:33; Isa. 36:1-39:8, Hezekiah

TSK: Mat 1:10 - Manasses // Amon // Josias Manasses : 2Ki 20:21, 21:1-18, 2Ki 24:3, 2Ki 24:4; 1Ch 3:13-15; 2Ch 32:33, 33:1-19, Manasseh Amon : 2Ki 21:19-26; 2Ch 33:20-24 Josias : 1Ki 13:2; 2Ki ...

Manasses : 2Ki 20:21, 21:1-18, 2Ki 24:3, 2Ki 24:4; 1Ch 3:13-15; 2Ch 32:33, 33:1-19, Manasseh

Amon : 2Ki 21:19-26; 2Ch 33:20-24

Josias : 1Ki 13:2; 2Ki 21:26, 22:1-20, 23:1-30; 2Ch 33:25, 34:1-33, 35:1-27; Jer 1:2, Jer 1:3, Josiah

TSK: Mat 1:11 - Josias // Jechonias // about Josias : ""Some read, Josias begat Jakim, and Jakim begat Jechonias." Jechonias : 2Ki 23:31-37, 24:1-20; 1Ch 3:15-17; 2Ch 36:1-8; Jer. 2:10-28 about :...

Josias : ""Some read, Josias begat Jakim, and Jakim begat Jechonias."

Jechonias : 2Ki 23:31-37, 24:1-20; 1Ch 3:15-17; 2Ch 36:1-8; Jer. 2:10-28

about : 2Ki 24:14-16, 2Ki 25:11; 2Ch 36:10,2Ch 36:20; Jer 27:20, Jer 39:9, Jer 52:11-15, Jer 52:28-30; Dan 1:2

TSK: Mat 1:12 - Jechonias // and Jechonias : 2Ki 25:27, Jehoiachin, 1Ch 3:17, 1Ch 3:19-24, Jeconiah, Jer 22:24, Jer 22:28, Coniah and : Ezr 3:2, Ezr 5:2; Neh 12:1; Hag 1:1, Hag 1:12, ...

Jechonias : 2Ki 25:27, Jehoiachin, 1Ch 3:17, 1Ch 3:19-24, Jeconiah, Jer 22:24, Jer 22:28, Coniah

and : Ezr 3:2, Ezr 5:2; Neh 12:1; Hag 1:1, Hag 1:12, Hag 1:14, Hag 2:2, Hag 2:23, Shealtiel, Zerubbabel, Luk 3:27

TSK: Mat 1:16 - Joseph // of whom // who Joseph : Mat 1:18-25, Mat 2:13; Luk 1:27, Luk 2:4, Luk 2:5, Luk 2:48, Luk 3:23, Luk 4:22 of whom : Mar 6:3; Luk 1:31-35, Luk 2:7, Luk 2:10,Luk 2:11 wh...

TSK: Mat 1:18 - the birth // of the the birth : Luk 1:27-38 of the : Gen 3:15; Job 14:4, Job 15:14; Luk 1:25, Luk 1:35; Gal 4:4, Gal 4:5; Heb 7:26, Heb 10:5

TSK: Mat 1:19 - her husband // a just // a public // was her husband : Lev 19:20; Deu 22:23, Deu 22:24 a just : Gen 6:9; Psa 112:4, Psa 112:5; Mar 6:20; Luk 2:25; Act 10:22 a public : Gen 38:24; Lev 20:10; D...

TSK: Mat 1:20 - while // the angel // in // Joseph // fear not // that // conceived while : Psa 25:8, Psa 25:9, Psa 94:19, Psa 119:125, Psa 143:8; Pro 3:5, Pro 3:6, Pro 12:5; Isa 26:3, Isa 30:21 the angel : Jdg 13:3, Jdg 13:8, Jdg 13:...

TSK: Mat 1:21 - she // thou // Jesus // for she : Gen 17:19, Gen 17:21, Gen 18:10; Jdg 13:3; 2Ki 4:16, 2Ki 4:17; Luk 1:13, Luk 1:35, Luk 1:36 thou : Luk 1:31, Luk 2:21 Jesus : that is, Saviour, ...

TSK: Mat 1:22 - that that : Mat 2:15, Mat 2:23, Mat 5:17, Mat 8:17, Mat 12:17, Mat 13:35, Mat 13:21; 1Ki 8:15, 1Ki 8:24; Ezr 1:1; Luk 21:22, Luk 24:44; Joh 10:35, Joh 12:3...

TSK: Mat 1:23 - a virgin // they shall call his name // Emmanuel // God a virgin : Isa 7:14 they shall call his name : or, his name shall be called Emmanuel : Isa 7:14, Isa 8:8, Immanuel God : Mat 28:20; Psa 46:7, Psa 46:1...

a virgin : Isa 7:14

they shall call his name : or, his name shall be called

Emmanuel : Isa 7:14, Isa 8:8, Immanuel

God : Mat 28:20; Psa 46:7, Psa 46:11; Isa 8:8-10, Isa 9:6, Isa 9:7, Isa 12:2; Joh 1:14; Act 18:9; Rom 1:3, Rom 1:4, Rom 9:5; 2Co 5:19; 1Ti 3:16; 2Ti 4:17, 2Ti 4:22

TSK: Mat 1:24 - did did : Gen 6:22, Gen 7:5, Gen 22:2, Gen 22:3; Exo 40:16, Exo 40:19, Exo 40:25, Exo 40:27, Exo 40:32; 2Ki 5:11-14; Joh 2:5-8; Joh 15:14; Heb 11:7, Heb 1...

TSK: Mat 1:25 - she // and he she : Exo 13:2, Exo 22:29; Luk 2:7; Rom 8:29 and he : Luk 2:21

kecilkan semua
Tafsiran/Catatan -- Catatan Kata/Frasa (per Ayat)

Poole: Mat 1:2 - And his brethren The evangelist reckoneth the genealogy of our Saviour by three periods, reckoning thrice fourteen descents. The first period began in Abraham, Gen 2...

The evangelist reckoneth the genealogy of our Saviour by three periods, reckoning thrice fourteen descents. The first period began in Abraham, Gen 21:2,3 and ended in David. The second began in Solomon, and ended in Jehoiachin. The third began with Jehoiachin, and ended in Christ. Luke (as we shall see in its place) fetcheth our Saviour’ s line from Adam. From Abraham to David there is no difference between Matthew and Luke, they both reckoned up the same fourteen persons, Luk 3:32-34 . But Luke repeating our Saviour’ s pedigree by his mother’ s side, and Matthew by his supposed father’ s side, Joseph, after David they must differ, Mary descending from David’ s family by his son Nathan, Joseph descending from him by Solomon. All interpreters agree that there are great difficulties about the genealogy of Christ, especially in reconciling Matthew and Luke; and the enemies of Christianity have in all times made their advantage of them, to weaken our faith as to the gospel: but Christians ought to consider,

1. That the Jews had without doubt perfect genealogies, and were more especially exact in keeping them as to the royal tribe of David, which was Judah, and the priestly tribe of Levi, that they might have a right king and high priest; and it cannot be expected that after seventeen hundred years almost we should make out genealogies as they could.

2. That they were very apt to make strifes about words and endless genealogies; as appears by the apostle’ s cautioning both Timothy and Titus against it, 1Ti 1:4 1Ti 6:4 Tit 3:9 .

3. That it had been a sufficient exception against Christ if they could have proved he had not lineally descended from David.

4. That though they cavilled at Christ for many things, yet they never made any such cavil.

5. That we are forbidden strife and endless labour about genealogy. And therefore it is the most unreasonable thing imaginable for us to make such little dissatisfactions grounds for us to question or disbelieve the gospel, because we can not untie every knot we meet with in a pedigree.

But in this first period no such difficulties occur; both the evangelists are agreed, and the Old Testament agrees with both. That Abraham begat Isaac (when he was an hundred years old) we are assured by Moses, Gen 21:2,5 ; that Isaac begat Jacob he also telleth us, Gen 25:26 . So also that Jacob begat Judah and his brethren, Gen 29:35 . Judah was Jacob’ s third son by Leah, and that son of whom dying Jacob prophesied, That him should his brethren praise, and to him should his father’ s children bow down. That the sceptre should not depart from Judah, nor the lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh came; and unto him should the gathering of the people be, Gen 49:8-10 . Though Saul, who was the first king of Israel, (given them in wrath), was of the tribe of Benjamin, 1Sa 9:21 ; yet David was of the tribe of Judah, in whose line the kingdom held unto the captivity.

And his brethren: the brethren of Judah are here mentioned, being the heads of the Jewish nation: Christ descended from Judah.

Poole: Mat 1:3 - Phares begat Ezrom // Ezrom begat Aram // Thamar That Judas begat Phares and Zara (they were twins begot of Thamar his daughter-in-law), the relict of his son Er whom God slew, Gen 38:7 , appearet...

That Judas begat Phares and Zara (they were twins begot of Thamar his daughter-in-law), the relict of his son Er whom God slew, Gen 38:7 , appeareth from Gen 38:27-30 . That

Phares begat Ezrom appeareth from Rth 4:18 1Ch 2:5 ; and from the same texts appears also that

Ezrom begat Aram Rth 4:19 1Ch 2:9, where he is called Ram. Some may possibly be offended that amongst all the ancestors of Christ there are but three women named, and all of them such as had a great stain and blot upon their reputation. This

Thamar the mother of Phares and Zara, was blotted with incest, and Phares was one of the children begot in that incest. Rahab also is mentioned, Mat 1:5 , whom the Scripture calleth an harlot, Jos 2:1 ; and Bathsheba was stained with adultery. But we ought to consider:

1. That (abating original corruption, which we indeed all derive from our parents) no man derives any intrinsic badness from the vice of his parents, though he may derive a blot upon his honour and reputation from it.

2. That this was one degree of our Saviour’ s humiliation.

3. That it was no way incongruous, that He who came into the world to die for great sinners, should be born of some that were such.

Poole: Mat 1:4 - Naasson // Salmon This exactly agreeth with the Old Testament, Rth 4:19,20 1Ch 2:10,11 ; only it is there said that Naasson was prince of the children of Judah, Nu...

This exactly agreeth with the Old Testament, Rth 4:19,20 1Ch 2:10,11 ; only it is there said that

Naasson was prince of the children of Judah, Num 1:7 2:3 , and

Salmon is there called Salma.

Poole: Mat 1:5-6 - Salmon // Boaz // David the king Ver. 5,6. This agreeth with Rth 4:22 1Sa 16:1,13 . Here now ariseth the first difficulty we meet with in this genealogy, and it rather an appearance ...

Ver. 5,6. This agreeth with Rth 4:22 1Sa 16:1,13 . Here now ariseth the first difficulty we meet with in this genealogy, and it rather an appearance of a difficulty than a real one.

Salmon being the son of Aminadab, who was the prince of the children of Judah in Moses’ s time, Salmon cannot be imagined to have lived later than in the times of Joshua.

Boaz seemeth to have lived in Eli’ s time, which (if chronologers count right) was three hundred years after: here are but four men named to take up these years, Salmon, Booz, Obed, Jesse.

Answer. The world according to chronologers, wanted but five of two thousand five hundred years old, when the Israelites (under the conduct of Joshua) entered into Canaan: we will suppose Salmon to have then been a young man. Eli is by them said to have lived about the two thousand eight hundred and tenth. So that the distance is three hundred and fifteen years. David is said to have been born in the two thousand eight hundred and sixtieth. So as from Salmon to David are three hundred and sixty-five years. Admit Salmon, Boaz, Obed, and Jesse to have each of them lived a hundred years, or upward, in admitting this, if we consider the age and vigour of persons in that age of the world. Moses (though a man spent with travels and battles) lived one hundred and twenty years, Deu 34:7 . Caleb at eighty-five years was strong and as fit for war as ever, Jos 4:11,12 . If we allow these four men the life of Moses they might live four hundred and eighty years, which might allow to each of them fifteen or sixteen years apiece for the concurrency of their lives with their parents, yet three hundred and sixty-five years might be well allowed for all their time: nor is it unreasonable for us to suppose, that God might allow those whom he intended thus to dignify a something longer life than the ordinary sort of men lived in that age of the world. So as the thing being neither naturally impossible (for in our age we see particular persons live upward of a hundred years) nor morally improbable, and directly affirmed in three or four texts, they must have a great mind to quarrel with a Divine revelation who question the truth of it upon such a pretence; especially considering that the lives of men in our declining and debauched age of the world, are no measures by which we can guess at the lives of extraordinary persons who lived near three thousand years ago.

David the king : possibly that term is added to distinguish the David here intended from others of the same name; or because he was the first king of the tribe of Judah, to whom the sceptre of Israel was promised, Gen 49:10 ; or the first king not given to the Israelites in wrath, as Saul was upon their murmuring against Samuel: or to show that Christ descended from that family, to whom the promise of the Messias was made, Jer 23:5 , and a kingdom established for ever, Psa 89:36,37 . Thus our evangelist hath given us the names in his first period of fourteen generations: Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judas, Phares, Esrom, Aram, Aminadab, Naasson, Salmon, Boaz, Obed, Jesse, David.

Solomon was not the eldest child of David by Bathsheba; that died, 2Sa 12:22,23 . He was born after David had taken Bathsheba (who had been the wife of Uriah) for his wife, 2Sa 12:25 , compared with 2Sa 11:27 .

Ver. 5,6. This agreeth with Rth 4:22 1Sa 16:1,13 . Here now ariseth the first difficulty we meet with in this genealogy, and it rather an appearance of a difficulty than a real one.

Poole: Mat 1:7 - -- This exactly agrees with the history of the Old Testament, 1Ki 11:43 (where he is called Rehoboam ); he reigned but seventeen years, and died. 1Ki...

This exactly agrees with the history of the Old Testament, 1Ki 11:43 (where he is called Rehoboam ); he reigned but seventeen years, and died. 1Ki 14:21,31 . Abijam his son reigned in his stead; he is here called Abia; but we shall observe frequent alteration of names, both as to the final terminations, and where the quiescent letters in Hebrew fall into the name. Abia, or Abijam, reigned but three years, and was succeeded by Asa his son, 1Ki 15:2,8 . Asa reigned forty-one years, 2Ch 16:13 . So as these three princes reigned sixty years.

Poole: Mat 1:8 - Josaphat // Joram // Joram begat Ozias Jehoshaphat, here called Josaphat in the Greek, (they having no letter to express the Hebrew h by), was the son of Asa, a good son of a good fath...

Jehoshaphat, here called

Josaphat in the Greek, (they having no letter to express the Hebrew h by), was the son of Asa, a good son of a good father, 2Ch 17:1,2 ; he reigned twenty-five years, 1Ki 22:42 . Jehoram, here called

Joram succeeded him in his kingdom: he slew his brethren; he walked in the ways of Ahab. 2Ch 21:4,6 ; he reigned but eight years, lived and died wickedly, and was buried infamously, 2Ch 21:19,20 . But here ariseth another difficulty from what is said,

Joram begat Ozias It is certain that he did not beget him immediately, for Uzziah was the fourth from Joram. Jehoram or Joram begat Ahaziah, he was his youngest son; he lived but one year as king, 2Ch 22:1,2 ; then Athaliah usurped the kingdom for six years, not counting her usurpation. Joash the son of Ahaziah reigned forty years, 2Ch 24:1 . He dies, and Amaziah his son reigned in his stead, 2Ki 12:21 . He was the father of Uzziah, 2Ch 26:1 , called Azariah, 2Ki 14:21 . So that when it is said, that Joram begat Ozias, we must only understand that Uzziah lineally descended from Joram: thus, Mat 1:1 , Christ is called the Son of David, the son of Abraham. Thus the Jews said: We have Abraham to our father; and Elisabeth is said to be of the daughters of Aaron, Luk 1:5 . But it is a greater question why the evangelist leaves out Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah, who were all three lawful princes, and rightly descended from the family of David. To pass by various conjectures, the best account I find given of it is this.

1. It is manifest the evangelist had a design to divide all the generations from Abraham to Christ into three periods. The first of which should contain the growing state of the Jewish commonwealth, till it came at the height, which was in David’ s time. The second should contain its flourishing state; which was from David’ s time till the first carrying into captivity. The third should contain its declining state, from the first carrying them into captivity to the coming of Christ.

2. He designed to reduce all the generations in each period to fourteen; this appeareth from Mat 1:17 . Now although the first period contained exactly fourteen descents or generations, yet in the second there was manifestly seventeen, so as the evangelist was obliged to leave out three to bring them to the number of fourteen: now though it be a little too curious to inquire why the evangelist chose to leave out these three, Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah, rather than any other three, yet there is a probable good account of it given by learned men, who have waded into these speculations. Ahaziah was the son of Jehoram by Athaliah the daughter of Ahab, 2Ch 21:6 ; Joash her grandchild; Amaziah her great grandchild. Now God had cursed the house of Ahab, and threatened to root out all his house, 1Ki 21:21 . This (as is supposed) made the evangelist, who was necessitated to leave out three to bring the generations to fourteen, rather to choose to leave out these princes, who were of Ahab’ s half blood, than any others. If any say, Why then did he not leave out more? Besides that he was not obliged any other way, (than as he would keep to his number to leave out these), he knew God’ s threatenings of children for the sins of parents usually terminate in the third and fourth generation.

Poole: Mat 1:9 - -- That Jotham succeeded his father Uzziah, and reigned sixteen years, agreeth with 2Ch 26:23 , and that Ahaz his son succeeded him, agreeth with 2Ch 27:...

That Jotham succeeded his father Uzziah, and reigned sixteen years, agreeth with 2Ch 26:23 , and that Ahaz his son succeeded him, agreeth with 2Ch 27:9 ; he also reigned sixteen years, and Hezekiah his son reigned in his stead, 2Ch 28:27 . Some here have cavilled at the truth of the history of holy writ, because it appeareth from 2Ki 16:2 that Ahaz died at thirty-six years of age, and that Hezekiah began to reign at twenty-five years of age doth also appear from 2Ch 29:1 , whence it appeareth that Hezekiah must be born when his father was but eleven years of age, which they think improbable: but those who will question the truth of what we have so good a proof of as the revelation of holy writ is, are obliged not only to tell us of things in it that are improbable to their apprehensions, but either in nature impossible, or at least inconsistent with some other piece of Divine revelation. Of the latter sort, we hear of nothing objected in this case. Now though with us it be not ordinary for persons at that age to beget children, yet that it is not impossible in nature, nor more than hath happened in the world sometimes, Spanhemius hath largely proved in his Dubia Evangelica. Dub. 5, and that by no less authorities than those of Hierome amongst the ancients, and the learned Scaliger amongst the more modern writers. It is what may be. The Scripture telleth us it was so; that is enough for us, though it be not a thing very ordinary.

Poole: Mat 1:10 - -- All this exactly agreeth with the Scriptures of the Old Testament. These three princes in a lineal descent immediately succeeded each other, Manasseh ...

All this exactly agreeth with the Scriptures of the Old Testament. These three princes in a lineal descent immediately succeeded each other, Manasseh (2Ki 20:21 1Ch 3:13 ) reigning fifty-five, Amon two, and Josiah thirty-one years, altogether eighty-eight years.

Poole: Mat 1:11 - -- In this Jechonias 1Ch 3:15,16 (whoever he was) determined the evangelist’ s second period of fourteen generations. But there is much dispute, ...

In this Jechonias 1Ch 3:15,16 (whoever he was) determined the evangelist’ s second period of fourteen generations. But there is much dispute, both about the Jechonias who is here mentioned, and the sons of Josiah as they are reckoned up 1Ch 3:15 , where it is said: The sons of Josiah were, the firstborn Johanan, the second Jehoiakim, the third Zedekiah, the fourth Shallum. It is plain that Jehoahaz succeeded Josiah his father, 2Ki 23:31 2Ch 36:1 . It is certain that amongst the Jews it was very ordinary for persons to have two names; thus king Uzziah in the Book of Kings is called Azariah, 2Ki 14:21 . Most if not all of Josiah’ s sons had two names: it is plain that Jehoahaz his eldest son is the same who in 1Ch 3:15 is called Johanan; but he reigned but three months, probably set up by the people, and put down by Pharaoh-necho, in a battle against whom Josiah was slain; he pursuing his victory put him down and set up Eliakim his next brother, calling him Jehoiakim, as he is called 1Ch 3:15 . He reigned eleven years, 2Ch 36:5 . The king of Babylon puts him down, and setteth up Jehoiachin his son, who is also called Jeconiah, and Coniah. He reigned but three months and ten days, 2Ch 36:9 ; and the king of Babylon fetcheth him away, and sets up his uncle Zedekiah, called also Mattaniah. He reigned eleven years, as appeareth by 2Ch 36:11 ; then the whole body of the Jews were carried away captive into Babylon. 2Ki 24:14-16 2Ki 25:11 2Ch 36:10,20 Jer 27:20 39:9 52:11,15,28-30 Da 1:2 We do not read, either in the Book of Kings or Chronicles, that Shallum (Josiah’ s fourth son) ever reigned, yet it should seem that he did, by Jer 22:11 . Some think that he was set up instead of Jehoahaz, when he was carried away. But the Scripture saith nothing of it, nor is it very probable that the conqueror should skip over the second and third son, and set up the fourth. But it is not my present concern to inquire after Shallum, but only after Jechonias mentioned in this verse, and the other Jechonias mentioned in Mat 1:12 , as the head of those generations which make up the last period. As to this Jechonias, the most probable opinion is, that it was Jehoiakim, who was also called Jeconiah, and that the Jechonias mentioned Mat 1:12 was Jehoiachin, the son of Jehoiakim. In this I find some of the best interpreters acquiescing, nor indeed is there any great difficulty in allowing Jehoiakim the father, as well as Jehoiachin the son, to be called Jeconiah (so near are the names akin, and the signification of both the same); but then the question is, how Josiah could be said to beget Jehoiakim about the time of the carrying into the captivity of Babylon; for it appeareth by 2Ch 36:5 , that Jehoiakim was twenty-five years old when he began to reign, and he reigned eleven years; and in his time was the first carrying into Babylon; so that there must be thirty-seven years betwixt the begetting of Jehoiakim and the first transportation into Babylon. The margin of our Bibles tells us of another reading, Josias begat Jakim, ( Jakim and Jehoiakim are the same), and Jakim begat Jechonias (that is, Jehoiachin). Beza thinks this the truest reading, taken out of an old copy of R. Stephens, magnified by Stapulensis and Bucer. But he thinks it should be thus, Josias begat Jakim and his brethren, ( for we know that Josiah had four sons), and Jakim begat Jechonias (that is, Jehoiachin) about the time of the carrying into the captivity o Babylon. For Jehoiachin or Jeconiah was not nine years old when himself was carried away, and his father was carried away before. About the carrying away into Babylon: the Greek preposition epi doth not signify any determinate certain time, but doth include sometimes many and distinct times, as it must do here; for Josiah began to reign at eight years old, and reigned thirty-one years, so that he died at thirty-nine years of age, 2Ch 34:1 . Jehoahaz (or Johanan) his eldest son succeeded him at twenty-three years old, so he must be born when Josiah was sixteen years of age; Jehoiakim began to reign at twenty-five years of age; Zedekiah at one and twenty; as appeareth from 2Ch 36:2,5,11 . So that Zedekiah must be but about nine years old when his father died, which was not twelve years before, Jehoiakim was carried into Babylon, as appeareth by the history, 2Ch 36:1-23 . Thus the persons in this period (which was the flourishing time of the kingdom of Judah) are fourteen: Solomon, Rehoboam, Abia, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Joram, Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amon, Josiah, Jehoiakim; only here is no mention made of Jehoahaz’ s reign, who was Josiah’ s eldest son, who, it may be, is not mentioned by the evangelist, either because Jehoiakim (here called Jechonias) was a second son of the same father, or in regard of his short reign (for it was but three months and odd days); or, it may be, because in all probability he was tumultuously set up by the people, and not fixed in his throne before he was turned out by the conqueror Pharaoh-necho; nor do we read of any sons he left; to be sure he left none who could succeed him in the throne, for Jehoiakim was set up, and his son Jehoiachin succeeded him, as the history telleth us.

Poole: Mat 1:12 - Salathiel This Jechonias 1Ch 3:17-19 is generally thought to be Jehoiachin, the son of Jehoiakin; he is called Jeconiah , 1Ch 3:16 , as well as Jehoiachin , ...

This Jechonias 1Ch 3:17-19 is generally thought to be Jehoiachin, the son of Jehoiakin; he is called Jeconiah , 1Ch 3:16 , as well as Jehoiachin , 2Ch 36:8 ; so also he is called Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim , Jer 24:1 . That this Jechonias begat Salathiel Ezr 3:2 5:2 Neh 12:1 Hag 1:1appeareth from 1Ch 3:17 . It is here objected that God said concerning this Jeconiah, called also Coniah, Write ye this man childless , Jer 22:30 how then did he beget Salathiel? But it is easily answered, for that verse. Jer 22:30 , will expound itself: Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days; for no man of his seed shall prosper sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah: so as that text is plainly to be understood, without a child that shall actually succeed in the crown; for the text itself supposes that he should have seed, but none that should prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling in Judah, which the Scripture, 2Ch 36:1-23 justifieth, for the king of Babylon set up Zedekiah his uncle in his stead, who was the last king in Judah, in the eleventh year of whose reign the Jews were all carried captive. This Jeconiah had eight sons, as we read, 1Ch 3:17,18 . Salathiel is there reckoned as his second son; possibly Assir died young, or at least childless, so as the right of the crown was in Salathiel, who is the person alone here named. But how

Salathiel is here said to have begat Zorobabel is yet a greater difficulty; for, 1Ch 3:19 , it is said, The sons of Pedaiah (not of Salathiel) were, Zerubabel, and Shimei . If Zorobabel were the son of Pedaiah, how could he be the son of Salathiel? Several answers are given to this. Some think that Zorobabel, because he descended lineally from Salathiel, is called his son, which were a sufficient answer if the supposition were true, that Zorobabel were lineally descended from Salathiel: but that it is not, for according to 1Ch 3:18 Pedaiah was not the son, but the brother of Salathiel. Others think that Salathiel is here said to have begot Zorobabel, because Zorobabel succeeded him in the kingdom; but as that is a strange interpretation of the word begat, so neither was Salathiel a king, though possibly the title of the crown was in him as the great grandchild of Josiah, nor did ever Zorobabel assume the crown that we read of. Whereas others say, that there were two Zorobabels, and that this son was the adopted son of Salathiel: both these things are suggested without proof. The most probable opinion, which I perceive the best interpreters acquiesce in, is, that Salathiel dying without issue, Pedaiah his brother married his wife, according to the law of God, Deu 25:5 , and begat Zorobabel of her that had been the wife of Salathiel; and thence it is said Salathiel begat him, Pedaiah so raising up seed to his brother according to the law aforesaid. To this it is objected by some, that the law was, that the child should succeed in the name of the brother that was dead: so that if this were the sense, it should not have been, Salathiel begat Zorobabel, but Salathiel begat Salathiel. The answer to this is not difficult; for, to succeed in the name of the brother that is dead, doth not signify, to be called by the very name with which he was called, but to be denominated his son, as if begotten by him. And this is evident from Rth 4:10 , where Boaz hath these words, Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of Mahlon, have I purchased to be my wife, to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance, that the name of the dead be not cut off from among his brethren. Yet, Rth 4:21 , Boaz, having a son by Ruth, did not call his name Mahlon, by the name of his father, but Obed.

Poole: Mat 1:13-15 - -- Ver. 13-15. Here are divers objections made to this last part of the genealogy, and in a great measure caused from the difference between Matthew and...

Ver. 13-15. Here are divers objections made to this last part of the genealogy, and in a great measure caused from the difference between Matthew and Luke; but I shall not attempt any reconciliation of those differences till I come to Luk 3:23-38 . There is no Abiud reckoned amongst the sons of Zorobabel, 1Ch 3:19,20 ; and for the others named, we have no certain account of them in any part of the holy writ. From the time of Jehoiakim were above five hundred years to the birth of Christ, of which seventy were spent in the captivity of Babylon. Zorobabel was alive at the end of the captivity, Ezr 5:2 , and, as it appears, the ruler of the Jews, though not under the title and style of king. For Eliakim, Azor, Sadoc, Achim, Eliud, Eleazar, Matthan, and Jacob, though we have no mention of them in any canonical books of holy writ but only this, yet Matthew’ s credit in the church of God ought to out weigh any other writings, pretending any thing contrary to what he saith; we are therefore obliged to believe they all lineally descended from David, but, living in a private state and condition, and holy writ not extending its history beyond Zorobabel’ s time, (the time when the Jews came out of Babylon), it is no wonder that we have no better means than we have from holy writ to know their lineal descent from the royal family. That Matthew in what he wrote was guided by the unerring Spirit, and that he had rolls of pedigrees which we want, we have reason to believe. This is enough for us Christians, who own the books of the New as well as the Old Testament to be wrote by persons Divinely inspired; so, as to them, we have nothing to do but to reconcile Matthew and Luke, both whom we own to have had the same infallible inspiration and direction. If Jews or pagans argue from any other topic than this, it is enough to tell them, that the Jews kept exact genealogies, and more especially as to the descents in the tribes of Judah and Levi, that they might never be at loss as to the Messiah, whom they expected as the Son of David, nor yet as to the true high priest. Though these records and rolls of genealogy be now lost, yet we have no reason to believe they were so in Matthew’ s time; of which genealogies (as to this part) doubtless what Matthew saith was but a copy, directed by that Holy Spirit by which he was inspired.

Poole: Mat 1:16 - -- How Luke cometh to make Joseph the son of Heli we shall inquire (if God please) when we come to his third chapter: but from this verse ariseth a ver...

How Luke cometh to make Joseph the son of Heli we shall inquire (if God please) when we come to his third chapter: but from this verse ariseth a very grave question, viz. How, or wherefore, the evangelist, in deriving the pedigree of Christ, bringeth the line down to Joseph, from whom our Saviour did not descend, being no flesh of his flesh. Christ being the promised Messias, the prophecy, Isa 7:14 , must be and was fulfilled in him, A virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Now if Joseph were not the true, but only the legal or supposed, father of Christ, what had the evangelist to do with his genealogy? Many answers are given to this. Some think that the evangelist accommodates himself to the vulgar opinion; they took him generally for the true and natural son of Joseph; they said, Is not this the carpenter’ s son? But then the Holy Spirit must have attempted to have proved a conclusion true from a medium that was false, which must by no means be allowed. Besides, neither could this be Matthew’ s design, who afterwards relates the mystery of our Saviour’ s incarnation plain enough; and tells us, Mat 1:18 , that Mary was found with child before Joseph and she came together. Others therefore say that amongst the Jews the genealogies of women use not to be reckoned. How universally true that is I cannot tell; generally it is, (very probably), it being usual almost with all nations to reckon descents from the males. It is granted by most that Luke derives the descent of Mary. In the present case, it seemeth of high concern that the genealogy both of Joseph and Mary should be counted. Though our Saviour’ s being the Messias could not have been proved from his being the Son of Joseph, for then he could not have been the Son of a virgin, yet (admitting the Jewish error in that case, not knowing the mystery of Christ’ s incarnation) Christ, by their own confession, was confirmed to be the Son of David because Joseph was so. On the other side, Luke deriving Mary’ s genealogy from David, and affirming Christ to be born of a virgin espoused, confirmed him to all the world to be both the Son of David, descending from Mary a virgin, that was a daughter to one who was the son of David, and also the true Messiah, in whom the prophecy was fulfilled, of a virgin’ s conceiving and bearing a Son. So that by the reckoning of the generation of two persons, both of which were lineally descended from David, he was proved to be the Son of David, both to the generality of the Jews, who could not deny but Joseph was so, and to all believers, both Jews and Gentiles, to whom God should give to believe the mystery of the incarnation by the conception of the Holy Ghost. This to me seems a sufficient reason for the reckoning up our Saviour’ s descent from David both by father and mother. Which is advantaged by considering that Joseph was not only the reputed father, but the legal father of Christ; and although his being not the natural but the legal father of Christ will not prove him the Son of David, further than to the Jews who would have him to be the natural son of Joseph, yet the genealogy reckoned from Abraham to Joseph will prove Joseph the son of David; (whom they judged Christ’ s natural father), so as they had nothing to say against that and the other parts of this Gospel; and this chapter indeed, with the genealogy of Mary, will prove that he was both the Son of David, and the true Messias, as a Son born of a virgin. Whereas some say that Mary was of the tribe of Levi, and think to prove it by her being cousin to Elisabeth, who is expressly called a daughter of Aaron, Luk 1:5 ; besides that Luk 3:23-38 plainly proveth her of the tribe of Judah, and of the family of David, the proof is by no means sufficient; for although the law, Num 36:8,9 , for the avoiding of a confusion of inheritances, commanded them to marry within their tribes, yet this law concerned not the daughters of the tribe of Levi, for that tribe had no inheritance as the rest. So as that kindred might easily be, though Mary was not of the tribe of Levi, but of Judah, as indeed she was. But leaving this question, let us come to the words of the verse. And Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary; that is, the espoused husband of Mary. Espousals make a marriage before God: the angel afterward saith to Joseph, (but yet espoused), Fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife. And he was soon after the legal, actual husband of Mary.

Of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ; that person who was called Jesus is by the direction of the angel, as we shall by and by see, who was also called Christ, which, as we said, signifieth Anointed, and the same with Messiah. It is observed by some that the name Christ was given to kings of Judah (because of their anointing) before the captivity, but to none after, till he came who was the Christ; God by that providence (if the Jews would have understood it) pointing out to them, that the person was now come who was promised them under the notion of the Messiah, Dan 9:25,26 , and whom they expected, as appeareth from Joh 1:41 4:25 , and no longer to be expected.

Poole: Mat 1:17 - -- The evangelist, for reasons which we cannot fathom, reduces our Saviour’ s progenitors to fourteen in each period of the Jewish state; and in t...

The evangelist, for reasons which we cannot fathom, reduces our Saviour’ s progenitors to fourteen in each period of the Jewish state; and in the first period, determining with David, there were no more. In the second, he leaveth out three kings descended from the daughter of Ahab. In the third, which was from the captivity to Christ, there were doubtless more; Luke reckoneth up twenty-four, (taking in Christ for one), and agreeth in very few with Matthew, who was forced to leave out some to keep to this number of fourteen. Nor doth Matthew speak any thing false, or contradictious to Luke, in saying there were fourteen though there were more. Besides, there might be many more progenitors of Mary than of Joseph, whose pedigree Matthew deriveth.

Poole: Mat 1:18 - Now the birth or Jesus Christ was on this wise // When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph // the Holy Ghost The evangelist prefaceth this extraordinary birth of our Saviour in this manner. Now the birth or Jesus Christ was on this wise not in the ordinar...

The evangelist prefaceth this extraordinary birth of our Saviour in this manner.

Now the birth or Jesus Christ was on this wise not in the ordinary course and manner in which children are conceived and brought forth into the world ( with child of the Holy Ghost Luk 1:35 ), but in this wonderful manner.

When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph Betrothing, or espousing, was nothing else but a solemn promise of marriage made by two persons each to other, at such a distance of time as they agreed upon. It was a decent usage, approved of (if not ordained) by God, as appears by Deu 20:7 . That we are obliged still to use it I dare not say; it might be a prudential order and constitution of that state. There was nothing in it typical, nothing to bring it under the notion of a carnal ordinance, as the apostle calls some of their ordinances relating to the worship of God. It seemeth equitable, that the parties to be married might have some convenient time to think seriously of the great change they are soon to make in their lives, and more solemnly seek unto God for his blessing upon them; as also that they might more freely discourse together about their household affairs, and the settlement of their families, than the modesty of the virgins of that age would otherwise have allowed them. It made them man and wife before God, though they came not together for some time after. The distance of time seemeth to have been left to the agreement of parties and parents. In this case we cannot certainly assert the distance, but it appeareth to have been such as that she was

found with child before they came together. Mary knew what the evangelist here asserts, that it was by

the Holy Ghost for as she must know that she had not known man as she told the angel, Luk 1:34 ; so the angel had satisfied her, saying, Luk 1:35 , The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee. Therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. It cannot be doubted but that she revealed this to some of her friends, but how it came to be found, or who found it, we are not told. Joseph as yet had no such revelation.

God would have his Son to be born of a virgin:

1. For the fulfilling of the promise, Isa 7:14 .

2. Of the Holy Ghost, that the womb of the virgin being sanctified by the Spirit of holiness, there might be no traduction of original sin.

Of a betrothed virgin:

1. That he might not be under the reproach of illegitimacy.

2. Nor his mother subjected to the punishment of the Judaical law.

3. That Mary’ s stock might be by her betrothed husband.

4. That Christ might have a guard in his infancy.

Poole: Mat 1:19 - was minded to put her away privily // a just man It was found she was with child, possibly herself or some of her friends told it to Joseph her espoused husband; it is plain from this text he came ...

It was found she was with child, possibly herself or some of her friends told it to Joseph her espoused husband; it is plain from this text he came to the knowledge of it, for upon it, the evangelist saith, he

was minded to put her away privily Had Joseph at this time heard and believed that the Holy Ghost had come upon her, and the power of the Most High overshadowed her, being a good man, he would not have entertained thoughts of putting her away. But though she had before received this revelation, and might possibly have communicated it to some of her friends, yet it is manifest that her husband Joseph had not heard it, or at least was not easy to believe a thing of so unusual and extraordinary a nature. That she was with child was evident, how she came to be so was as yet hidden from him in nature, and so incredible a thing, as it had argued too much of easiness of belief for him to have believed, had not Joseph had (as afterward he had) a Divine revelation for it: he therefore receiving such a report, and finding it to be true, resolves to put her away in the most private manner he could, rather than to expose her to a public shame, or to be made a public example. Their being betrothed was a thing publicly taken notice of, and he could not put her away so privately but there must be witnesses of it; the meaning therefore must be, as privately as the nature of the thing would bear. Joseph in this case had the choice of three things:

1. He might, notwithstanding this, have taken her to his house as his wife, for the law of divorce, or putting away, was but a law giving a liberty in case of a discerned uncleanness to put away the wife, it did not lay any under an obligation so to do.

2. He might give her a bill of divorce, and leave her with her friends. Now those skilled in the Jewish writings tell us this might be done, either more privately before two or three witnesses, putting a writing of that import into her bosom; or more openly and publicly before the magistrate.

3. He might, according to the law, Deu 22:23,24 , &c., have brought her forth to be examined, whether she had only suffered a rape, or had herself consented. If it was done with her consent, she was by the law to be stoned.

Of these Joseph, in his first thoughts upon the matter, and before he rightly did understand the thing, chooseth the second and the milder part, and resolves to put her away, but in the most private manner the law would in that case allow him. He did this (saith the evangelist) because he was

a just man where the term dikaiov signifieth equitable, in opposition to severity and rigour; nor ought any to say Joseph in this showed himself an unjust man, because by the law she ought to have been stoned to death; for that is a mistake. Supposing she had been with child by man, yet if she had been forced the man only was to die, Deu 22:25,26 ; or she might have been with child before her betrothing, in which case she was only obliged to marry him that had so abused her. A kind and equitable man always presumes the best, especially in a case where life is concerned; besides that, no doubt Mary had by this time told Joseph the truth, and what the angel had said to her, to which (it being so incredible a thing as not to be believed but upon a Divine revelation) though Joseph was not obliged, having as yet no such revelation, to give a present easy faith, yet he might reasonably give so much credit as to resolve upon the mildest course he could take, though he was willing also to avoid the blot upon himself by taking her to him for his wife according to his contract. God will not leave so good a man long unresolved what to do.

Poole: Mat 1:20 - Joseph, thou son of David // Fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife What we have in this verse assures us, that Joseph was not only inclined, by the kindness and benignity of his own natural temper, and by his charit...

What we have in this verse assures us, that Joseph was not only inclined, by the kindness and benignity of his own natural temper, and by his charity, to that moderate resolution he had taken up, but also more immediately influenced by God, who was now sending a messenger to him to tell him what he would have him to do in this case. Whether this angel was the angel Gabriel, who Luke tells us, Luk 1:26 , was sent to Mary, to tell her that the power of the Most High should overshadow her, or some other angel, none can assert; an angel it was. He appeareth to Joseph while he was asleep, and in and by a dream. By dreams was one way by which God revealed his mind to people formerly, Heb 1:1 ; one of those ways by which God made himself known to prophets, Num 12:6 ; and not to prophets only, but to pagan princes sometimes, as appeareth by the instances we have in Scripture of the dreams which Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar both had. Dreams are either natural, or supernatural, or preternatural. How to distinguish the former from the two latter is not my work in this place, and possibly a difficult task, especially in our times, when God, having spoken to us by his Son, and given us his word as a perfect rule, hath left off ordinary speaking to his prophets by dreams and visions, though not limited himself but that he may sometimes so speak. We are assured of the truth of a Divine revelation to Joseph by this way of dreams, while his head was full of thoughts what he was to do in this case. God thinks of us when we sleep, and one way or other will not be wanting to our inquisition in sincerity to know his will, in the difficult cases of our lives. The angel saith unto Joseph,

Joseph, thou son of David by which compellation he lets him know he was to be the supposed and legal, though not the natural, father of the Messias, who was by the confession of all men to be the Son of David.

Fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife she that is thy betrothed wife, and so thy wife in my sight; thou hast espoused her, and called me to witness that thou wilt consummate this marriage with her in a due time, and take her to thine house. I see what hath happened which troubleth thy thoughts; possibly thou art afraid lest thou shouldest offend me, marrying one who appeareth unto thee to be defiled; or thou art afraid of bringing a blot upon thyself if thou shouldest consummate this marriage; but do not fear any of these things, but go on, and consummate thy marriage. She is not, as you supposeth, or mayest fear, defiled by man,

for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost That holy thing, ( as Luke speaks), that human body which is in her womb, is created in her, and is of the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost, by his almighty creating power, hath supplied what is wanting from the help of the creature, as to ordinary productions of this nature.

Poole: Mat 1:21 - For he shall save his people from their sins When the usual time of women is accomplished, she shall bring forth a Son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus He shall not be thy natural son, but...

When the usual time of women is accomplished,

she shall bring forth a Son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus He shall not be thy natural son, but he shall be her son, not begot by thee, but brought forth by her, so flesh of her flesh. His name shall be called Jesus by thee, or by his mother. It is the will of God thou shouldest give him that name.

For he shall save his people from their sins It was the custom of the Jews (God’ s ancient people) to give names to their children, either expressive of the mercy which God had showed them in giving them their children, or of the duty which their children did owe unto God. This name was given by God, expressing the mercy of God to his people in giving them this child;

for he shall save his people from their sins saith the angel. Jesus comes from a Hebrew word, which signifies salvation. Joshua had his name from the same word, because he was to be a temporal saviour to save the Jews, the whole body of the Jews, from the Canaanites their enemies. This Jesus was to save his people, all that should believe in his name, whether Jews or Gentiles, from their sins. Hereby the angel hints the mistake of the Jews, in thinking the Messias should be a temporal saviour, who should save the Jews from their enemies, minding them that he was to save them, not from their bodily, but spiritual enemies, from their sins; the guilt of them, and the power of them, and from the eternal danger of them: and he alone should do it; There is none other name under heaven given among men, neither is there salvation in any other, Act 4:12 .

Poole: Mat 1:22-23 - -- Ver. 22,23. By these great acts of Divine Providence, that which was spoken and prophesied of by Isaiah, Isa 7:14 , speaking by inspiration from God,...

Ver. 22,23. By these great acts of Divine Providence, that which was spoken and prophesied of by Isaiah, Isa 7:14 , speaking by inspiration from God, was fulfilled. Though things are said in the evangelists to be fulfilled when the types have had their accomplishment in the antitype, and when something cometh to pass much like, or bearing some proportion to, something which before happened in the world, (as I shall show hereafter), yet I take the sense of being fulfilled here to be literally fulfilled; believing so much of that prophecy as is here quoted did literally concern Christ, and none but him. But we must take heed of interpreting the particle that as signifying the end of God’ s action in this great work of Providence; for the end for which God sent his Son into the world was before expressed, to save his people from their sins, not to fulfil a prophecy.

That here only signifies the consequent of that act of Divine Providence, and the sense is but only this, By all this which was done, was fulfilled that which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, &c. But the Jews have so much clamouring against the application of that text Isa 7:14 to Christ, and some learned interpreters thinking the fulfilling mentioned to be no more than the fulfilling of a type in the antitype, it will be necessary that we make it appear that it was literally fulfilled. To which I know of but two prejudices:

1. That it could be no relief to Ahaz, nor to the Jews, against their sense and fear of their present danger, to tell them that Christ should be born of a virgin eight hundred years after.

2. That whereas it is added, Isa 7:16 , Before the child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.

Supposing those two kings to be Pekah king of Israel and Rezin king of Syria, who were at that time joined in a siege against Jerusalem, or at least preparing for it, and the child mentioned Isa 7:16 to be the son of a virgin promised Isa 7:14 , it could be no relief to Ahaz, nor any great news for the prophet to have told Ahaz, that they should both leave the country before eight hundred years were elapsed. Let us therefore first consider the history to which that prophecy related. Isa 7:1,2 we are told, that in the time of Ahaz, Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel, went up toward Jerusalem to war against it. And it was told the house of David, ( that is, Ahaz), saying, Syria is confederate with Ephraim. And his heart was moved, and the heart of his people, as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind. The expedient which Ahaz thought upon in this distress, was to get Tiglathpileser, the king of Assyria, to join with and help him; which he afterward did, hiring him with the silver and gold found in the house of the Lord, and in the treasures of the king’ s house, as we find 2Ki 16:7,8 . This conjunction with idolaters was what the Lord had forbidden, and had often declared his abhorrence of. To prevent it, he sends his prophet Isaiah to him: Isa 7:3,4 , Go forth now to meet Ahaz, thou, and Shear-jashub thy son, at the end of the upper pool in the highway of the fuller’ s field; and say unto him, fear not, neither be faint hearted, & c. In short, he assures him in the name of the Lord, that the counsel of these two kings should not stand, nor come to pass, that within threescore and five years Israel should not be a people , &c., Isa 7:7,8 . Ahaz knew not how to believe this. Isaiah offereth him from God to ask a sign for the confirmation of his word, either in the depth, or in the height. Ahaz refuseth it under pretence that he would not tempt the Lord, as if it had been a tempting God to have asked a sign at his command. At this the Lord was angry, as appeareth by the prophet’ s reply, Isa 7:13 ; And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will you weary my God also? Then he goeth on, Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin, & c. There was nothing more ordinary in the prophets than to comfort the people of God amongst the Jews in their distresses with the promise of the Messias; this we find they often did with reference to the captivity of Babylon, and in other causes of distress and trouble. And certainly that is the design of the prophet here, in these words: Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and shall call his name Emmanuel. Ahaz had refused to believe the promise God gave him, to defeat the counsel of these two kings; he had refused to ask a sign, for the confirmation of God’ s word. Well, (saith the prophet), God shall give you that fear him a sign, he shall in his own time send you the Messias, whose name shall be called Emmanuel, and he shall be born of a virgin. Nor yet doth he leave Ahaz and his people comfortless, as to their present distress, for saith he, Isa 7:16 , Before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings. The Hebrew is rekh which I think were better translated this child, than the child , for h seems not to be a relative, (referring to the child, mentioned in Isa 7:14 ), but a demonstrative, referring to the son of Isaiah, Shearjashub, whom God, Isa 7:3 , commanded the prophet, going to meet Ahaz, to carry with him, who probably was a very young child. Saith the prophet: Here is a little child whom God hath commanded me to bring with me; before this child be much older, this land which thou art so much afraid of shall be quitted of both those kings who have now some possession of it; for at this time Rezin had taken Elath, a city of Judah, 2Ki 16:6 ; and doubtless he and Pekah had taken divers places, for they were come up to Jerusalem itself. And indeed, if this be not the sense, it is very hard to conceive to what purpose God commanded Isaiah to take Shearjashub with him when he went upon this errand. Isa 7:3 . So that Isa 7:14 remains as a prophecy respecting the Messiah only, and given not for any relief of unbelieving Ahaz as to his present distress, but for some relief to God’ s people among the Jews, with reference to their posterity. This will appear a much more probable sense than theirs, who think that Mahershalalhashbaz is the son mentioned Isa 7:14 , whom we read of Isa 8:3 , who was born to Isaiah of the prophetess, (who some think was at this time a virgin), and was a type of Christ; for the Scripture doth not tell us whether that prophetess was a virgin or a widow, neither was it any great wonder that a virgin being married should conceive, and bear a son. Nor had this been any relief to Ahaz, as to his present distress, for this virgin (if she were such) was yet to be married, to conceive, and bear a son; so that, according to that notion, we must allow three or four years before Ahaz could have expected relief. This is further advantaged by that passage, Isa 8:18 , Behold, I and the children which the Lord hath given me are for signs: not the child, but the children. Shearjashub was for a sign of God’ s deliverance of the Jews from those two kings; Mahershalalhashbaz was for a sign of the destruction of the Israelites within five years, and also of Syria, which fell out afterward. Thus Isa 8:14 remains a literal prophecy of Christ. For the Jewish interpretation of it concerning Hezekiah, (born fifteen years after), it is too ridiculous to be mentioned.

Poole: Mat 1:24-25 - He took unto him his wife // knew her not // till she had brought forth her firstborn Son // till // And he called his name Jesus Ver. 24,25. The will of God (as we heard) was revealed to Joseph in a dream. It is God that giveth a power to sleep, and a power to awake; therefore ...

Ver. 24,25. The will of God (as we heard) was revealed to Joseph in a dream. It is God that giveth a power to sleep, and a power to awake; therefore it is said, being raised from sleep, he showed both his faith and obedience; his faith in the Divine revelation, a certainty of which he had doubtless by some extraordinary Divine impression, and his obedience to the Divine precept.

He took unto him his wife , that is, he took her unto his house, (for betrothed virgins used to abide at their own friends’ houses till the consummation of the marriage), and owned her as his wife, yet not fully using her as such, for the text saith he

knew her not (a modest phrase used from the beginning of the world, as appears from Gen 4:1 , to express the conjugal act)

till she had brought forth her firstborn Son Some make a great stir in determining whether he knew her afterwards, yea or no. Some of the ancients were stiff in their opinion that he did not, so are the popish writers, and many protestant interpreters. Mr. Calvin I think determines best, that none will move such a question, but such as are unwarrantably curious; nor contend for either part, but such as are unreasonably quarrelsome. For as, on the one side, none can conclude that she had more children from the word

till further than they can conclude, from Psa 110:1 , that Christ shall not for ever sit at his Father’ s right hand, (the word until being a particle only exclusive of a preceding time, not affirming the thing in future time), nor doth the term firstborn conclude any born afterward; so, on the other side, there are no cogent arguments to prove that Mary had no more children by Joseph. We read of the brother of our Lord, Gal 1:19 , and of his mother and his "brethren," Mat 12:47 ; and though it be true brethren may signify kinsmen, according to the Hebrew dialect, yet that it doth so in these texts cannot be proved. The Holy Ghost had made use of the virgin for the production of the Messias; why after this her womb should be shut up, and Joseph take her home to be his wife, and not use her as such I cannot tell, nor yet what reproach it could be to Mary or to our Saviour, marriage being God’ s ordinance, and the undefiled bed honourable: and those who think our Saviour would have been dishonoured in any others lying in the same bed after him, seem to forget how much he humbled himself in lying in that bed first, and then in a stable and a manger. We know he knew her not till Christ was born, whether he did afterward or no we are willingly ignorant because God hath not told us.

And he called his name Jesus: this is added to declare his obedience to the command received by the angel. We shall meet with more circumstances relating to the birth of Christ when we come to the two first chapters of Luke.

Lightfoot: Mat 1:1 - The book of the generation of Jesus Christ. // Of Jesus Christ. // The Son of David The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.   [The book of the generation of Jesus Christ.] Ten s...

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.   

[The book of the generation of Jesus Christ.] Ten stocks came out of Babylon; 1. Priests. 2. Levites. 3. Israelites. 4. Common persons; as to the priesthood: such whose fathers, indeed, were sprung from priests, but their mothers unfit to be admitted to the priests' marriage-bed. 5. Proselytes. 6. Liberti; or servants set free. 7. Nothi; such as were born in wedlock; but that which was unlawful. 8. Nethinims. 9. Bastards; such as came of a certain mother, but of an uncertain father. 10. Such as were gathered up out of the streets, whose fathers and mothers were uncertain.   

A defiled generation indeed! And, therefore, brought up out of Babylon in this common sink, according to the opinion of the Hebrews, that the whole Jewish seed still remaining there might not be polluted by it. For Ezra went not up out of Babylon, until he had rendered it pure as flour. They are the words of the Babylonian Gemara, which the Gloss explains thus; "He left not any there that were illegitimate in any respect, but the priests and Levites only, and Israelites of a pure and undefiled stock. Therefore, he brought up with him these ten kinds of pedigrees, that these might not be mingled with those, when there remained now no more a Sanhedrim there, which might take care of that matter. Therefore he brought them to Jerusalem, where care might be taken by the Sanhedrim fixed there, that the legitimate might not marry with the illegitimate."   

Let us think of these things a little while we are upon our entrance into the Gospel-history:   

I. How great a cloud of obscurity could not but arise to the people concerning the original of Christ, even from the very return out of Babylon, when they either certainly saw, or certainly believed that they saw, a purer spring of Jewish blood there than in the land of Israel itself!   

II. How great a care ought there to be in the families of pure blood, to preserve themselves untouched and clean from this impure sink; and to lay up among themselves genealogical scrolls from generation to generation as faithful witnesses and lasting monuments of their legitimate stock and free blood!   

Hear a complaint and a story in this case: "R. Jochanan said, By the Temple, it is in our hand to discover who are not of pure blood in the land of Israel: but what shall I do, when the chief men of this generation lie hid?" (that is, when they are not of pure blood, and yet we must not declare so much openly concerning them). "He was of the same opinion with R. Isaac, who said, A family (of the polluted blood) that lies hid, let it lie hid. Abai also saith, We have learned this also by tradition, That there was a certain family called the family of Beth-zeripha, beyond Jordan, and a son of Zion removed it away." (The Gloss is, Some eminent man, by a public proclamation, declared it impure.) "But he caused another which was such" [that is, impure] "to come near. And there was another which the wise men would not manifest."   

III. When it especially lay upon the Sanhedrim, settled at Jerusalem to preserve pure families, as much as in them lay, pure still; and when they prescribed canons of preserving the legitimation of the people (which you may see in those things that follow at the place alleged), there was some necessity to lay up public records of pedigrees with them: whence it might be known what family was pure, and what defiled. Hence that of Simon Ben Azzai deserves our notice: "I saw (saith he) a genealogical scroll in Jerusalem, in which it was thus written; 'N., a bastard of a strange wife.' " Observe, that even a bastard was written in their public books of genealogy, that he might be known to be a bastard, and that the purer families might take heed of the defilement of his seed. Let that also be noted: "They found a book of genealogy at Jerusalem, in which it was thus written; ' Hillel was sprung from David. Ben Jatsaph from Asaph. Ben Tsitsith Hacceseth from Abner. Ben Cobisin from Achab,' " etc. And the records of the genealogies smell of those things which are mentioned in the text of the Misna concerning 'wood-carrying': "The priests' and people's times of wood-carrying were nine: on the first day of the month Nisan, for the sons of Erach, the sons of Judah: the twentieth day of Tammuz, for the sons of David, the son of Judah: the fifth day of Ab, for the sons of Parosh, the son of Judah: the seventh of the same month for the sons of Jonadab the son of Rechab: the tenth of the same for the sons of Senaah, the son of Benjamin," etc.   

It is, therefore, easy to guess whence Matthew took the last fourteen generations of this genealogy, and Luke the first forty names of his; namely, from the genealogical scrolls at that time well enough known, and laid up in the public repositories, and in the private also. And it was necessary, indeed, in so noble and sublime a subject, and a thing that would be so much inquired into by the Jewish people as the lineage of the Messiah would be, that the evangelists should deliver a truth, not only that could not be gainsaid, but also that might be proved and established from certain and undoubted rolls of ancestors.   

[Of Jesus Christ.] That the name of Jesus is so often added to the name of Christ in the New Testament, is not only that thereby Christ might be pointed out for the Saviour; which the name Jesus signifies; but also, that Jesus might be pointed out for true Christ; against the unbelief of the Jews, who though they acknowledged a certain Messiah; or Christ; yet they stiffly denied that Jesus of Nazareth was he. This observation takes place in numberless places of the New Testament; Act 2:36; Act 8:35; 1Co 16:22; 1Jo 2:22; 1Jo 4:15, etc.   

[The Son of David.] That is, "the true Messias}." For by no more ordinary and more proper name did the Jewish nation point out the Messiah than by The Son of David. See Mat 12:23; Mat 21:9; Mat 22:42; Luk 18:38; and everywhere in the Talmudic writings, but especially in Babylonian Sanhedrim: where it is also discussed, What kind of times those should be when the Son of David should come.   

The things which are devised by the Jews concerning Messiah Ben Joseph (which the Targum upon Canticles 4:5 calls 'Messiah Ben Ephraim') are therefore devised, to comply with their giddiness and loss of judgment in their opinion of the Messiah. For, since they despised the true Messiah, who came in the time fore-allotted by the prophets, and crucified him; they still expect I know not what chimerical one, concerning whom they have no certain opinion: whether he shall be one, or two; whether he shall arise from among the living, or from the dead; whether he shall come in the clouds of heaven, or sitting upon an ass, etc.: they expect a Son of David; but they know not whom, they know not when.

Lightfoot: Mat 1:2 - Judas Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;   [Judas.] In Hebrew, Jehudah. Which word not only...

Abraham begat Isaac; and Isaac begat Jacob; and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;   

[Judas.] In Hebrew, Jehudah. Which word not only the Greeks, for want of the letter "h" in the middle of a word, but the Jews themselves, do contract into Judah; which occurs infinite times in the Jerusalem Talmud. The same person who is called R. Jose Bi R. Jehudah; in the next line is called R. Jose Bi R. Judah...

Lightfoot: Mat 1:5 - Booz of Rachab And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;   [Booz of Rachab.] So far the Jewish writers agree w...

And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; and Booz begat Obed of Ruth; and Obed begat Jesse;   

[Booz of Rachab.] So far the Jewish writers agree with Matthew, that they confess Rachab was married to some prince of Israel, but mistaking concerning the person: whether they do this out of ignorance, or wilfully, let themselves look to that. Concerning this matter, the Babylonian Gemara hath these words: "Eight prophets and those priests sprung from Rachab, and they are these, Neriah, Baruch, Seraiah, Maaseiah, Jeremiah, Hilkiah, Hanameel, and Shallum. R. Judah saith, Huldah also was of the posterity of Rachab." And a little after, "There is a tradition, that she, being made a proselytess, was married to Joshua": which Kimchi also produceth in Joshua_6. Here the Gloss casts in a scruple: "It sounds somewhat harshly (saith it), that Joshua married one that was made a proselyte, when it was not lawful to contract marriage with the Canaanites, though they became proselytes. Therefore we must say that she was not of the seven nations of the Canaanites, but of some other nation, and sojourned there. But others say that that prohibition took not place before the entrance into the promised land," etc.

Lightfoot: Mat 1:8 - And Joram begat Ozias And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;   [And Joram begat Ozias.] The names of Ahazias, Joash, and Am...

And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram begat Ozias;   

[And Joram begat Ozias.] The names of Ahazias, Joash, and Amazias, are struck out. See the history in the books of the Kings, and 1Ch 3:11-12.   

I. The promise that "the throne of David should not be empty," passed over, after a manner, for some time into the family of Jehu, the overthrower of Joram's family. For when he had razed the house of Ahab, and had slain Ahaziah, sprung, on the mother's side, of the family of Ahab, the Lord promiseth him that his sons should reign unto the fourth generation, 2Ki 10:30. Therefore however the mean time the throne of David was not empty, and that Joash and Amazias sat during the space between, yet their names are not unfitly omitted by our evangelist, both because they were sometimes not very unlike Joram in their manners; and because their kingdom was very much eclipsed by the kingdom of Israel, when Ahazias was slain by Jehu, and his cousin Amazias taken and basely subdued by his cousin Joash, 2Ch 25:23.   

II. "The seed of the wicked shall be cut off," Psa 37:28. Let the studious reader observe that, in the original, in this very place, the letter Ain, which is the last letter of wicked; and of seed; is cut off, and is not expressed; when, by the rule of acrostic verse (according to which this Psalm is composed), that letter ought to begin the next following verse.   

III. "Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven image, etc. For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation," (Exo 20:5).   

Joram walked in the idolatrous ways of the kings of Israel, according to the manner of the family of Ahab, 2Ki 8:18. Which horrid violation of the second command God visits upon his posterity, according to the threatening of that command; and therefore the names of his sons are dashed out unto the fourth generation.   

IV. The Old Testament also stigmatizeth that idolatry of Joram in a way not unlike this of the New; and shows that family unworthy to be numbered among David's progeny, 2Ch 22:2; Ahazias, the son of two and forty years; that is, not of his age (for he was not above two-and-twenty, 2Ki 8:26), but of the duration of the family of Omri, of which stock Ahazias was, on the mother's side; as will sufficiently appear to him that computes the years. A fatal thing surely! That the years of a king of Judah should be reckoned by the account of the house of Omri.   

V. Let a genealogical style not much different be observed, 1Ch 4:1; where Shobal, born in the fifth or sixth generation from Judah, is reckoned as if he were an immediate son of Judah. Compare Mat 2:50.   

In the like manner, Ezra_7, in the genealogy of Ezra, five or six generations are erased.   

[Please see Genealogies of the Bible: A Neglected Subject (111k) etc. at the Arthur Custance, Doorway Papers Library site regarding these lists and the "missing" names.]

Lightfoot: Mat 1:11 - And Josias begat Jechonias And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:   [And Josias begat Jechonias.] The sons of...

And Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:   

[And Josias begat Jechonias.] The sons of Josias were these: the first-born, Jochanan; the second, Joachim; the third, Zedekiah; the fourth, Shallum, 1Ch 3:15. Who this Shallum was, the Jerusalem Talmudists do dispute: "R. Jochanan saith, Jochanan and Jehoachaz were the same. And when it is written, Jochanan the first-born; it means this; that he was the first-born to the kingdom: that is, he first reigned. And R. Jochanan saith, Shallum and Zedekias are the same. And when it is written, Zedekias the third Shallum the fourth; he was the third in birth, but he reigned fourth." The same things are produced in the tract Sotah. But R. Kimchi much more correctly: "Shallum (saith he) is Jechonias, who had two names, and was reckoned for the son of Josias, when he was his grandchild" (or the son of his son); "For the sons of sons are reputed for sons." Compare Jer 22:11 with Jer 22:24; and the thing itself speaks it. And that which the Gemarists now quoted say, Zedekiah was also called Shallum, because in his days 'Shalmah,' 'an end was put to' the kingdom of the family of David; this also agrees very fitly to Jechonias, Jer 22:28-30.

Lightfoot: Mat 1:12 - Jechonias begat Salathiel And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;   [Jechonias begat Salathiel.] That is,...

And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;   

[Jechonias begat Salathiel.] That is, "a son of the kingdom," or successor in that dignity of the house of David, whatsoever it was, which was altogether withered in the rest of the sons of Josiah, but did somewhat flourish again in him, 2Ki 25:27. And hence it is, that of all the posterity of Josiah, Jechonias only is named by St. Matthew.   

Jechonias, in truth, was without children; Jer 22:30; and Salathiel, properly speaking, was the son of Neri, Luk 3:27; but yet Jechonias is said to beget him; not that he was truly his father, but that the other was his successor; not, indeed, in his kingly dignity, for that was now perished, but in that which now was the chief dignity among the Jews. So 1Ch 3:16; Zedekias is called the son, either of Jehoiakim, whose brother indeed he was, or of Jechonias, whose uncle he was; because he succeeded him in the kingly dignity.   

The Lord had declared, and that not without an oath, that Jechonias should be without children. The Talmudists do so interpret "R. Judah saith, All they of whom it is said, These shall be without children; they shall have no children. And those of whom it is said, They shall die without children; they bury their children." [ul Lev_20:20-21]   

So Kimchi also upon the place; "The word (saith he) means this; That his sons shall die in his life, if he shall now have sons: but if he shall not now have sons, he never shall. But our Rabbins of blessed memory say, That he repented in prison. And they say moreover, Oh! How much doth repentance avail, which evacuates a penal edict! For it is said, 'Write ye this man childless': but, he repenting, this edict turned to his good," etc. "R. Jochanan saith, His carrying away expiated. For when it is said, 'Write this man childless,' after the carrying away it is said, 'The sons of Coniah, Assir his son, Shealtiel his son.' " These things are in Babylonian Sanhedrim, where these words are added, "Assir his son, because his mother conceived him in prison."   

But the words in the original (1Ch 3:17) are these... Now the sons of Jechonias bound [or imprisoned] were Shealtiel his son. Which version both the accents and the order of the words confirm...

Lightfoot: Mat 1:16 - And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.   [And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary.] ...

And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.   

[And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary.] The mother's family is not to be called a family. Hence the reason may very easily be given, why Matthew brings down the generation to Joseph, Mary's husband; but Luke to Eli, Mary's father. These two frame the genealogy two ways, according to the double notion of the promise of Christ. For he is promised, as the 'seed of the woman,' and as the 'Son of David'; that, as a man, this, as a king. It was therefore needful, in setting down his genealogy, that satisfaction should be given concerning both. Therefore Luke declareth him the promised seed of the woman, deducing his mother's stock, from whence man was born, from Adam; Matthew exhibits his royal original, deriving his pedigree along through the royal family of David to Joseph, his (reputed) father.

Lightfoot: Mat 1:17 - Fourteen generations So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generation...

So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations; and from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations.   

[Fourteen generations.] Although all things do not square exactly in this threefold number of fourteen generations; yet there is no reason why this should be charged as a fault upon Matthew, when in the Jewish schools themselves it obtained for a custom, yea, almost for an axiom, to reduce things and numbers to the very same, when they were near alike. The thing will be plain by an example or two, when a hundred almost might be produced.   

Five calamitous things are ascribed to the same day, that is, to the ninth day of the month Ab. "For that day (say they) it was decreed, That the people should not go into the promised land: the same day, the first Temple was laid waste, and the second also: the city Bitter was destroyed, and the city Jerusalem ploughed up." Not that they believed all these things fell out precisely the same day of the month; but, as the Babylonian Gemara notes upon it, That they might reduce a fortunate thing to a holy day, and an unfortunate to an unlucky day.   

The Jerusalem Gemara, in the same tract, examines the reason why the daily prayers consist of the number of eighteen, and among other things hath these words; "The daily prayers are eighteen, according to the number of the eighteen Psalms, from the beginning of the Book of Psalms to that Psalm whose beginning is, 'The Lord hear thee in the day of trouble,' " [which Psalm, indeed, is the twentieth Psalm Psalms_20]. "But if any object, that nineteen Psalms Psalms_19 reach thither, you may answer, The Psalm which begins, 'Why did the heathen rage,' is not of them," a distinct Psalm. Behold, with what liberty they fit numbers to their own case.   

Inquiry is made, whence the number of the thirty-nine more principal servile works, to be avoided on the sabbath-day, may be proved. Among other, we meet with these words; "R. Chaninah of Zippor saith, in the name of R. Abhu, Aleph denotes one, Lamed thirty, He five, Dabar one, Debarim two. Hence are the forty works, save one, concerning which it is written in the law. The Rabbins of Caesarea say, Not any thing is wanting out of his place: Aleph one, Lamed thirty, Cheth eight: our profound doctors do not distinguish between He and Cheth": that they may fit number to their case...   

"R. Joshua Ben Levi saith, In all my whole life I have not looked into the [mystical] book of Agada but once; and then I looked into it, and found it thus written, A hundred and seventy-five sections of the law; where it is written, He spake, he said, he commanded; they are for the number of the years of our father Abraham." And a little after; "A hundred and forty and seven Psalms, which are written in the Book of the Psalms [note this number], are for the number of the years of our father Jacob. Whence this is hinted, that all the praises wherewith the Israelites praise God are according to the years of Jacob. Those hundred and twenty and three times, wherein the Israelites answer Hallelujah, are according to the number of the years of Aaron," etc.   

They do so very much delight in such kind of concents, that they oftentimes screw up the strings beyond the due measure, and stretch them till they crack. So that if a Jew carps at thee, O divine Matthew, for the unevenness of thy fourteens, out of their own schools and writings thou hast that, not only whereby thou mayest defend thyself, but retort upon them.

Lightfoot: Mat 1:18 - When as his mother was espoused // Before they came together. // She was found with child Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with chil...

Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.   

[When as his mother was espoused] no woman of Israel was married, unless she had been first espoused. "Before the giving of the law (saith Maimonides), if the man and the woman had agreed about marriage, he brought her into his house, and privately married her. But after the giving of the law, the Israelites were commanded, that, if any were minded to take a woman for his wife, he should receive her, first, before witnesses; and thenceforth let her be to him a wife, as it is written, If any one take a wife. This taking is one of the affirmative precepts of the law, and is called espousing." Of the manner and form of espousing, you may read till you are weary, in that tractate, and in the Talmudic tract, Kiddushin.   

[Before they came together.] "In many places the man espouseth the woman; but doth not bring her home to him, but after some space of time." So the Gloss upon Maimonides.   

Distinction is made by the Jewish canons, and that justly and openly, between private society or discourse between the espouser and the espoused, and the bringing of the espoused into the husband's house. Of either of the two may those words be understood, before they came together; or, rather, of them both. He had not only not brought her home to him, but he had no manner of society with her alone, beyond the canonical limits of discourse, that were allowed to unmarried persons; and yet she was found with child.   

[She was found with child.] Namely, after the space of three months from her conception, when she was now returned home from her cousin Elizabeth. See Luk 1:56; and compare Gen 38:24.   

The masters of the traditions assign this space to discover a thing of that nature. "A woman (say they) who is either put away from her husband, or become a widow, neither marrieth, nor is espoused, but after ninety days: namely, that it may be known, whether she be big with child or no; and that distinction may be made between the offspring of the first husband and of the second. In like manner, a husband and wife, being made proselytes, are parted from one another for ninety days, that judgment may be made between children begotten in holiness," (that is, within the true religion; see 1Co 7:14) "And children begotten out of holiness."

Lightfoot: Mat 1:19 - But Joseph, being a just man, etc.// To make her a public example. // Put her away privily Then Joseph her husband, being a just man; and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily.   [But Jose...

Then Joseph her husband, being a just man; and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily.   

[But Joseph, being a just man, etc.] there is no need to rack the word just; to fetch out thence the sense of gentleness or mercy; which many do; for, construing the clauses of the verse separately, the sense will appear clear and soft enough, Joseph, being a just man; could not, would not, endure an adulteress: but yet not willing to make her a public example; being a merciful man, and loving his wife, was minded to put her away privily.   

[To make her a public example.] This doth not imply death, but rather public disgrace, to make her public. For it may, not without reason, be inquired, whether she would have been brought to capital punishment, if it had been true that she had conceived by adultery. For although there was a law promulged of punishing adultery with death, Lev 10:10; Deu 22:22; and, in this case, she that was espoused, would be dealt withal after the same manner as it was with her who was become a wife; yet so far was that law modified, that I say not weakened, by the law of giving a bill of divorce, Deu 24:1; etc., that the husband might not only pardon his adulterous wife, and not compel her to appear before the Sanhedrim, but scarcely could, if he would, put her to death. For why otherwise was the bill of divorce indulged?   

Joseph, therefore, endeavours to do nothing here, but what he might, with the full consent both of the law and nation. The adulteress might be put away; she that was espoused could not be put away without a bill of divorce; concerning which thus the Jewish laws: "A woman is espoused three ways; by money, or by a writing, or by being lain with. And being thus espoused, though she were not yet married, nor conducted into the man's house, yet she is his wife. And if any shall lie with her beside him, he is to be punished with death by the Sanhedrim. And if he himself will put her away, he must have a bill of divorce."   

[Put her away privily.] Let the Talmudic tract 'Gittin' be looked upon, where they are treating of the manner of delivering a bill of divorce to a wife to be put away: among other things, it might be given privately, if the husband so pleased, either into the woman's hand or bosom, two witnesses only present.

Lightfoot: Mat 1:23 - Behold, a virgin shall be with child. // Which is, being interpreted Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with u...

Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.   

[Behold, a virgin shall be with child.] That the word virgin, in the prophet, denotes an untouched virgin; sufficiently appears from the sense of the place, Isa 7:14. King Ahaz there was afraid, lest the enemies that were now upon him might destroy Jerusalem, and utterly consume the house of David. The Lord meets this fear by a signal and most remarkable promise, namely, 'that sooner should a pure virgin bring forth a child, than the family of David perish.' And the promise yields a double comfort: namely, of Christ hereafter to be born of a virgin; and of their security from the imminent danger of the city and house of David. So that, although that prophecy, of a virgin's bringing forth a son, should not be fulfilled till many hundreds of years after, yet, at that present time, when the prophecy was made, Ahaz had a certain and notable sign, that the house of David should be safe and secure from the danger that hung over it. As much as if the prophet had said, "Be no so troubled, O Ahaz; does it not seem an impossible thing to thee, and that never will happen, that a pure virgin should become a mother? But I tell thee, a pure virgin shall bring forth a son, before the house of David perish."   

Hear this, O unbelieving Jew! And shew us now some remainders of the house of David: or confess this prophecy fulfilled in the Virgin's bringing forth: or deny that a sign was given, when a sign is given.   

In what language Matthew wrote his Gospel.  

[Which is, being interpreted.] I. All confess that the Syriac language was the mother-tongue to the Jewish nation dwelling in Judea; and that the Hebrew was not at all understood by the common people may especially appear from two things:   

1. That, in the synagogues, when the law and the prophets were read in the original Hebrew, an interpreter was always present to the reader, who rendered into the mother-tongue that which was read, that it might be understood by the common people. Hence those rules of the office of an interpreter, and of some places which were not to be rendered into the mother-tongue.   

2. That Jonathan the son of Uzziel, a scholar of Hillel, about the time of Christ's birth, rendered all the prophets (that is, as the Jews number them, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, the Books of the Kings, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the twelve lesser prophets) into the Chaldee language; that is, into a language much more known to the people than the Hebrew, and more acceptable than the mother-tongue. For if it be asked why he translated them at all, and why he translated not rather into the mother-tongue, which was known to all? And if it be objected concerning St. Matthew and St. Paul, that, writing to the Jews, one his Gospel, the other his Epistle (to the Hebrews), they must have written in the Syriac tongue (if so be they wrote not in Hebrew), that they might be understood by all: -- we answer,   

First, It was not without reason that the paraphrast Jonathan translated out of the Hebrew original into the Chaldee tongue, because this tongue was much more known and familiar to all the people than the Hebrew. The holy text had need of an interpreter into a more known tongue, because it was now in a tongue not known at all to the vulgar. For none knew the Hebrew but such as learned it by study. However, therefore, all the Jews inhabiting the land of Canaan, did not so readily understand the Chaldee language as the Syriac, which was their mother-language, yet they much more readily understood that than the Hebrew, which, to the unlearned, was not known at all. Hence it was not without necessity that the prophets were turned into the Chaldee language by Jonathan, and the law, not much after, by Onkelos, that they might a little be understood by the common people, by whom the Hebrew original was not understood at all. We read also that the Book of Job had its Targum in the time of Gamaliel the Elder; that is, Paul's master.   

Secondly, it is no impertinent question, Why Jonathan and Onkelos did not rather translate into the Syriac language, which was the mother-language to all the people, when both they themselves were in Judea, while they were employed about this work, and laboured in it for the use of the Jews that dwelt there? To which we give this double answer; 1. That, by turning it into the Chaldee language, they did a thing that might be of use to both them that dwelt in Judea, and in Babylon also. 2. The Syriac language was not so grateful unto the Jews, who used it for their mother-tongue, as the Chaldee was; as being a language more neat and polite, and the mother-tongue to the brethren in Babylon, and which they that came up out of Babylon, carried thence with them into Judea. You may wonder, reader, when you hear that canon which permits a single man "to say his prayers in any language, when he asks those things that are needful for him, except only the Syriac: While he asketh necessaries for himself, let him use any language but the Syriac." But you will laugh when you hear the reason: "Therefore, by all means, because the angels do not understand the Syriac language."   

Whether they distinguish the Syriac language here from the pure Chaldee, is not of great moment solicitously to inquire: we shall only produce these things of the Glosser upon Beracoth, which make to our purpose: -- "There are some (saith he) who say, that that prayer which begins 'sermon,' is therefore to be made in the Syriac language, because it is a noble prayer, and that deserves the highest praise; and therefore it is framed in the Targumistical language, that the angels may not understand it, and envy it to us," etc. And a little after; "It was the custom to recite that prayer after sermon; and the common people were there present, who understood not the Hebrew language at all; and therefore they appointed it to be framed in the Targumistical language, that it might be understood by all; for this is their tongue."   

Mark, the Hebrew was altogether unknown to the common people: no wonder, therefore, if the evangelists and apostles wrote not in Hebrew when there were none who understood things so written, but learned men only.   

That also must not be passed over, which, at first sight, seems to hint that the Syriac language was not understood even by learned men. "Samuel the Little, at the point of death, said, Simeon and Ismael to the sword; and all the other people to the spoil: and there shall be very great calamities." And because he spoke these things in the Syriac language, they understood not what he had said. This story you have repeated in the Babylonian Gemara, where the words of the dying man are thus related; Let the Glosser upon the place be the interpreter: " Simeon and Ismael to the sword [that is, Rabban Simeon the prince, and R. Ismael Ben Elisha the high-priest, were slain with the sword], and his fellows to slaughter [that is, R. Akibah and R. Chananiah Ben Teradion were slain by other deaths; namely R. Akibah by iron teeth, and R. Chananiah by burning alive before idols]; and the other people for a prey: and very many calamities shall fall upon the world."   

Now where it is said that, "They understood not what he said, because he spake in the Syrian tongue," we also do not easily understand. What! For the Jerusalem doctors not to understand the Chaldee language! For Samuel the Little died before the destruction of the city; and he spake of the death of Rabban Simeon, who perished in the siege of the city; and he spake these things when some of the learnedest Rabbins were by: and yet that they understood not these words, which even a smatterer in the oriental tongues would very easily understand!   

Therefore, perhaps, you may beat out the sense of the matter from the words of the author of Juchasin, who saith, He prophesied in the Syriac language; But now, when prophecies were spoken only in the Hebrew language, however they understood the sense of the words, yet they reputed it not for a prophecy, because it was not uttered in the language that was proper for prophetical predictions. But we tarry not here. That which we would have is this, that Matthew wrote not in Hebrew (which is proved sufficiently by what is spoken before), if so be we suppose him to have written in a language vulgarly known and understood; which, certainly, we ought to suppose: not that he, or the other writers of the New Testament, wrote in the Syriac language, unless we suppose them to have written in the ungrateful language of an ungrateful nation, which, certainly, we ought not to suppose. For when the Jewish people were now to be cast off, and to be doomed to eternal cursing, it was very improper, certainly, to extol their language, whether it were the Syriac mother-tongue, or the Chaldee, its cousin language, unto that degree of honour; that it should be the original language of the New Testament. Improper, certainly, it was, to write the Gospel in their tongue, who, above all the inhabitants of the world, most despised and opposed it.   

II. Since, therefore, the Gentiles were to be called to the faith, and to embrace the Gospel by the preaching of it, the New Testament was written very congruously in the Gentile language, and in that which, among the Gentile languages, was the most noble; viz. The Greek. Let us see what the Jews say of this language, envious enough against all languages besides their own.   

"Rabban Simeon Ben Gamaliel saith, Even concerning the holy books, the wise men permitted not that they should be written in any other language than Greek. R. Abhu saith that R. Jochanan said, The tradition is according to Rabban Simeon; that R. Jochanan said, moreover, Whence is that of Rabban Simeon proved? From thence, that the Scripture saith, 'The Lord shall persuade Japhet, and he shall dwell in the tents of Sem': the words of Japhet shall be in the tents of Sem": and a little after, God shall persuade Japhet; i.e. The grace of Japhet shall be in the tents of Sem." Where the Gloss speaks thus; "'The grace of Japhet' is the Greek language; the fairest of those tongues which belonged to the sons of Japhet."   

"Rabban Simeon Ben Gamaliel saith, Even concerning the sacred books, they permitted not that they should be written in any other language than Greek. They searched seriously, and found, that the law could not be translated according to what was needful for it, but in Greek." You have this latter clause cut off in Massecheth Sopherim, where this story also is added: "The five elders wrote the law in Greek for Ptolemy the king: and that day was bitter to Israel, as the day wherein the golden calf was made, because the law could not be translated according to what was needful for it." This story of the 'five interpreters' of the law is worthy of consideration, which you find seldom mentioned, or scarce anywhere else. The tradition next following after this, in the place cited, recites the story of the Seventy. Look at it.   

When, therefore, the common use of the Hebrew language had perished, and when the mother Syriac or Chaldee tongue of a cursed nation could not be blessed, our very enemies being judges, no other language could be found, which might be fit to write the (new) divine law, besides the Greek tongue. That this language was scattered, and in use among all the eastern nations almost, and was in a manner the mother tongue, and that it was planted every where by the conquests of Alexander, and the empire of the Greeks, we need not many words to prove; since it is every where to be seen in the historians. The Jews do well near acknowledge it for their mother-tongue even in Judea.   

"R. Jochanan of Beth Gubrin said, There are four noble languages which the world useth; the mother-tongue, for singing; the Roman, for war; the Syriac, for mourning; and the Hebrew, for elocution: and there are some who say, the Assyrian for writing." What is that which he calls the mother-tongue? It is very easily answered, the Greek, from those encomiums added to it, mentioned before: and that may more confidently be affirmed from the words of Midras Tillin, respecting this saying of R. Jochanan, and mentioning the Greek language by name. "R. Jochanan said, There are three languages; the Roman, for war; the Greek, for speech; the Assyrian, for prayer." To this also belongs that, that occurs once and again in Babylonian Megillah, In the Greek mother tongue. You have an instance of the thing; "R. Levi, coming to Caesarea, heard some reciting the phylacteries in the Hellenistical language." This is worthy to be marked. At Caesarea flourished the famous schools of the Rabbins. The Rabbins of Caesarea are mentioned in both Talmuds most frequently, and with great praise, but especially in that of Jerusalem. But yet among these, the Greek is used as the mother-tongue, and that in reciting the phylacteries, which, you may well think, above all other things, in Judea were to be said in Hebrew.   

In that very Caesarea, Jerome mentions the Hebrew Gospel of St. Matthew, to be laid up in the library of Pamphilus, in these words: "Matthew, who was also called Levi, from a publican made an apostle, first of all in Judea composed the Gospel of Christ in Hebrew letters and words, for their sakes, who were of the circumcision and believed. Which Gospel, who he was that afterward translated it into Greek, it is not sufficiently know. Moreover, that very Hebrew Gospel is reserved to this day in the library at Caesarea, which Pamphilus the martyr, with much care, collected. I also had leave given me by the Nazarenes, who use this book in Berea, a city of Syria, to write it out."   

It is not at all to be doubted, that this Gospel was found in Hebrew; but that which deceived the good man was not the very handwriting of Matthew, nor, indeed, did Matthew write the Gospel in that language: but it was turned by somebody out of the original Greek into Hebrew, that so, if possible, the learned Jews might read it. For since they had little kindness for foreign books, that is, heathen books, or such as were written in a language different from their own, which might be illustrated from various canons, concerning this matter; some person converted to the gospel, excited with a good zeal, seems to have translated this Gospel of St. Matthew out of the Greek original into the Hebrew language, that learned men among the Jews, who as yet believed not, might perhaps read it, being now published in their language: which was rejected by them while it remained in a foreign speech. Thus, I suppose, this gospel was written in Greek by St. Matthew, for the sake of those that believed in Judea, and turned into Hebrew by somebody else, for the sake of those that did not believe.   

The same is to be resolved concerning the original language of the Epistle to the Hebrews. That Epistle was written to the Jews inhabiting Judea, to whom the Syriac was the mother-tongue; but yet it was writ in Greek, for the reasons above named. For the same reasons, also, the same apostle writ in Greek to the Romans, although in that church there were Romans, to whom it might seem more agreeable to have written in Latin; and there were Jews, to whom it might seem more proper to have written in Syriac.

PBC: Mat 1:1 - -- The mysteries of his character, and his glorious errand on earth, are wrapped up in his glorious and wonderful name, Immanuel -God with, us; God in ou...

The mysteries of his character, and his glorious errand on earth, are wrapped up in his glorious and wonderful name, Immanuel -God with, us; God in our nature; God at peace with us; in covenant with us.

This child, though not born like other children, but born of a virgin, a thing impossible according to the law of nature, yet he shall be really and truly man, and shall be nursed and brought up like other children. Though he be conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, and is as truly God as he is man, yet he shall not therefore be fed on angels’ food, but, as it becomes him, shall be in all things made like unto his brethren; Heb 2:17. Being born by extraordinary generation, and being truly, Immanuel, God with us, yet he does not appear in the full stature of a man, but a newborn babe, an infant, a child, a man-child, and is nursed, and shall gradually grow to manhood, and in wisdom, so as to know how to refuse the evil and choose the good; Lu 2:40,52.

Elder Gregg Thompson

Haydock: Mat 1:1 - The book of the The first English Testament, divided into verses, was that printed at Geneva, by Conrad Badius, in the year 1557. (Haydock) --- "The book of the Gene...

The first English Testament, divided into verses, was that printed at Geneva, by Conrad Badius, in the year 1557. (Haydock) ---

"The book of the Generation," is not referred to the whole gospel, but to the beginning, as in Genesis v. "This is the book of the generation of Adam." (Estius) ---

The book of the [1] Generation , i.e. the generation or pedigree, which is here set down in the first sixteen verses. In the style of the Scriptures any short schedule or roll is called a book, as the bill or short writing of a divorce, is called a little book. (Matthew v. 31.) (Witham) ---

Jesus, in Hebrew Jesuah , is the proper name of Him, who was born of the Virgin Mary, who was also the Son of God, "a name given by the angel before he was conceived in the womb." (Luke ii.) It signifies Saviour , "because he was to save his people from their sins." He was also called Christ , which signifies anointed; for though in the Old Testament kings, priests, and prophets were anointed , and though many were then designated by the name of Jesus , properly, and by an invariable custom of the New Testament, that person is exclusively signified, who, on account of the union of the divine and human nature, was anointed by the Holy Ghost above all his fellows . (Psalm xliv. and Hebrews i. 9.) Whence in this turn the hypostasis is understood, in which the two natures, the divine and human meet. (Estius)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Liber Generationis. Greek: Biblos geneseos . So Genesis ver. 1. Hic est liber generationis Adam, Greek: Biblos , &c.

Haydock: Mat 1:2 - -- He begins with Abraham, the father of the faithful, because to him the promise was made, that all generations should be blessed in his seed. (Theophyl...

He begins with Abraham, the father of the faithful, because to him the promise was made, that all generations should be blessed in his seed. (Theophylactus)

Haydock: Mat 1:3 - -- See Genesis xxxviii, ver. 6. & dein. and Zera of Thamar, her daughter-in-law. (Haydock)

See Genesis xxxviii, ver. 6. & dein. and Zera of Thamar, her daughter-in-law. (Haydock)

Haydock: Mat 1:5 - -- See Josue. chap. ii. & dein. We nowhere else find the marriage of Salmon with Rahab; but this event might have been known by tradition, the truth of w...

See Josue. chap. ii. & dein. We nowhere else find the marriage of Salmon with Rahab; but this event might have been known by tradition, the truth of which the divinely inspired evangelist here confirms. (Bible de Vence) Rahab was a debauched woman, preserved in the pillage of Jericho, where she had been born. In this genealogy only four women are mentioned, of which two are Gentiles, and two adulteresses. Here the greatest sinners may find grounds for confidence in the mercies of Jesus Christ, and hopes of pardon, when they observed how the Lord of life and glory, to cure our pride, not only humbled himself by taking upon himself the likeness of sinful flesh, but by deriving his descent from sinners, and inspiring the holy evangelist to record the same to all posterity. (Haydock)

Haydock: Mat 1:6 - -- Extract from St. John Chrysostom's first Homil. upon the first chapter of St. Matthew: "How, you say, does it appear that Christ descended from David?...

Extract from St. John Chrysostom's first Homil. upon the first chapter of St. Matthew: "How, you say, does it appear that Christ descended from David? For if he be born not of man, but of a virgin, concerning whose genealogy nothing is said, how shall we know that he is of the family of David? We have here two difficulties to explain. Why is the genealogy of the Virgin passed over in silence, and why is Joseph's mentioned, as Christ did not descend from him? ... How shall we know that the Virgin is descended from David? Hear the words of the Almighty addressed to the archangel Gabriel: 'Go to a virgin espoused to a man, whose name is Joseph, of the house and family of David.' What could you wish plainer that this, when you hear that the Virgin is of the family of David? Hence it also appears that Joseph was of the same house, for there was a law which commanded them not to marry any one but of the same tribe. ... But whether these words, of the house and family of David , be applied to the Virgin or to Joseph, the argument is equally strong. For if he was of the family of David, he did not take a wife but out of the same tribe, from which he had descended. Perhaps you will say he transgressed this law. But the evangelist has prevented such a suspicion, by testifying beforehand that Joseph was a just man. Beware how you attach crime to him, whose virtue is thus publicly acknowledged. ... It was not the custom among the Hebrews to keep the genealogies of women. The evangelist conformed to this custom, that he might not at the very beginning of the gospel offend by transgressing ancient rites, and introducing novelty."

Haydock: Mat 1:8 - Joram begot Ozias Joram begot Ozias , three generations are omitted, as we find 2 Paraliponenon xxii; for there, Joram begot Ochozias, and Ochozias begot Joas, and Joa...

Joram begot Ozias , three generations are omitted, as we find 2 Paraliponenon xxii; for there, Joram begot Ochozias, and Ochozias begot Joas, and Joas begot Amazias, and Amazias begot Ozias . This omission is not material, the design of St. Matthew being only to shew the Jews that Jesus, their Messias, was of the family of David; and he is equally the son, or the descendent of David, though the said three generations be left out: for Ozias may be called the son of Joram, though Joram was his great-grandfather. (Witham) ---

It is thought that St. Matthew omitted these three kings, Ochozias, Joas, and Amazias, to preserve the distribution of his genealogy into three parts, each of fourteen generations; and, perhaps, also on account of their impiety, or rather on account of the sentence pronounced against the house of Achab, from which they were descended by their mother Athalia. (3 Kings xxi. 21.) (Calmet)

Haydock: Mat 1:11 - Josias begot // In the transmigration Josias begot [2] Jechonias, &c. The genealogy of Christ, as it appears by the 17th verse, is divided by the evangelist into thrice fourteen generat...

Josias begot [2] Jechonias, &c. The genealogy of Christ, as it appears by the 17th verse, is divided by the evangelist into thrice fourteen generations, and so it is to contain 42 persons. The first class of fourteen begins with Abraham, and ends with David. The second class begins with Solomon, and ends with Jechonias. The third class is supposed to begin with Salathiel, and to end, says St. Jerome, with our Saviour Christ. But thus we shall only find in the third class thirteen generations, and in all only forty-one, instead of forty-two. Not to mention in these short notes other interpretations, the conjecture of St. Epiphanius seems to most probable, that we are to understand two Jechonias's, the father and the son, who had the same name. So that the true reading should be, Josias begot Jechonias and his brethren, and Jechonias begot Jechonias, and Jechonias begot Salathiel. Thus Jechonias named in the 12th verse is not the same, but the son of him that was named in the 11th verse; and from Jechonias the son, begins the third class, and so Christ himself will be the last or 14th person in that last series or class. There are several difficulties about reconciling this genealogy in St. Matthew with that in St. Luke, chap. iii. But without insisting on all the particulars in these short notes, I hope it may suffice to take notice, that no one can reasonably doubt that both the evangelists copied out the genealogical tables, as they were then extant, and carefully preserved by the Jews, and especially by those families that were of the tribe of Juda, and of the family of David, of which the Messias was to be born. For if the evangelists had neither falsified, or made any mistake as to these genealogies, the Jews undoubtedly would have objected this against their gospels, which they never did. (Witham) ---

The difficulties here are: 1. Why does St. Matthew give the genealogy of Joseph and not of Mary? 2. How is it inferred that Jesus is descended from David and Solomon, because Joseph is the son of David? 3. How can Joseph have two men for his father, Jacob of the race of Solomon, and Heli of the race of Nathan? To the 1st it is generally answered, that it was not customary with the Jews to draw out the genealogies of women; to the 2nd, that Jesus being the son of Joseph, either by adoption, or simply as the son of Mary his wife, he entered by that circumstance into all the rights of the family of Joseph; moreover, Mary was of the same tribe and family of Joseph, and thus the heir of the branch of Solomon marrying with the heiress of the branch of Nathan, the rights of the two families united in Joseph and Mary, were transmitted through them to Jesus, their son and heir; to the 3rd, that Jacob was the father of Joseph according to nature, and Heli his father according to law; or that Joseph was the son of the latter by adoption, and of the former by nature. (Haydock) ---

In the transmigration, [3] transportation to Babylon; i.e. about the time the Jews were carried away captives to Babylon. For Josias died before their transportation. See 4 Kings xxiv. (Witham) ---

Some think we are to read: Josias begot Joakim and his brethren; and Joakim begot Joachim, or Jechonias. Jechonias was son to Joakim, and grandson to Josias. The brothers of Jechonias are not known, but those of Joakim are known. (1 Paralipomenon iii. 15, 16.) Besides this reading give the number 14. (Haydock) ---

St. Jerome says that Jechonias, the son of Josias, is a different person from Jechonias who begot Salathiel, for the latter was son of the former; see Paralipomenon iii. where it is said that Zorobabel was son of Phadaia; but Phadaia is the same as Salatheil. (Estius) ---

Mat. Polus affirms that every one the least conversant in Jewish story, must know that several genealogies which appear to contradict each other, do not in reality. ( Synop. Crit. ver. 4, p. 12.)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

See St. Epiphanius hær. vi. pag. 21. Edit. Petav. Greek: epeide tines &c.

In transmigratione, Greek: epi tes metoikesias , i.e. circa tempus transmigrationis.

Haydock: Mat 1:12 - -- By the text of the first book of Paralipomenon iii. 17, 19. it appears that Zorobabel was grandson to Salathiel. In comparing the present genealogy w...

By the text of the first book of Paralipomenon iii. 17, 19. it appears that Zorobabel was grandson to Salathiel. In comparing the present genealogy with that of St. Luke, (chap. iii.) we find that in this last part St. Matthew has suppressed many generations, to bring the list to the number 14; for there are a greater number from Zorobabel to Jesus Christ in St. Luke, but in a different branch. (Bible de Vence) ---

The evangelist was well aware that the suppressed names could be easily supplied from the Jewish records; and that every person could reply most satisfactorily to any objection on that head, who was the least acquainted with the Jewish tables. In the first fourteen of these generations, we see the family of David rising to the throne; in the second, a race of kings descending from him; in the last, the royal family descending to a poor carpenter. Yet, when every human appearance of restoring the kingdom to David's house was at an end, Jesus arose to sit on his father's throne, (Luke i. 32.) and of his kingdom there shall be no end. (Haydock)

Haydock: Mat 1:16 - The husband of Mary // Joseph the husband of Mary The husband of Mary. The evangelist gives us rather the pedigree of St. Joseph, than that of the blessed Virgin, to conform to the custom of the ...

The husband of Mary. The evangelist gives us rather the pedigree of St. Joseph, than that of the blessed Virgin, to conform to the custom of the Hebrews, who in their genealogies took no notice of women: but as they near akin, the pedigree of the one sheweth that of the other. (Challoner) ---

Joseph the husband of Mary. [3] So he is again called, ver. 19: but in ver. 18, we read, when Mary his mother was espoused to Joseph. These different expressions of being husband, and being espoused, have occasioned different interpretations. Some think that Joseph and the blessed Virgin were truly married at the time of Christ's conception: others, that they were only then espoused, or engaged by a promise to marry afterwards. St. Jerome says, when you hear the name of husband, do not from thence imagine them to be married, but remember the custom of the Scriptures, according to which, they who are espoused only, are called husband and wives. (Witham) ---

That Jesus, who is called Christ, was of the seed of David, is also evident, as St. Augustine affirms from various texts of the holy Scriptures, as in the epistle to the Romans, where St. Paul, (chap. i.) speaking of the Son of God, says, who was made to Him of the seed of David, according to the flesh . See also the promises made to David, 2 Kings vii. Psalms lxxxviii. and cxxxi. and spoken of Solomon, as a figure of Jesus Christ. (Estius)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Joseph virum Mariæ, Greek: ton anera Marias . And Ver. 19, vir ejus, Greek: aner autes . But Ver. 18, Greek: mnesteutheises , desponsata, Greek: mnesteuomai , is not properly the same as Greek: gamein .

Haydock: Mat 1:18 - -- The account of the birth of Jesus Christ follows his genealogy. From these words, "before they came together," Helvidius and others have started obje...

The account of the birth of Jesus Christ follows his genealogy. From these words, "before they came together," Helvidius and others have started objections, which have been answered long ago by St. Jerome, where he shews in many examples from Scripture, that the words before and until do not signify what happened afterwards; for that point is left indefinite, but only what was done before, or not done. Thus when it is said, Sit thou at my right hand, till I make thine enemies they footstool, Psalm cix, by no means signifies, that after the subjection of his enemies, the Son of God is no longer to sit at the right hand of his Father. In common conversation, when we say that a man died before he reached his 30th year, we do not mean that he afterwards attained it. Or, should we say that Helvidius died before he did penance, we cannot mean that he afterwards did penance: the same conclusion should be deduced from the words, "before they came together," the end being accomplished by the power of the operation of the Holy Ghost, without their going together. If we should advance, that such a man was cured before he went to a physician, the natural inference would be, that he did not go to a physician at all. Thus also in the language of Scripture, the word first-begotten does not mean after whom others were born, but before whom no one was born, where there were further issue or not. And the reason is, because the law required that a sacrifice should be offered for the first-born, and that he should be redeemed very soon after his birth; nor did it allow the parents to wait and see if any other son should be born. (Estius) ---

True and perfect marriage, and continual living in the same, without knowing each other. (St. Augustine, lib. ii. Consen. Evang. chap. i.) (Bristow)

Haydock: Mat 1:19 - -- And Joseph her husband, knowing her strict virtue, was surprised at this her pregnancy, but "being a just man," and not willing to expose her, by deno...

And Joseph her husband, knowing her strict virtue, was surprised at this her pregnancy, but "being a just man," and not willing to expose her, by denouncing her, or giving her a bill of divorce, he had a mind to dismiss her privately, committing the cause to God. Let us learn from Joseph to be ever tender of our neighbour's reputation, and never to entertain any injurious thoughts, or any suspicions to his prejudice. (Haydock)

Haydock: Mat 1:20 - Fear not to take Fear not to take, &c. i.e., fear not to marry her, if we suppose them not yet married, or if married already, the sense is, fear not to keep and rema...

Fear not to take, &c. i.e., fear not to marry her, if we suppose them not yet married, or if married already, the sense is, fear not to keep and remain with thy chaste wife; lay aside all thoughts of dismissing and leaving her. (Witham) ---

As the incarnation of the Son of God was effected by the whole blessed Trinity, it may be asked why this operation is peculiarly attributed to the Holy Ghost, not only here, but in Luke ii., and in the apostles' creed? The answer is, because as power is attributed to the Father, wisdom to the Son, so goodness is attributed to the Holy Ghost, and the gifts of grace which proceed from it. (Estius in different location)

Haydock: Mat 1:21 - Jesus . . . he shall save Jesus . . . he shall save, &c. The characteristic name of Saviour was peculiar to the Messias, by which he was distinguished, as well as by the ador...

Jesus . . . he shall save, &c. The characteristic name of Saviour was peculiar to the Messias, by which he was distinguished, as well as by the adorable name of Jesus. The expectations of both Jew and Gentile looked forward to a saviour. St. Augustine, in the 18th book, 23d chapter, de Civitate Die, introduces a curious anecdote. He mentions there, that he received from the eloquent and learned Proconsul Flactianus, a book containing in Greek the verses of one of the Sybils, which related to the coming of Christ. The substance of them is much the same as occurs in the prophecies of Isaiah, from which Virgil has likewise copied into his Pollio, many of the sublime thoughts which we find in that beautiful eclogue. It is remarkable that of the initials of these verses, St. Augustine had formed an acrostic to the following import, Greek: Iesous Christos Deos huios soter; that is, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, Saviour. (Haydock)

Haydock: Mat 1:22 - -- The Greeks in general, after St. John Chrysostom, look upon this as a continuation of the angel's speech to St. Joseph. The other Fathers and comment...

The Greeks in general, after St. John Chrysostom, look upon this as a continuation of the angel's speech to St. Joseph. The other Fathers and commentators think it a reflection of the evangelist.

Haydock: Mat 1:23 - Behold a virgin Behold a virgin, [5] &c. The Jews sometimes objected, as we see in St. Justin's dialogue with Tryphon, that the Hebrew word alma, in the prophet Is...

Behold a virgin, [5] &c. The Jews sometimes objected, as we see in St. Justin's dialogue with Tryphon, that the Hebrew word alma, in the prophet Isaias, signified no more than a young woman . But St. Jerome tells us that alma signifies a virgin kept close up. Let the Jews, says he, shew me any place in which the Hebrew word alma, is applied to any one that is not a virgin, and I will own my ignorance. Besides the very circumstances in the text of the prophet, are more than a sufficient confutation of this Jewish exposition; for there a sign, or miracle, is promised to Achaz; and what miracle would it be for a young woman to have a child, when she had ceased to be a virgin? (Witham) ---

How happens it that nowhere in the gospels, or in any other part, do we find Christ called Emmanuel? I answer, that in the Greek expression the name is given for the thing signified; and the meaning is: He shall be a true Emmanuel, i.e. a God with us, true God and true man. (Estius) ---

The text says, they shall call, i.e. all men shall look upon Him as an Emmanuel. Again, his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, the mighty, the Prince of peace, &c. i.e. He shall be all these, not so much nominally, as really and in effect. (Haydock)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Ecce Virgo, Greek: idou e parthenos . So is it read, not only here in St. Matthew but in the Septuagint Isaias vii. St. Hier. [St. Jerome] lib. 1. Cont. Jovin. tom. iv. parte 2. pag. 174. Ostendant mihi, ubi hoc Verbo (Alma) appellentur et nuptæ, et imperitiam confitebor.

====================

Haydock: Mat 1:24 - -- The heretic Helvidius argues from this text, and from what we read in the gospel of Christ's brethren, that Christ had brothers, and Mary other sons. ...

The heretic Helvidius argues from this text, and from what we read in the gospel of Christ's brethren, that Christ had brothers, and Mary other sons. But it is evident that in the style of the Scriptures, they who were no more than cousins were called brothers and sisters. (Haydock)

Haydock: Mat 1:25 - -- See note on ver. 18. --- St. Jerome assures us, that St. Joseph always preserved his virginal chastity. It is "of faith" that nothing contrary theret...

See note on ver. 18. ---

St. Jerome assures us, that St. Joseph always preserved his virginal chastity. It is "of faith" that nothing contrary thereto ever took place with his chaste spouse, the blessed Virgin Mary. St. Joseph was given her by heaven to be the protector of her chastity, to secure her from calumnies in the birth of the Son of God, to assist her in her flight into Egypt, &c. &c. We cannot sufficiently admire the modest reserve of both parties. Mary does not venture to explain to her troubled husband the mystery of her pregnancy; and Joseph is afraid of mentioning his uneasiness and doubts, for fear of troubling her delicate mind and wounding her exquisite feelings. So great modesty, reserve and silence, are sure to be approved by heaven; and God sends an angel to Joseph in his sleep, to dissipate his doubts, and to expound to him the mystery of the incarnation. (Haydock)

Gill: Mat 1:1 - The book of the generation of Jesus Christ // the son of David // The son of Abraham The book of the generation of Jesus Christ,.... This is the genuine title of the book, which was put to it by the Evangelist himself; for the former s...

The book of the generation of Jesus Christ,.... This is the genuine title of the book, which was put to it by the Evangelist himself; for the former seems to be done by another hand. This book is an account, not of the divine, but human generation of Christ; and not merely of his birth, which lies in a very little compass; nor of his genealogy, which is contained in this chapter; but also of his whole life and actions, of what was said, done, and suffered by him. It is an Hebrew way of speaking, much like that in Gen 5:1 and which the Septuagint render by the same phrase as here; and as that was the book of the generation of the first Adam; this is the book of the generation of the second Adam. The Jews call their blasphemous history of the life of Jesus, ספר תולדות ישו "The book of the generations of Jesus" o. This account of Christ begins with the name of the Messiah, well known to the Jews,

the son of David; not only to the Scribes and Pharisees, the more learned part of the nation, but to the common people, even to persons of the meanest rank and figure among them. See Mat 9:27. Nothing is more common in the Jewish writings, than for בן דוד "the son of David" to stand alone for the Messiah; it would be endless to cite or refer to all the testimonies of this kind; only take the following p,

"R. Jochanan says, in the generation in which בן דוד "the son of David" comes, the disciples of the wise men shall be lessened, and the rest, their eyes shall fail with grief and sorrow, and many calamities and severe decrees shall be renewed; when the first visitation is gone, a second will hasten to come. It is a tradition of the Rabbins (about) the week (of years) in which בן דוד "the son of David" comes, that in the first year this scripture will be fulfilled, Amo 4:7. "I will rain upon one city", &c. in the second, arrows of famine will be sent forth; in the third there will be a great famine, and men, women and children, holy men and men of business will die, and the law will be forgotten by those who learn it; in the fourth there will be plenty and not plenty; in the fifth there will be great plenty, and they shall eat and drink and rejoice, and the law shall return to them that learn it; in the sixth there will be voices (or thunders;) in the seventh there will be wars; and in the going out of the seventh בן דוד the "son of David" comes. The tradition of R. Judah says, In the generation in which בן דוד "the son of David" comes, the house of the congregation (the school or synagogue) shall become a brothel house, Galilee shall be destroyed, and Gabalene shall become desolate; and the men of Gabul (or the border) shall go about from city to city, and shall find no mercy; and the wisdom of the scribes shall stink; and they that are afraid to sin shall be despised; and the face of that generation shall be as the face of a dog, and truth shall fail, as it is said, Isa 59:15 --The tradition of R. Nehorai says, In the generation in which בן דוד "the son of David" comes, young men shall make ashamed the faces of old men, and old men shall stand before young men, the daughter shall rise up against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; nor will a son reverence his father. The tradition of R. Nehemiah says, In the generation in which בן דוד "the son of David" comes, impudence will increase, and the honourable will deal wickedly, and the whole kingdom will return to the opinion of the Sadducees, and there will be no reproof. --It is a tradition of the Rabbins, that בן דוד "the son of David" will not come, until traitorous practices are increased, or the disciples are lessened or until the smallest piece of money fails from the purse, or until redemption is despaired of.''

In which passage, besides the proof for which it is cited, may be observed, how exactly the description of the age of the Messiah, as given by the Jews themselves, agrees with the generation in which Jesus the true Messiah came; who as he was promised to David, and it was expected he should descend from him, so he did according to the flesh; God raised him up of his seed, Rom 1:3 it follows,

The son of Abraham. Abraham was the first to whom a particular promise was made, that the Messiah should spring from, Gen 22:18. The first promise in Gen 3:15 only signified that he should be the seed of the woman; and it would have been sufficient for the fulfilment of it, if he had been born of any woman, in whatsoever nation, tribe, or family; but by the promise made to Abraham he was to descend from him, as Jesus did; who took upon him the seed of Abraham, Heb 2:16 or assumed an human nature which sprung from him, and is therefore truly the son of Abraham. The reason why Christ is first called the son of David, and then the son of Abraham, is partly because the former was a more known name of the Messiah; and partly that the transition to the genealogy of Christ might be more easy and natural, beginning with Abraham, whom the Jews call q ראש היחס the "head of the genealogy", and the root and foundation of it, as Matthew here makes him to be; wherefore a Jew cannot be displeased with the Evangelist for beginning the genealogy of our Lord at, Abraham.

Gill: Mat 1:2 - Abraham begat Isaac // Isaac begat Jacob // Jacob begat Judas and his brethren Abraham begat Isaac,.... The descent of Christ from Abraham is in the line of Isaac; Abraham begat Ishmael before Isaac, and others after him, but the...

Abraham begat Isaac,.... The descent of Christ from Abraham is in the line of Isaac; Abraham begat Ishmael before Isaac, and others after him, but they are not mentioned; because the Messiah was not to spring from any of them, but from Isaac, of whom it is said, "in Isaac shall thy seed be called", Gen 21:12 and who, as he was a progenitor, so an eminent type of Christ; being Abraham's only beloved son; and particularly in the binding, sacrifice and deliverance of him.

Isaac begat Jacob. The genealogy of Christ proceeds from Isaac, in the line of Jacob. Isaac begat Esau, as well as Jacob, and they two were twins, but one was loved, and the other hated; wherefore no mention is made of Esau, he had no concern in the Messiah, nor was he to spring from him, but from Jacob, or Israel, by whose name he is sometimes called, Isa 49:3

Jacob begat Judas and his brethren. The lineage of Christ is carried on from Jacob in the line of Judah; the reason of which is, because it was particularly prophesied that the Messiah, Shiloh, the prince and chief ruler, should be of him, Gen 49:10 1Ch 5:2. And it is evident beyond all contradiction, that our Lord sprung from his tribe, Heb 7:14. The reason why the brethren of Judah, who were eleven in number, are mentioned, when the brethren of Isaac and Jacob are not, is, because though the Messiah did not spring from them, yet the promise of him was made to the twelve tribes, who all expected him, and to whom he was sent, and came. These made but one body of men, and therefore, though the Messiah came from the tribe of Judah, yet he is said to be of them all, Rom 9:4.

Gill: Mat 1:3 - And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar // And Phares begat Esrom // And Esrom begat Aram And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar,.... The genealogical account of Christ goes on from Judah in the line of Phares, with whom Zara is mentione...

And Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar,.... The genealogical account of Christ goes on from Judah in the line of Phares, with whom Zara is mentioned; not because they were twins, for so were Jacob and Esau, and yet the latter is taken no notice of; but it may be because of what happened at their birth, see Gen 38:28. But the line of the Messiah was in Phares, and very rightly is he put in the genealogy of Christ, the Jews themselves being witnesses; who expressly say, that "the Messiah comes from him." These two are said to be begotten of Thamar, daughter-in-law to Judah; who, though she was a Canaanitish woman, has the honour to be named in the genealogy of Christ, who came to save Gentiles as well as Jews: nor can the Jews reproach our Evangelist for putting her into the account; since they themselves frequently acknowledge that the Messiah was to spring from her: they say, r.

"there are two women from whom come David the king, and Solomon, and the king Messiah; and these two are Thamar and Ruth.''

Jonathan Ben Uzziel on Gen 38:6 says, that Thamar was the daughter of Shem the great.

And Phares begat Esrom; called Hezron, Rth 4:18 where the same phrase is used as here. He had another son called Hamul, 1Ch 2:5 but the account proceeds from Phares, in the line of Esrom.

And Esrom begat Aram; called Ram in Rth 4:18 where the same way of speaking is used as here. Esrom also besides him begat Jerahmeel, Chelubai, or Caleb, and Segub, 1Ch 2:9 but these are not in the line. Elihu, who conversed with Job, is said to be of the kindred of Ram, Job 32:2 whether the same with Ram or Aram, may be inquired.

Gill: Mat 1:4 - And Aram begat Aminadab And Aram begat Aminadab,.... Which, with what follows in this verse, exactly agrees with the genealogical account in Rth 4:19.

And Aram begat Aminadab,.... Which, with what follows in this verse, exactly agrees with the genealogical account in Rth 4:19.

Gill: Mat 1:5 - And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab // And Booz begat Obed of Ruth // And Obed begat Jesse And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab,.... That Salmon begat Boaz, is affirmed in Rth 4:21 but it is not there said, nor any where else in the Old Testament...

And Salmon begat Booz of Rachab,.... That Salmon begat Boaz, is affirmed in Rth 4:21 but it is not there said, nor any where else in the Old Testament, as here, that he begat him of Rahab, that is, of Rahab the harlot. This the Evangelist had from tradition, or from the Jewish records. That the Messiah was to spring from Boaz is asserted by the Jewish writers s; and they also own that Rahab was married to a prince in Israel, which some say t was Joshua: they pretend that she was ten years of age when the Israelites came out of Egypt; that she played the harlot all the forty years they were in the wilderness, and was married to Joshua upon the destruction of Jericho. To excuse this marriage with a Canaanitish woman, they tell us, she was not of the seven nations with whom marriage was forbid; and moreover, that she became a proselyte when the spies were received by her: they own that some very great persons of their nation sprung from her, as Jeremiah, Maaseiah, Hanameel, Shallum, Baruch, Ezekiel, Neriah, Seraiah, and Huldah the prophetess. The truth of the matter is, she became the wife of Salmon, or Salma, as he is called, 1Ch 2:11. And in the Targum on Rth 4:20 is said to be of Bethlehem; he was the son of Nahshon or Naasson, a famous prince in Judah, and the head and captain of the tribe, Num 1:7 Num 7:12. And from Rahab sprung the Messiah, another instance of a Gentile in the genealogy of Christ; and a third follows.

And Booz begat Obed of Ruth; who was a Moabitess. It is a notion that generally obtains among the Jews u, that she was the daughter of Eglon, grandson of Balak, king of Moab; and it is often taken notice of by them w, that the king Messiah should descend from her; and also other persons of note, as David, Hezekiah, Josiah, Hananiah, Mishael, Azariah, and Daniel; wherefore the mentioning of her in this genealogy, cannot be said by them to be impertinent.

And Obed begat Jesse. Jesse is thought to be, not the immediate son of Obed, but to be of the fourth generation from him; though no others are mentioned between them in Ruth, any more than here. A Jewish writer observes x, that

"the wise men of the Gentiles say, that there were other generations between them; perhaps, says he, they have taken this from the wise men of Israel, and so it is thought.''

Now notwithstanding this, Jesse may be said to be begotten by Obed, as Hezekiah's posterity, who were carried captive into Babylon, are said to be begotten by him, Isa 39:7 though they were a remove of several generations from him. However, Jesse is rightly put among the progenitors of Christ, since the Messiah was to be a rod of his stem, and the branch of his roots, and is called the root of Jesse, Isa 11:1 which words are interpreted of the Messiah, by many of the Jewish writers y; and to this day the Jews pray for him in their synagogues under the name of בן ישי, "the son of Jesse" z.

Gill: Mat 1:6 - And Jesse begat David the king // And David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias And Jesse begat David the king,.... The descent of the Messiah runs in the line of David, the youngest of Jesse's sons, who was despised by his brethr...

And Jesse begat David the king,.... The descent of the Messiah runs in the line of David, the youngest of Jesse's sons, who was despised by his brethren, and overlooked and neglected by his father; but God chose him, and anointed him to be king, and set him on the throne of Israel; hence he is called "David the king"; as also because he was the first king that was of the tribe of Judah, and in the genealogy of Christ, and was an eminent type of the king Messiah, who is sometimes called by the same name, Eze 34:24 and who was to be his son, as Jesus is, and also right heir to his throne and kingdom.

And David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias; which was Bathsheba, though not named; either because she was well known, or because of the sin she had been guilty of, which would easily be revived by mentioning her name: our translators have rightly supplied, "that had been", and not as the Vulgate Latin, which supplies it, "that was the wife of Urias", for Solomon was begotten of her, not while she was the wife of Uriah, but when she was the wife of David.

Gill: Mat 1:7 - And Solomon begat Roboam // And Roboam begat Abia // And Abia begat Asa And Solomon begat Roboam,.... Called Rehoboam, 1Ki 11:43 of Naamah an Ammonitess, 1Ki 14:21. And Roboam begat Abia, sometimes called Abijam, as in ...

And Solomon begat Roboam,.... Called Rehoboam, 1Ki 11:43 of Naamah an Ammonitess, 1Ki 14:21.

And Roboam begat Abia, sometimes called Abijam, as in 1Ki 14:31, sometimes Abijah, 2Ch 12:16 and sometimes, as here, Abia, 1Ch 3:10. Him Rehoboam begat of Maachah, the daughter of Abishalom, 1Ki 15:2 called Michaiah, the daughter of Uriel, 2Ch 13:2. Maachah and Michaiah being the same name; or else she went by two names, as her father did.

And Abia begat Asa, who was a good king; his mother's name is the same with the name of his father's mother; and perhaps it is not his proper mother, but his grandmother who is meant in 1Ki 15:10. He is wrongly called Asaph in the Persic and Ethiopic versions, and in one copy.

Gill: Mat 1:8 - And Asa begat Josaphat // And Josaphat begat Joram // And Joram begat Ozias And Asa begat Josaphat,.... Called Jehoshaphat, 1Ki 15:24 whom Asa begat of Azubah, the daughter of Shilhi, 1Ki 22:42. He also was a very good prince....

And Asa begat Josaphat,.... Called Jehoshaphat, 1Ki 15:24 whom Asa begat of Azubah, the daughter of Shilhi, 1Ki 22:42. He also was a very good prince.

And Josaphat begat Joram; called Jehoram, 1Ki 22:50 to whom his father gave the kingdom, because he was the firstborn, 2Ch 21:3.

And Joram begat Ozias; called Uzziah, 2Ch 26:1 and Azariah, 2Ki 15:1. He was not the immediate son of Joram; there were three kings between them, Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah, which are here omitted; either because of the curse denounced on Ahab's family, into which Joram married, whose idolatry was punished to the third or fourth generation; or because these were princes of no good character; or because their names were not in the Jewish registers. Nor does this omission at all affect the design of the Evangelist, which is to show that Jesus, the true Messiah, is of the house of David; nor ought the Jews to complain of it, as they do a since such omissions are to be met with in the Old Testament, particularly in Ezr 7:2 where six generations are omitted at once; and which is taken notice of by one of their own genealogical writers, whose words are these b;

"we see in the genealogy of Ezra that he hath skipped over seven generations (perhaps it should be ו "six" and not ז "seven", since six are only omitted) from Ahitub to Ahitub.''

Nor is it any objection that Joram is said to beget Ozias, which he may be said to do in the like sense, as has been before observed of Hezekiah, Isa 39:7.

Gill: Mat 1:9 - And Ozias begat Joatham // And Joatham begat Achaz // And Achaz begat Ezekias And Ozias begat Joatham,.... Called Jotham, 2Ki 15:7 him Ozias begat of Jerushah, the daughter of Zadok, 2Ki 15:33. And Joatham begat Achaz, or Aha...

And Ozias begat Joatham,.... Called Jotham, 2Ki 15:7 him Ozias begat of Jerushah, the daughter of Zadok, 2Ki 15:33.

And Joatham begat Achaz, or Ahaz, 2Ki 15:38 to him the sign was given, and the famous prophecy of the Messiah, Isa 7:14.

And Achaz begat Ezekias, or Hezekiah, 2Ki 16:20 him Ahaz begat of Abi, the daughter of Zachariah, 2Ki 18:2. He was a very religious king, and had that singular favour from God to have fifteen years added to his days, Isa 38:5.

Gill: Mat 1:10 - And Ezekias begat Manasses // And Manasses begat Amon // And Amon begat Josias And Ezekias begat Manasses,.... Or Manasseh, 2Ki 20:21. Him Hezekiah begat of Hephzibah, 2Ki 21:1. He was very remarkable both for his sins, and for h...

And Ezekias begat Manasses,.... Or Manasseh, 2Ki 20:21. Him Hezekiah begat of Hephzibah, 2Ki 21:1. He was very remarkable both for his sins, and for his humiliation on account of them.

And Manasses begat Amon, of Meshullemeth, the daughter of Haruz of Jotbah, 2Ki 21:19. He was a very wicked prince.

And Amon begat Josias, or Josiah of Jedidah, the daughter of Adaiah of Boscath, 2Ki 22:1. He was a very pious king, and was prophesied of by name some hundreds of years before he was born, 1Ki 13:2.

Gill: Mat 1:11 - And Josias begat Jechonias // and his brethren // about the time they were carried away to Babylon And Josias begat Jechonias,.... This Jechonias is the same with Jehoiakim, the son of Josias, called so by Pharaohnecho, when he made him king, whose ...

And Josias begat Jechonias,.... This Jechonias is the same with Jehoiakim, the son of Josias, called so by Pharaohnecho, when he made him king, whose name before was Eliakim, 2Ki 23:34 begat of Zebudah, the daughter of Pedaiah of Rumah, 2Ki 23:36.

and his brethren. These were Johanan, Zedekiah, and Shallum. Two of them were kings, one reigned before him, viz. Shallum, who is called Jehoahaz, 2Ki 23:30 compared with Jer 22:11, the other, viz. Zedekiah, called before Mattaniah, reigned after his son Jehoiakim: these being both kings, is the reason why his brethren are mentioned; as well as to distinguish him from Jechonias in the next verse; who does not appear to have had any brethren: these were

about the time they were carried away to Babylon, which is not to be connected with the word "begat": for Josiah did not beget Jeconiah and his brethren at that time, for he had been dead some years before; nor with Jechonias, for he never was carried away into Babylon, but died in Judea, and slept with his fathers, 2Ki 24:6 but with the phrase "his brethren": and may be rendered thus, supposing τους understood, "which were at", or "about the carrying away to Babylon", or the Babylonish captivity.

Gill: Mat 1:12 - And after they were brought to Babylon // Jechonias begat Salathiel // And Salathiel begat Zorobabel And after they were brought to Babylon,.... Not Jechonias, but the father of Jechonias, and the Jews. Jechonias begat Salathiel. Not Jechonias ment...

And after they were brought to Babylon,.... Not Jechonias, but the father of Jechonias, and the Jews.

Jechonias begat Salathiel. Not Jechonias mentioned in the former verse, but his son, called Jehoiachin, 2Ki 24:6 and Coniah, Jer 22:24 both which are rendered Jechonias by the Septuagint in 2Ch 36:8 and he is so called, 1Ch 3:16. Abulpharagius c calls him Junachir, and says he is the same who in Matthew is called Juchonia; and he asserts him to be the father of Daniel the Prophet. But here a considerable difficulty arises, how he can be said to beget Salathiel, called Shealtiel, Hag 1:1 when he was pronounced "childless", Jer 22:30. To remove which, it may be observed, that the sentence pronounced may be considered with this tacit condition or proviso, if he repented not. Now the Jews have a tradition d that he did repent in prison, upon which the sentence was revoked; but there is no need to suppose this, though it is not an unreasonable supposition; for the sentence does not imply that he should have no children, but rather that he should, as will appear upon reading the whole; "thus saith the Lord, write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days; for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting on the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah". Besides, the Hebrew word ערירי, rendered "childless", comes from ערה, which signifies "to make naked" or "bare" and so denotes not only such as have no children, or are bereft of them, but such as are by any providence stripped of the blessings of life, and are left bare, destitute, and unhappy, as Jechonias and his posterity were: however, the Jews have no reason to find fault with our Evangelist, since Salathiel is expressly called Jechonias's son, 1Ch 3:17 either he was his proper natural son, or, to use their way of speaking, בן מלכות "the son of the kingdom" e, that is, his heir and successor in the kingdom, as some have thought; since it looks as if he was the son of Neri, Luk 3:27 though the chronicle of Jedidaeus of Alexandria f, or Philo the Jew, says, that Jechonias was called Neri, because Ner, or the lamp of David, shined in him, which had been almost extinguished.

And Salathiel begat Zorobabel. This account perfectly agrees with many passages in the Old Testament, where Zorobabel is called the son of Shealtiel or Salathiel, Ezr 3:2 Hag 1:1 which is sufficient to justify the Evangelist in this assertion. There is indeed a difficulty which as much presses the Jews as the Christians, and that is, that Zorobabel is reckoned as the son of Pedaiah, 1Ch 3:19 for the solution of which a noted Jewish commentator g observes, that

"in Haggai, Zachariah and Ezra, Zorobabel is called the son of Shealtiel, because he was his son's son; for Pedaiah was the son of Shealtiel, and Zorobabel the son of Pedaiah; and do not you observe (adds he) that in many places children's children are mentioned as children?''

No doubt there are many instances of this; but to me it seems that Pedaiah was not the son of Shealtiel, but his brother, 1Ch 3:17. And I greatly suspect that Shealtiel had no children of his own, since none are mentioned; and that he adopted his brother Pedaiah's son Zorobabel, and made him his heir and successor in the government of Judah. However, it is certain, as a genealogical writer h among the Jews observes, that he was of the son's sons of Jechonias, king of Judah, from whom our Evangelist makes him to descend.

Gill: Mat 1:13-15 - And Zorobabel begat Abiud // And Abiud begat Eliakim And Zorobabel begat Abiud,.... The children of Zorobabel are said in 1Ch 3:19, to be Meshullam, and Hananiah, and Shelomith their sister, but no menti...

And Zorobabel begat Abiud,.... The children of Zorobabel are said in 1Ch 3:19, to be Meshullam, and Hananiah, and Shelomith their sister, but no mention is made of Abiud: he seems to be the same with Meshullam the eldest son, who might have two names; nor is this unlikely, since it was usual, especially about the time of the Babylonish captivity, for men to have more names than one, as may be observed in Daniel and others, Dan 1:7 where they went by one, and in Judea by another.

And Abiud begat Eliakim, &c. From hence to the 16th verse the genealogy is carried down to Joseph, the husband of Mary; which account must be taken from the genealogical tables of the Jews, to which recourse might be had, and with which it agrees; or otherwise the Jews would have cavilled at it; but I do not find any objections made by them to it. That there were genealogical books or tables kept by the Jews is certain, from the following instances i;

"Simeon ben Azzai says, I found in Jerusalem, מגלת יוחסין, "a volume of genealogies", and there was written in it, &c.''

Again k, says R. Levi,

"they found a "volume of genealogies" in Jerusalem, and there was written in it that Hillell came from David; Ben Jarzaph from Asaph; Ben Tzitzith Hacceseth from Abner; Ben Cobesin from Ahab; Ben Calba Shebuah from Caleb; R. Jannai from Eli; R. Chayah Rabba from the children of Shephatiah, the son of Abital; R. Jose be Rabbi Chelphetha from the children of Jonadab, the son of Rechab; and R. Nehemiah from Nehemiah the Tirshathite.''

Once more l, says R. Chana bar Chanma, when the holy blessed God causes his

"Shechinah to dwell, he does not cause it to dwell but upon families, מיוחסות, "which are genealogized" in Israel.''

Now if Matthew's account had not been true, it might easily have been refuted by these records. The author of the old m Nizzachon takes notice of the close of this genealogy, but finds no fault with it; only that it is carried down to Joseph, and not to Mary; which may be accounted for by a rule of their own n, משפחת אם אינה קרויה משפחת "the mother's family is not called a family", whereas the father's is. It is very remarkable that the Jewish Targum o traces the descent of the Messiah from the family of David in the line of Zorobabel, as Matthew does; and reckons the same number of generations, wanting one, from Zorobabel to the Messiah, as the Evangelist does, from Zorobabel to Jesus; according to Matthew, the genealogy stands thus, Zorobabel, Abiud, Eliakim, Azor, Sadoc, Achim, Eliud, Eleazar, Matthan, Jacob, Joseph, Jesus; and according to the Targum the order is this,

"Zorobabel, Hananiah, Jesaiah, Rephaiah, Arnon, Obadiah, Shecaniah, Shemnigh, Neariah, Elioenai, Anani; this is the king Messiah, who is to be revealed.''

The difference of names may be accounted for by their having two names, as before observed. This is a full proof, that, according to the Jews own account, and expectation, the Messiah must be come many years and ages ago.

Gill: Mat 1:16 - And Jacob begat Joseph // of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ And Jacob begat Joseph,.... According to an old tradition mentioned by p Epiphanins, this Jacob, the father of Joseph, was named Panther, and which na...

And Jacob begat Joseph,.... According to an old tradition mentioned by p Epiphanins, this Jacob, the father of Joseph, was named Panther, and which name perhaps is originally Jewish; and it may be observed, that Joseph is sometimes called by the Jewish writers Pandera q, and Jesus בן פנדירא, the son of Pandira r. It has created some difficulty with interpreters that Jacob should be here said to beget Joseph, when Joseph in Luke is said to be the son of Eli. Some have thought Joseph's father had two names, one was Jacob, and the other Eli; others take them to be two different persons, and suppose that Joseph was the natural son of the one, and the legal son of the other, either by marriage, or by adoption, or by the law of the brother's wife, Deu 25:5. But the truth of the matter is, that not Joseph, but Jesus, is by Luke called the son of Eli, as will be made to appear in its proper place. Joseph, who is here called the husband of Mary, because he not only espoused her, but, upon the advice and encouragement of the Angel, took her to be his wife, was, as is evident by this genealogy, of the house and lineage of David; though a mean and obscure person, and by trade a carpenter. Mary, which is the same name with Miriam in Hebrew, was a poor virgin that dwelt at Nazareth, a city of Galilee; yet also of the family of David, and belonged to the city of Bethlehem;

of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ, or Messiah; being that illustrious person, who was spoken of by the Prophets of the Old Testament under that name, and whom the Jews expected. We may learn from hence, what a low condition the family of David was in, when the true Messiah came; according to ancient prophecy, it was like a stump of a tree, or like to a tree cut down to the root, Isa 11:1 and Christ who sprung from it was like a root out of a dry ground, Isa 53:2. From the whole of this genealogy it appears, that Jesus was of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Judah, and of the family of David; whereby several ancient prophecies have their accomplishment, and therefore he ought to be acknowledged as the true Messiah: and also that he was of the blood royal, and had his descent from the kings of Judah, and was heir apparent to the throne and kingdom of his father David. The Talmudic Jews own that Jesus, or Jesu, as they call him, was put to death because he s, קרוב למלכות היה "was nigh to the kingdom", or nearly related to it. Yea, even in that malicious book t they have written of his life, they represent him as akin to queen Helena, who they say, on that account, would have saved his life. And this was so clear a point, and their forefathers were so thoroughly convinced of this matter, that they would have took him by force and made him a king, Joh 6:15 but his kingdom was to be of another kind, a spiritual, and not a temporal one.

Gill: Mat 1:17 - So all the generations from Abraham // And from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations // And from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations So all the generations from Abraham,.... The Evangelist having traced the genealogy of Christ from Abraham, which he divides into "three" parts, becau...

So all the generations from Abraham,.... The Evangelist having traced the genealogy of Christ from Abraham, which he divides into "three" parts, because of the threefold state of the Jews, "first" under Patriarchs, Prophets, and Judges, "next" under Kings, and "then" under Princes and Priests, gives the sum of each part under its distinct head; "so all the generations", that is, the degrees of generation, or the persons generated from Abraham to David, both being included, "are fourteen generations"; as there were, and no more, and are as follow, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, Phares, Esrom, Aram, Amminadab, Naasson, Salmon, Boaz, Obed, Jesse, David.

And from David until the carrying away into Babylon are fourteen generations. Here David who closed the first division must be excluded this, and it must be observed, that the Evangelist does not say as before, that "all" the generations from David to the captivity were fourteen, for there were seventeen, three kings being omitted by him at once; but, the generations he thought fit to mention, in order to reduce them to a like number as before, and which were sufficient for his purpose, were fourteen; and may be reckoned in this order, Solomon, Roboam, Abia, Asa, Josaphat, Joram, Ozias, Joatham, Achaz, Ezekias, Manasses, Amon, Josias, Jechonias, or Jehoiachin.

And from the carrying away into Babylon unto Christ are fourteen generations. This must be understood as before; for there might be more generations in this interval, but these were enough to answer the design of the Evangelist; and which he thought proper to mention, and may be numbered in this manner; Jechonias, or Jehoiachin, Salathiel, Zorobabel, Abiud, Ehakim, Azor, Sadoc, Achim, Eliud, Eleazar, Matthan, Jacob, Joseph, Christ. This way of reckoning by generations was used by other nations as well as the Jews u, particularly the Grecians; so w Pausanias says,

"From Tharypus to Pyrrhus the son of Achilles, πεντε ανδρων και δεκα εισι γενεαι, were fifteen generations of men.''

And Herodotus x speaking of those who had reigned in Babylon, says, among them were two women, one whose name was Semiramis, who reigned before the other γενεησι πεντε, five generations; many other instances of the like kind might be given.

Gill: Mat 1:18 - Now the birth of Jesus Christ // was on this wise // when as // of the Holy Ghost // found with child // espoused to Joseph // before they came together Now the birth of Jesus Christ,.... The Evangelist having finished the genealogy of Christ, proceeds to give an account of his birth, which includes bo...

Now the birth of Jesus Christ,.... The Evangelist having finished the genealogy of Christ, proceeds to give an account of his birth, which includes both his conception and bringing forth; and which he says

was on this wise, ουτως so, "after this manner", and which was very wonderful and astonishing;

when as, γαρ, for his mother Mary was found with child, not of man, no, not of Joseph her husband; Christ had no real father as man, Joseph was only, as was supposed, his father; but

of the Holy Ghost, according to Luk 1:35. "The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee", &c. and this was done that the human nature of Christ might be clear of original pollution; that so being the immediate produce of the Holy Ghost and without sin, it might be fit for union with the Son of God, and for the office of Mediator he had undertook. When Mary is said to be

found with child, the meaning is, it appeared by evident signs, it was observed by Joseph particularly, who might know not only that she was with child, but with child of the Holy Ghost; by conversation with her, who might relate to him what passed between the Angel and her, Luk 1:28 though it looks as if as yet he did not know this, or at least was not fully satisfied about it; since he had a mind to have put her away, before he was assured of the truth of it, by the appearance of an angel to him. Now Mary's being with child, and its being known, were facts, at the time when she was

espoused to Joseph, and thereby the outward credit both of Mary and Jesus were secured; for had this appeared before the espousals, the Jews would have fixed a brand of infamy on them both; and both the espousals and her being found with child, were

before they came together; that is, before they cohabited together as man and wife, before he brought her home to his own house and bed. The espousals were before they thus came together. It was usual with the Jews first to espouse or betroth, and then to marry, or rather consummate the marriage, by bringing the woman home to her husband's house, between which there was some space of time. The account and manner of betrothing is given by Maimonides y in the following words.

"Before the giving of the law, if a man met a woman in the street, if he would, he might take her, and bring her into his house and marry her between him and herself, and she became his wife; but when the law was given, the Israelites were commanded, that if a man would take a woman he should obtain her before witnesses, and after that she should be his wife, according to Deu 22:13 and these takings are an affirmative command of the law, and are called או אירוסין קידושין "espousals" or "betrothings" in every place; and a woman who is obtained in such a way is called או מאורסת מקודשת "espoused" or "betrothed"; and when a woman is obtained, and becomes מקודשת "espoused", although she is not yet נבעלה "married, nor has entered into her husband's house", yet she is a man's wife.''

And such a distinction between a married woman and a betrothed virgin, which was Mary's case, may be observed in Deu 22:22 moreover, her being found or appearing to be with child, was "before they came together"; which it is likely, as Dr. Lightfoot z observes, was about three months from her conception, when she was returned from her cousin Elizabeth. It is probable that as soon as she was espoused to Joseph, or quickly after, she went and paid her visit to Elizabeth, with whom she stayed about three months, and then returned home, Luk 1:56. Upon her return home, she appears to be with child, with which she had gone three months, a proper time for the discovery of such a matter, Gen 38:24 and which is assigned by the Jewish doctors for this purpose. In the Misna a such a case as this is put,

"If two men should espouse two women, and at the time of their entrance into the bride chamber, the one should be taken for the other--they separate them for three months, because they may prove with child;''

that is, as Bartenora observes upon it,

"they separate them that they may not return to their husbands; and that if they should be with child, they may distinguish between a legitimate and an illegitimate offspring; and that the children which they may bring forth may not be ascribed to the wrong persons.''

Now Mary being gone three months from the time of her espousals to Joseph, and he and she not being yet come together, it was a clear case, that the child she was gone three months with, was none of his; hence it follows,

Gill: Mat 1:19 - Then Joseph her husband // being a just man // and not willing to make her a public example // was minded to put her away privily Then Joseph her husband,.... To whom she had been betrothed, and who was her husband, and she his wife according to the Jewish law, Deu 22:23 though n...

Then Joseph her husband,.... To whom she had been betrothed, and who was her husband, and she his wife according to the Jewish law, Deu 22:23 though not yet come together,

being a just man, observant of the law of God, particularly that which respected adultery, being wholly good and chaste, like the Patriarch of the same name; a character just the reverse of that which the Jews give him, in their scandalous b book of the life of Jesus; where, in the most malicious manner, they represent him as an unchaste and an unrighteous person:

and not willing to make her a public example, or to deliver her, i.e. to the civil magistrate, according to Munster's Hebrew edition. The Greek word signifies to punish by way of example to others, to deter them from sinning; and with the ancients it c denoted the greatest and severest punishment. Here it means either bringing her before the civil magistrate, in order to her being punished according to the law in Deu 22:23 which requires the person to be brought out to the gate of the city and stoned with stones, which was making a public example indeed; or divorcing her in a very public manner, and thereby expose her to open shame and disgrace. To prevent which, he being tender and compassionate, though strictly just and good,

was minded to put her away privily: he deliberately consulted and determined within himself to dismiss her, or put her away by giving her a bill of divorce, in a very private manner; which was sometimes done by putting it into the woman's hand or bosom, see Deu 24:1. In Munster's Hebrew Gospel it is rendered, "it was in his heart to forsake her privately."

Gill: Mat 1:20 - But while he thought on these things // behold the Angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream // Joseph 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 Ghost But while he thought on these things,.... While he was revolving them in his mind, considering what was most fit and proper to be done, whether to dis...

But while he thought on these things,.... While he was revolving them in his mind, considering what was most fit and proper to be done, whether to dismiss her publicly or privately; while he was consulting within himself the glory of God, the peace of his own conscience, and the credit of Mary,

behold the Angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream; probably the same Angel which appeared to Zacharias, and brought him tidings that his wife should have a son, and who also appeared to Mary, and acquainted her that she should conceive, and bring forth the Messiah, Whose name was Gabriel, Luk 1:11. If we will believe the Jews, this Angel must be Gabriel, since he is the Angel who they say d דממנא על חלמא "is appointed over dreams"; for he appeared to

Joseph in a dream, which is one of the ways and methods in which the Lord, or an Angel of his, has appeared to the saints formerly, and has answered them, see Gen 31:11 and is reckoned by the Jews e one of the degrees or kinds of prophecy: and so the Angel here not only encourages Joseph to take to him his wife,

saying Joseph, thou son of David; which is said partly to attest his being of the house and lineage of David, and partly to raise his expectations and confirm his faith, that his wife should bring forth the promised son of David; and chiefly to engage his attention to what he was about to say,

fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife; do not be afraid either that thou shalt offend the Lord, or bring any reproach or scandal upon thyself as if thou didst connive at an adulteress; but as she is thine espoused wife, solemnly betrothed to thee, take her home to thyself, live with her as thy wife, and openly avow her as such. To which he is encouraged by the following reason or argument,

for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost; she has not been guilty of any criminal conversation with men; this conception of her's is of the Holy Ghost, and entirely owing to his coming upon her, and overshadowing her in a wonderful and miraculous manner. I say, the Angel not only encourages Joseph after this manner, but delivers something to him by way of prophecy, in the following verse.

Gill: Mat 1:21 - And she shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Jesus. // for he shall save his people from their sins And she shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Jesus. For though she was with child, it could not be known any otherwise than by predic...

And she shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Jesus. For though she was with child, it could not be known any otherwise than by prediction or divine revelation, that she should have a son, whose name should be called Jesus; a name of the same signification with Joshua and Hosea, and may be interpreted a "Saviour", Act 13:23 for the word ישוע Jesus, comes from ישע which signifies "to save." And to this agrees the reason of the name given by the Angel,

for he shall save his people from their sins. The salvation here ascribed to him, and for which he is every way fit, being God as well as man, and which he is the sole author of, is to be understood, not of a temporal, but of a spiritual and everlasting salvation; such as was prophesied of, Isa 45:17 and which old Jacob had in his view, when he said, "I have waited for thy salvation, O Lord", Gen 49:18 which by the Jewish f Targumist is paraphrased thus:

"Jacob said when he saw Gideon the son of Joash, and Samson the son of Manoah, that they would rise up to be saviours, not for the salvation of Gideon do I wait, nor for the salvation of Samson do I look, for their salvation is דשעתא פורקן "a temporary salvation"; but for thy salvation, O Lord, do I wait and look, for thy salvation is פורקן עלמין "an everlasting salvation", or (according to another copy) but for the salvation of Messiah the son of David, who shall save the children of Israel, and bring them out of captivity, for thy salvation my soul waiteth.''

By "his people" whom he is said to save are meant, not all mankind, though they are his by creation and preservation, yet they are not, nor will they be all saved by him spiritually and eternally; nor also the people of the Jews, for though they were his nation, his kinsmen, and so his own people according to the flesh, yet they were not all saved by him; many of them died in their sins, and in the disbelief of him as the Messiah: but by them are meant all the elect of God, whether Jews or Gentiles, who were given to him by his Father, as a peculiar people, and who are made willing in the day of his power upon them, to be saved by him in his own way. And these he saves from "their sins", from all their sins, original and actual; from secret and open sins; from sins of heart, lip and life; from sins of omission and commission; from all that is in sin, and omission upon it; from the guilt, punishment, and damning power of it, by his sufferings and death; and from the tyrannical government of it by his Spirit and grace; and will at last save them from the being of it, though not in this life, yet hereafter, in the other world, when they shall be without spot or wrinkle, or any such thing.

Gill: Mat 1:22 - Now all this was done // that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the Prophet Now all this was done,.... These are not the words of the Angel, but of the Evangelist; observing that Mary's being with child of the Holy Ghost, and ...

Now all this was done,.... These are not the words of the Angel, but of the Evangelist; observing that Mary's being with child of the Holy Ghost, and her conception in such an extraordinary manner, whilst a pure virgin, before she and Joseph came together, who though espoused to him, was untouched by him, were all brought about in this way, and with such circumstances,

that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the Prophet; that is, the Prophet Isaiah, and so some copies read. The passage referred to is in Isa 7:14 what is there spoken was by divine inspiration; it was spoken of the Lord by the Prophet; the Spirit of the Lord spake by him. Prophets and holy men formerly, spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost; so that what they said is to be looked upon as the word of God. Now between the prophecy of Isaiah referred to, and the fact here recorded by the Evangelist, is an entire agreement: the prophecy shows the will, counsel, and determination of God about this matter; the accomplishment of it, the faithfulness and veracity of God in his word; the prediction declares that the thing would be, and the thing itself was done, that what was spoken might be fulfilled; not merely by way of accommodation, or in a typical and mystical, but in a strict, proper and literal sense.

Gill: Mat 1:23 - Behold, a virgin shall be with child // and they shall call his name Emmanuel // being interpreted is God with us Behold, a virgin shall be with child,.... These words are rightly applied to the virgin Mary and her son Jesus, for of no other can they be understood...

Behold, a virgin shall be with child,.... These words are rightly applied to the virgin Mary and her son Jesus, for of no other can they be understood; not of Ahaz's wife and his son Hezekiah, who was already born, and must be eleven or twelve years of age when these words were spoken; nor of any other son of Ahaz by her or any other person since no other was Lord of Judea; nor of the wife of Isaiah, and any son of his, who never had any that was king of Judah. The prophecy is introduced here as in Isaiah with a "behold!" not only to raise and fix the attention, but to denote that it was something wonderful and extraordinary which was about to be related; and is therefore called אות a "sign", wonder, or miracle; which lay not, as some Jewish writers g affirm, in this, that the person spoken of was unfit for conception at the time of the prophecy, since no such thing is intimated; or in this, that it should be a son and not a daughter h, which is foretold; for the wonder lies not in the truth of the prediction, but in the extraordinariness of the thing predicted; much less in this i, that the child should eat butter and honey as soon as born; since nothing is more natural and common with new born infants, than to take in any sort of liquids which are sweet and pleasant. But the sign or wonder lay in this, that a "virgin" should "conceive" or "be with child"; for the Evangelist is to be justified in rendering, עלמה by παρθενος "a virgin"; by the Septuagint having so rendered it some hundreds of years before him, by the sense of the word, which comes from עלם and which signifies to "hide" or "cover"; virgins being such who are unknown to, and not uncovered by men, and in the Eastern countries were kept recluse from the company and conversation of men; and by the use of the word in all other places, Gen 24:43. The last of these texts the Jews triumph in, as making for them, and against us, but without any reason; since it does not appear that the "maid" and the "adulterous woman" are one and the same person; and if they were, the vitiated woman might be called a maid or virgin, according to her own account of herself, or in the esteem of others who knew her not, or as antecedent to her defilement; see Deu 22:28. Besides, could this be understood of any young woman married or unmarried, that had known a man, it would be no wonder, no surprising thing that she should "conceive" or "be with child", and "bring forth a son". It is added,

and they shall call his name Emmanuel. The difference between Isaiah and Matthew is very inconsiderable, it being in the one "thou shalt call", that is, thou virgin shalt call him by this name; and in the other "they shall call", that is, Joseph, Mary, and others; for, besides that some copies read the text in Matthew χαλεσεις "thou shalt call", the words both in the one and the other may be rendered impersonally, "and shall be called"; and the meaning is, not that he should be commonly known and called by such a name, any more than by any, or all of those mentioned in Isa 9:6, but only that he should be so, which is a frequent use of the word; or he should be that, and so accounted by others, which answers to the signification of this name, which the Evangelist says,

being interpreted is God with us: for it is a compound word of אל "God" and עמנו "with us", and well agrees with Jesus, who is God in our nature, the word that was made flesh and dwelt among us. Joh 1:14, and is the one and only Mediator between God and us, 1Ti 2:5 k. So the Septuagint interpret the word in Isa 8:8.

Gill: Mat 1:24 - Then Joseph being raised from sleep // did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him // took unto him his wife Then Joseph being raised from sleep,.... That is, being awaked out of sleep, του υπνου "that sleep", into which he either naturally fell, whil...

Then Joseph being raised from sleep,.... That is, being awaked out of sleep, του υπνου "that sleep", into which he either naturally fell, whilst he was meditating on the affair of Mary's being with child; or rather into which he was cast by the Lord, on purpose that he might have a revelation of the will of God to him in a dream; and rising up from his bed or place where he was, immediately and without any delay,

did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him; firmly believing that it was a messenger of God that was sent to him, and that this matter was of the Lord. Wherefore he

took unto him his wife, that is, he publicly married her, whom he had before espoused, took her to his house, or continued her there, lived with her as his wife, and owned her to be such, and henceforwards had no more thoughts of putting her away.

Gill: Mat 1:25 - And knew her not // till she had brought forth her firstborn // Joseph knew her not till she had brought forth And knew her not,.... Or "but he knew her not", και answering to the Hebrew ו that is, had carnal knowledge of her, or copulation with her, though...

And knew her not,.... Or "but he knew her not", και answering to the Hebrew ו that is, had carnal knowledge of her, or copulation with her, though his wife. The words are an euphemism, or a modest way of expressing the conjugal act, and is a very ancient one, see Gen 4:1 and what has been used in nations and languages. And this conduct of his was necessary,

till she had brought forth her firstborn; that it might be manifest not only that she conceived, being a virgin, but also that she brought forth, being a virgin: for both are signified in the prophecy before related, "a virgin shall conceive and bring forth a son"; which is all one as if it had been said, a virgin shall conceive, and "a virgin" shall bring forth a son. The "firstborn" is that which first opens the womb of its mother, whether any follows after or not, Exo 13:12. Christ is called Mary's firstborn, because she had none before him, whether she had any after him or not; for her perpetual virginity seems to be no necessary article of faith: for when it is said,

Joseph knew her not till she had brought forth, the meaning is certain that he knew her not before. But whether he afterwards did or not, is not so manifest, nor is it a matter of any great importance; the word "until" may be so understood as referring to the time preceding, that the contrary cannot be affirmed of the time following, 2Sa 6:23 and which may be the case here, and is indeed generally understood so; and it also may be considered as only expressive of the intermediate time, as in Mat 5:26 as Beza observes. Christ was "her firstborn" as he was man, and the firstborn of God, or his first and only begotten, as the Son of God. It is further observed, that she "called his name Jesus", as was foretold to her, or ordered her by the Angel, Luk 1:31 and to Joseph, Mat 1:21.

buka semua
Tafsiran/Catatan -- Catatan Ayat / Catatan Kaki

NET Notes: Mat 1:1 Grk “the book of the genealogy.” The noun βίβλος (biblo"), though it is without the article, is to be t...

NET Notes: Mat 1:2 Grk “fathered.”

NET Notes: Mat 1:6 By the wife of Uriah, i.e., Bathsheba (cf. 2 Sam 11:3).

NET Notes: Mat 1:7 The reading ᾿Ασάφ (Asaf), a variant spelling on ᾿Ασά (Asa), is found in the earliest and most widesprea...

NET Notes: Mat 1:10 ᾿Αμώς (Amws) is the reading found in the earliest and best witnesses (א B C [Dluc] γ δ θ Ë1 33 pc...

NET Notes: Mat 1:11 Before the mention of Jeconiah, several medieval mss add Jehoiakim, in conformity with the genealogy in 1 Chr 3:15-16. But this alters the count of fo...

NET Notes: Mat 1:12 The Greek text and the KJV read Salathiel. Most modern English translations use the OT form of the name (cf. Ezra 3:2).

NET Notes: Mat 1:16 The term χριστός (cristos) was originally an adjective (“anointed”), developing in LXX into a substanti...

NET Notes: Mat 1:17 See the note on Christ in 1:16.

NET Notes: Mat 1:18 The connotation of the Greek is “before they came together in marital and domestic union” (so BDAG 970 s.v. συνέρ...

NET Notes: Mat 1:19 In the Jewish context, “full betrothal was so binding that its breaking required a certificate of divorce, and the death of one party made the o...

NET Notes: Mat 1:20 Or “the angel of the Lord.” Linguistically, “angel of the Lord” is the same in both testaments (and thus, he is either “...

NET Notes: Mat 1:21 The Greek form of the name Ihsous, which was translated into Latin as Jesus, is the same as the Hebrew Yeshua (Joshua), which means “Yahweh save...

NET Notes: Mat 1:23 An allusion to Isa 8:8, 10 (LXX).

NET Notes: Mat 1:24 See the note on the word “Lord” in 1:20. Here the translation “the angel of the Lord” is used because the Greek article (̠...

NET Notes: Mat 1:25 Grk “and he called his name Jesus.” The coordinate clause has been translated as a relative clause in English for stylistic reasons.

Geneva Bible: Mat 1:1 The ( 1 ) ( a ) book of the ( b ) generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the ( c ) son of Abraham. ( 1 ) Jesus Christ came of Abraham of the t...

Geneva Bible: Mat 1:11 and Josias begat ( d ) Jechonias and his brethren, at the time of the carrying away of Babylon. ( d ) That is, the captivity fell in the days of Jaki...

Geneva Bible: Mat 1:17 All ( e ) the generations, therefore, from Abraham to David [were] fourteen generations; and from David until the carrying away of Babylon, fourteen g...

Geneva Bible: Mat 1:18 Now the birth of ( 2 ) Jesus Christ was thus: His mother, Mary, that is, having been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was found to ...

Geneva Bible: Mat 1:20 but while he pondered on these things, behold, an angel of [the] Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, Joseph, son of David, fear not to ( f ) take...

Geneva Bible: Mat 1:21 And she shall bring forth ( 3 ) a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save ( i ) his people from their sins. ( 3 ) Christ is born o...

Geneva Bible: Mat 1:23 Behold, a ( k ) virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with u...

Geneva Bible: Mat 1:25 And knew her not ( l ) till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS. ( l ) The word "till", in the Hebrew language, giv...

buka semua
Tafsiran/Catatan -- Catatan Rentang Ayat

Maclaren: Mat 1:1-16 - A Libation To Jehovah Matthew's Genealogy Of Jesus Christ The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. 2. Abraham begat Isaac; and Isa...

Maclaren: Mat 1:18-25 - A Libation To Jehovah The Nativity Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as His mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found...

Maclaren: Mat 1:21 - A Libation To Jehovah The Name Above Every Name Thou shalt call His name JESUS: for He shall save His people from their sins.'--Matt. 1:21. I. The Historical A...

MHCC: Mat 1:1-17 - --Concerning this genealogy of our Saviour, observe the chief intention. It is not a needless genealogy. It is not a vain-glorious one, as those of grea...

MHCC: Mat 1:18-25 - --Let us look to the circumstances under which the Son of God entered into this lower world, till we learn to despise the vain honours of this world, wh...

Matthew Henry: Mat 1:1-17 - -- Concerning this genealogy of our Saviour, observe, I. The title of it. It is the book (or the account, as the Hebrew word sepher, a book, someti...

Matthew Henry: Mat 1:18-25 - -- The mystery of Christ's incarnation is to be adored, not pried into. If we know not the way of the Spirit in the formation of common persons, nor ...

Barclay: Mat 1:1-17 - "THE LINEAGE OF THE KING" It might seem to a modern reader that Matthew chose an extraordinary way in which to begin his gospel; and it might seem daunting to present right at...

Barclay: Mat 1:1-17 - "THE THREE STAGES" There is something symbolic of the whole of human life in the way in which this pedigree is arranged. It is arranged in three sections, and the thre...

Barclay: Mat 1:1-17 - "THE REALIZATION OF MEN'S DREAMS" This passage stresses two special things about Jesus. (i) It stresses the fact that he was the son of David. It was, indeed, mainly to prove this t...