Mateus 1
A.T. Robertson · Citado em PreceptAustin
Mateus 1
Robertson on son - 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 (Ro 8:14; Ro 9:26; Gal. 3:26; Gal 4:5–7) Related Resources: What is the Davidic covenant? The Fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant THE SON OF ABRAHAM Son of Abraham is not a frequently used phrase, occurring only here as a title of Messiah and used in Luke 3:34+ and Luke 19:8+ in non-messianic contexts. Nevertheless Matthew does mention Abraham elsewhere (Mt 1:2, 17; Mt 3:9; Mt 8:11; Mt 22:32). Clearly Abraham is the one whose status in God’s Kingdom is unquestionable. In fact he is so prominent that the Christ rejecting Jewish leaders appeal to their lineage from Abraham as validation to their beliefs/religion. For example Matthew records the John the Baptist warning to "the Pharisees and Sadducees" (Mt 3:7+) declaring "do not suppose that you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham for our father’; for I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham." (Mt 3:9+; see similar appeals to the name Abraham including the rich man in Hades in Lu 16:24+. See Jews who had professed Jesus in Jn 8:30 but did not truly believe in Him - Jn 8:33-38,39,40, 51-53, cf Ro 4:1-2+). The son of Abraham - Obviously if Jesus was the Son of David it goes without saying He was also the son of Abraham. "Father" Abraham marks the beginning of the nation of the Jewish nation of Israel. In first century Israel, the Jews felt that they participated in the merits of Abraham, which made their prayers acceptable, helped in war, expiated sins, appeased the wrath of God, and assured a share in God's eternal kingdom. John the Baptist shattered their false beliefs declaring the absolute necessity of personal repentance "Therefore bear fruit in keeping with repentance; and do not suppose that you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham for our father’; for I say to you that from these stones God is able to raise up children to Abraham." (Mt 3:8-9+) Jesus said the same thing when the Jews "said to Him, “Abraham is our father....“If you are Abraham’s children, do the deeds of Abraham. But as it is, you are seeking to kill Me, a man who has told you the truth, which I heard from God; this Abraham did not do." (Jn 8:39-40) And as Paul would later add "be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham." (Gal 3:7+) Abraham -Luke 3:8, 8. Lk 1:55, 73. 13:16, 28. 16:22, 23, 24, 25, 29, 30. 19:9. 20:37. Mt 1:1, 2, 17. 3:9, 9. 8:11. 22:32. Mk 12:26. Jn 8:33, 37, 39, 39, 40, 52, 53, 56, 57, 58. Ac 3:13, 25. 7:2, 16, 17, 32. 13:26. Ro 4:1, 2, 3, 9, 12, 13, 16. 9:7. 11:1. 2 Co 11:22. Ga 3:6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 16, 18, 29. 4:22. He 2:16. 6:13. 7:1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 9. 11:8, 17. Ja 2:21, 23. 1 P 3:6. Ge 17:5. Ge 12:3. 21:3, 22:18. 26:4. 28:14. Mt 1:1. Lk 1:54, 55. Jn 11:51, 52. Ac 3:25. Ro 4:13. Ga 3:8, 16. Brian Bill on Abraham - That means that Jesus was Jewish, and like Abraham, who surrendered all, He is the supreme servant. Abraham was promised that through his bloodline would come forth someone who would bless all nations in Genesis 22:18: “And through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me.” The lineage of the Lord is traced back to Abraham and at the same time, Jesus said in John 8:58 that He is eternal: “Before Abraham was born, I am!” He is fully God and fully man. Galatians 3:16 makes it clear that the offspring of Abraham was Jesus: “The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say ‘and to seeds,’ meaning many people, but ‘and to your seed,’ meaning one person, who is Christ.” D A Carson on why Matthew mentions son of Abraham - Abraham is mentioned for several important reasons. "Son of Abraham" may have been a recognized messianic title in some branches of Judaism (cf. T Levi 8:15). The covenant with the Jewish people had first been made with Abraham (Ge 12:1-3; Ge 17:7; Ge 22:18), a connection Paul sees as basic to Christianity (Gal 3:16). More important, Genesis 22:18 had promised that through Abraham's offspring "all nations" (panta ta ethne, LXX) would be blessed; so with this allusion to Abraham, Matthew is preparing his readers for the final words of this offspring from Abraham—the commission to make disciples of "all nations" (Mt 28:19, panta ta ethnē). Jesus the Messiah came in fulfillment of the kingdom promises to David and of the Gentile-blessings promises to Abraham (cf. also Matt 3:9; 8:11). (Ibid) Related Resources: What is the Abrahamic Covenant? Covenant: Abrahamic versus Mosaic Covenant: Abrahamic vs Old vs New Fulfillment Of The Abrahamic Covenant Ray Pritchard comments that the relative anonymity of Matthew chapter 1 is "like the story of the man who was asked to write a review of the phone book. His summary: “Great cast of characters. Weak plot.” That’s the way we feel when we examine Matthew 1: “Great cast of characters. Weak plot.” Unless you happen to know the Old Testament. But even that may not help you because some of the names in Matthew 1 are completely unknown to us—particularly the ones in the last few verses. Since most of these men lived in the intertestamental period, we know nothing about them except their names. If you are familiar with the King James Version, you remember that the word “begat” is used instead of the phrase “the father of.” “Abraham begat Isaac, Isaac begat Jacob, Jacob begat Judah,” and so on. That strange word has given rise to many strange interpretations. One day a little boy came home from Sunday School excited about his lesson. When his mother asked him what he had learned, the little boy replied, “I learned all the “forgots” of the Bible.” “What do you mean?” “You know, Abraham forgot Isaac, Isaac forgot Jacob, and Jacob forgot Judah.... We routinely skip it in order to get to the “good stuff.” But the Jews of the first century would be quite surprised by our attitude. To them the genealogy would have been an absolutely essential setting for the story of Jesus’ birth. The Jews routinely paid close attention to questions of genealogy. For instance, whenever land was bought or sold, the genealogical records were consulted to insure that land belonging to one tribe was not being sold to members of another tribe—and thus destroying the integrity of the ancient tribal boundaries. You couldn’t just put the money down and take the deed. You also had to prove that your ancestors came from the same tribe. Genealogy was also crucial in determining the priesthood. The law specified that the priests must come from the tribe of Levi. Genealogy also helped determine the line of heirship to the throne. That helps explain why Ezra 2 and Nehemiah 7 contain lengthy listings of the various people returning from captivity. As the Jews re-established themselves in Israel, it was crucial that they know which families had historically held which positions in the nation. But that same principle applies directly to the Christmas story. “In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world … And everyone went to his own town to register.” (Luke 2:1, 3+) That meant that each man must return to his ancestral hometown—the town from which his family had originally come. But the only way you could be sure about your ancestral hometown was to know your genealogy. Which is why Mary and Joseph had to travel from Nazareth to Bethlehem in the ninth month of her pregnancy. They had to make that long and dangerous journey because Bethlehem was Joseph’s ancestral hometown—a fact they knew from studying their genealogy.” (Four Women in Jesus' Family Tree). Brian Bill - While some people, like the Krank’s want to skip Christmas, many of us are tempted to skip at least part of the Christmas story each year. When we come to the very first book of the New Testament, Matthew begins with a long list of hard-to-pronounce names. You would think he would begin the exciting news of Immanuel’s birth with more of a bang. It’s like the man who was asked to write a review of the phone book. This was his summary: “Great cast of characters. Weak plot.” That’s a bit how Matthew 1 sounds to many of us. Why would he begin the most important story in the history of the world like this? This is probably the least read section of the New Testament because it seems devotionally dry and maybe even boring. How many of you have skipped over this list before or just skimmed right past it? You’re not alone. The names in this passage make up Jesus’ family tree. Actually, we could say that this is the very first “Christmas Tree.” Before we jump into this section of Scripture, let’s remind ourselves that there is great benefit in studying every part of the Bible. Even though this passage is piled up with people who are long gone, it’s important to come to grips with this genealogy. 2 Timothy 3:16 says, “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.” (Matthew 1:1-17 The Forgotten Family Tree) And like someone else said, this tree has a lot of "knots" (so to speak) in it! Related Resources: What is the relevance of the genealogies in the Bible? What does it mean that Jesus is the son of David? ILLUSTRATION - RECENTLY I LISTENED to a fascinating talk by Marvin Rosenthal, a Jewish convert to Christianity. He shared how Matthew’s genealogy was one of the proofs that persuaded him that Jesus is the Messiah. To explain what he meant Rosenthal used a helpful analogy from his experience as a U.S. Marine many decades ago. At the rifle range, he and his fellow soldiers would practice their aim by shooting at a target from three distances—200, 300, and 500 yards. From that distance they couldn’t always tell by the naked eye if their bullets hit the target or not. So, in order to determine their accuracy, one of the soldiers would hide down in a nine-foot ravine behind the target until he heard ten shots. Then he would get up and check the sharpness of the shooter. He would add up the score and relay the results by slipping a colored disk onto the end of a pole and raising it up high. The color of the disk would communicate the shooter’s accuracy. If you missed the target completely, a big flag would be waved, a military way of saying, “You ought to be embarrassed!” Yet, for each bull’s-eye a red disk would be secured to the pole and the pole would go up and down. So if you were six out of ten, the pole would go up and down six times. Now, if you hit the bull’s-eye ten times out of ten, that same pole and red disk would simply be spun around once. Rosenthal goes on to say that, especially for a Jewish audience (who understands the significance and the necessity of genealogical records), Matthew’s genealogy hits the bull’s-eye ten times out of ten. (Kent Hughes) Question: Why are Jesus' genealogies in Matthew and Luke so different? - Gotquestions.org Answer: Jesus' genealogy is given in two places in Scripture: Matthew 1 and Luke 3:23-38. Matthew traces the genealogy from Jesus to Abraham. Luke traces the genealogy from Jesus to Adam. However, there is good reason to believe that Matthew and Luke are in fact tracing entirely different genealogies. For example, Matthew gives Joseph's father as Jacob (Matthew 1:16), while Luke gives Joseph's father as Heli (Luke 3:23). Matthew traces the line through David's son Solomon (Matthew 1:6), while Luke traces the line through David's son Nathan (Luke 3:31). In fact, between David and Jesus, the only names the genealogies have in common are Shealtiel and Zerubbabel (Matthew 1:12; Luke 3:27). Some point to these differences as evidence of errors in the Bible. However, the Jews were meticulous record keepers, especially in regard to genealogies. It is inconceivable that Matthew and Luke could build two entirely contradictory genealogies of the same lineage. Again, from David through Jesus, the genealogies are completely different. Even the reference to Shealtiel and Zerubbabel likely refer to different individuals of the same names. Matthew gives Shealtiel's father as Jeconiah while Luke gives Shealtiel's father as Neri. It would be normal for a man named Shealtiel to name his son Zerubbabel in light of the famous individuals of those names (see the books of Ezra and Nehemiah). One explanation, held by the church historian Eusebius, is that Matthew is tracing the primary, or biological, lineage while Luke is taking into account an occurrence of “levirate marriage.” If a man died without having any sons, it was tradition for the man’s brother to marry the widow and have a son who would carry on the deceased man’s name. According to Eusebius’s theory, Melchi (Luke 3:24) and Matthan (Matthew 1:15) were married at different times to the same woman (tradition names her Estha). This would make Heli (Luke 3:23) and Jacob (Matthew 1:15) half-brothers. Heli then died without a son, and so his (half-)brother Jacob married Heli’s widow, who gave birth to Joseph. This would make Joseph the “son of Heli” legally and the “son of Jacob” biologically. Thus, Matthew and Luke are both recording the same genealogy (Joseph’s), but Luke follows the legal lineage while Matthew follows the biological. Most conservative Bible scholars today take a different view, namely, that Luke is recording Mary’s genealogy and Matthew is recording Joseph’s. Matthew is following the line of Joseph (Jesus’ legal father), through David’s son Solomon, while Luke is following the line of Mary (Jesus’ blood relative), through David’s son Nathan. Since there was no Greek word for “son-in-law,” Joseph was called the “son of Heli” by marriage to Mary, Heli’s daughter. Through either Mary’s or Joseph’s line, Jesus is a descendant of David and therefore eligible to be the Messiah. Tracing a genealogy through the mother’s side is unusual, but so was the virgin birth. Luke’s explanation is that Jesus was the son of Joseph, “so it was thought” (Luke 3:23). (Gotquestions.org) John Kitto - The Genealogies—Matthew 1:1–17; Luke 3:23–38 There are two genealogies of Jesus in the gospels,—one given by Matthew, the other by Luke. The object of both is to show that, according to the flesh, the holy child was lineally descended from King David. This fact was often asserted in our Lord’s lifetime, and never denied by the Jews,—as they would have been glad to have done had it been in their power. But the case was too plain, being no doubt attested by the genealogical lists of the family preserved at Bethlehem. Indeed, the fact was so notorious, that Jesus was frequently addressed by strangers as “the son of David;” and the public knowledge of this circumstance should always be borne in mind in reading the Gospel history, since it materially affected the relations in which He appeared, and the point of view in which He was regarded by the people. Even apart from the Messiahship which was to be in that line, any member of the house of David, who came forward in a prominent character, would be an object of attention and solicitude, as possessing certain hereditary claims to the temporal sovereignty; and there can be no doubt, looking to the circumstances of times, and the unpopularity of the government, that the people would have thrown themselves heart and soul into any feasible, or indeed unfeasible, attempt to restore that ancient and popular line. Indeed, although our Lord was always careful to let it be understood that his kingdom was not of this world, there was a time, and perhaps more than one time, when the people would have taken Him by force and made Him their king, had He not withdrawn himself from public view. Hence, also, the dangerous malignancy of the charge eventually made against Him, that He aspired to be a king,—which would have been simply ridiculous, had not the fact of his being of the royal house of David given political significance to the charge; and had it not been true, that a claim to reign on the part of an already renowned member of that illustrious house, would have stirred the heart of the nation, from Dan to Beersheba. It is true, however, and is evinced by the position of Joseph and Mary, that the families tracing their descent from the house of David had fallen into poverty, and also into neglect,—except in so far as their hopes of producing, at no distant day, “the desire of all nations,” were recognized. When, after the return from the Babylonish captivity, the sovereignty had been assumed, first, by the high priests of Levitical descent; subsequently, by the Asmonean family, and finally, by the house of Herod, of Idumaean origin, but engrafted into the Maccabean line by the marriage of Herod with Mariamne, it was the most obvious policy to leave in the obscurity into which they had sunk that race, which, if it should produce any pretendant of the least distinction, might advance an hereditary claim, as dear to the people as it would be dangerous to the reigning dynasty. The whole descendants of the royal race seem to have sunk so low, that even the popular belief which looked to the line of David as that from which the Messiah was to spring, did not invest them with sufficient importance to awaken the jealousy or suspicion of the rulers. The fact, that the descent of Jesus from David could be established by registers, and the presence of two such minute pedigrees as those of Matthew and Luke, evince that the Jews were, up to this time, still careful in the registration of family descents. The division of the whole Hebrew nation into tribes, and the allotment to each tribe, and to every family in each tide, of its distinct portion of territory, as an inalienable possession, rendered it indispensable that genealogical tables should be preserved. It might seem that the disturbance of this arrangement occasioned by the captivity, or rather by the fact that only two of the twelve tribes returned from Babylon, would impair this motive. But the rabbis assure us, that from that time they became still more careful in registering their genealogies—with immediate reference, doubtless, to the expectation of the Messiah—but with the ulterior object, in the purposes of the Divine providence, of preserving means for the establishment of the exact fulfillment of the predictions respecting his parentage. That such registers existed to even a later date is shown by Josephus, who declared that he traced his own descent in the tribe of Levi by public registers; and he expressly informs that, however dispersed and dispossessed his nation were, they never failed to have exact genealogical tables prepared from the authentic documents which were kept at Jerusalem; and that in all their sufferings they were particularly careful to preserve these tables, which were renewed from time to time. Since, however, the period of their destruction as a nation by the Romans, all their tables of descent seem to be lost, and now they are utterly unable to trace the pedigree of any one Israelite who might lay claim to be their promised, and still expected Messiah. These considerations are more important than they may seem at first view; as they show that, genealogical registers being still kept by the Jews, means existed for testing the claims of descent which any one might make; for rendering the fabrication of a genealogy impossible; and (apart from the question of inspiration) of furnishing the materials for the pedigrees which the evangelists have given,—thus meeting the objections of recent misbelievers who have ventured to insinuate, that no materials for such genealogies then existed among the Jews; and that they were made up—that is, fabricated—to produce a correspondence with the prophecies, which required that the Messiah should be of the line of David. But the two genealogies are materially different. They coincide until David, when Matthew takes the reigning line whereas Luke takes the younger and inferior line by David’s son Nathan. They concur, indeed, in Salathiel and Zorobabel, at the time of the captivity; but then diverge again, and even at the close the difference is maintained, for Matthew makes Joseph the son of Jacob, whereas Luke represents him as the son of Heli, or Eli. He could not have been naturally the son of both these persons; and the essential differences in the two lines of descent allows no satisfactory solution in the idea, that Jacob and Heli are different names for the same person. They are obviously two different genealogies from the common ancestor David. This being the case, there can be little doubt that the genealogy of Matthew is that of Joseph, and the one of Luke that of Mary,—the former being the legal, and the latter the real genealogy of Jesus. Indeed, Luke seems to have indicated his meaning as clearly as could be, consistently with the absence of a woman’s name in a pedigree, by distinguishing the real from the legal genealogy, in a parenthetical remark,—“Jesus being (as was reputed) the son of Joseph (but in reality) the son of Heli,” or his grandson by the mother’s side; for so the ellipsis should be supplied. Furthermore, Mary is always called by the Jews “the daughter of Heli;” and by the early Christian writers, “the daughter of Joakim and Anna.” Now, Joakim and Eliakim (as different names in Hebrew for God) are sometimes interchanged; so that Heli or Eli is an abridged form of Eliakim, interchanged for Joakim. These observations may suffice to indicate the heads of a discussion involving much curious matter, tending, as all discussion does, in the long run, to the vindication of the sacred writers, even in those of their statements that may, at the first view, seem the most inconsistent. One of the lines is, therefore, the natural and legal line of Joseph’s descent; and the other that of a reputed line, arising from his adoption by the father assigned to him in it, or by his marriage with the daughter. An adopted son inherited all the rights of a natural son. If, therefore, a man had a daughter only, the person who married her became virtually his son, and, as such, was reckoned in the genealogy,—so that, although descents could not be reckoned by females, yet the name of a man who had only a daughter was not lost in Israel, as the husband assumed his wife’s genealogy, and took his place in the roll as the son of her father. The conclusion then, is, that one of these genealogies is that of Joseph, and the other that of his wife Mary,—both lines being preserved to show definitely, that Jesus was, in the most full and perfect sense, a descendant of David; not only by law in the royal line of kings through his reputed father, but by direct personal descent through his mother. (Daily Bible Illustrations) HUMOROUS ILLUSTRATION - The manager of a large office noticed a new employee and asked, “What’s your name?” The worker replied, “John.” The manager scowled and said, “Look, I don’t know where you worked before, but I don’t call anyone by their first name. It breeds familiarity and that leads to a breakdown in authority. I refer to my employees by their last name only…Smith, Jones, Baker…you got it? I’m to be referred to as Mr. Robertson. Now that we’ve got that straightened out, what’s your last name?” The new guy sighed, “Darling. My name is John Darling.” To which the boss replied, “It’s nice to meet you, John.” Matthew 1:2 Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers. Abraham: Ge 21:2-5 Jos 24:2,3 1Ch 1:28 Isa 51:2 Lu 3:34 Ac 7:8 Ro 9:7-9 Heb 11:11,17,18 Isaac the father of Jaco: Ge 25:26 Jos 24:4 1Ch 1:34 Isa 41:8 Mal 1:2,3 Ro 9:10-13 Jacob the father of Judah: Ge 29:32-35 Ge 30:5-20 Ge 35:16-19 Ge 46:8-27 49:8-12 Ex 1:2-5 1Ch 2:1-8 5:1,2 Lu 3:33,34 Ac 7:8 Heb 7:14 Rev 7:5, JESUS' GENEALOGY BEGINS WITH A SUPERNATURAL BIRTH As Andrus says commenting on Isaac's birth "The simplicity of that statement hides a fantastic miracle, for Abraham and his wife Sarah did not get pregnant until he was 100 and she was 90. They were both long past the child-bearing age, even considering that people generally lived longer in those days. But if the birth of Isaac was supernatural, it was nothing compared to the birth of Jesus. It’s one thing to activate the reproductive organs of an old couple so that they are able to conceive; but it’s an entirely different class of miracle to have a woman get pregnant without any involvement from a man at all." (Matthew 1:1-17 Son of Man, Son of God or, Termites in the Family Tree) TECHNICAL NOTE: While the phrase "father of" is used repeatedly (30x in every verse from Mt 1:2-16; KJV = "begat"), this phrase has two meanings, the first describing a literal father (e.g., Abraham) of the one mentioned (Isaac). But given that Matthew occasionally omits the literal father-son record, the other sense of "father of" does not require immediate relationship but is more like "was the ancestor of" or "became the progenitor of." (Carson) Abraham was the father of Isaac - Isaac was the child of promise who God miraculously gave Sarah and Abraham in their old age. So Genesis 21:2-5 (1Ch 1:28, Lk 3:34+) So Sarah conceived and bore a son to Abraham in his old age, at the appointed time of which God had spoken to him. 3 Abraham called the name of his son who was born to him, whom Sarah bore to him, Isaac. 4Then Abraham circumcised his son Isaac when he was eight days old, as God had commanded him. 5 Now Abraham was one hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him. Isaac: Ge 21:3 25:26 1Ch 1:34 Mt 1:2 Ac 7:8 Ro 9:6-8. He 11:17-19 Father of - see gennao below, which occurs 42 times from Mt 1:2-16. Zodhiates observes a subtle shift "From Mt 1:2 to Mt 1:16, the verb egénnēsen (see gennao), the aorist active (active voice) of gennao, to give birth or beget, is used when conception includes the physical father listed in the genealogy. However, in Mt 1:16, a conspicuous shift to egennḗthe occurs (the aorist passive of gennao). The birth (was born) (not the conception) is highlighted, since the Lord was conceived by a virgin." (Exegetical Commentary on Matthew) Isaac the father of Jacob - Jacob's name meant "heel-catcher" or "supplanter." Genesis 25:26 Afterward his brother came forth with his hand holding on to Esau’s heel, so his name was called Jacob; and Isaac was sixty years old when she gave birth to them. And Jacob the father of Judah (Lk 3:33-34+)) and his brothers - Jacob's name of course was changed in Genesis 32:28 when God (see Ge 32:24, 30) said "Your name shall no longer be Jacob, but Israel ("He contends with God"); for you have striven with God and with men and have prevailed.” And his brothers is an allusion to the 12 brothers that gave rise to 12 tribes. Genesis 29:32-35 Leah conceived and bore a son and named him Reuben, for she said, “Because the LORD has seen my affliction; surely now my husband will love me.” 33 Then she conceived again and bore a son and said, “Because the LORD has heard that I am unloved, He has therefore given me this son also.” So she named him Simeon. 34 She conceived again and bore a son and said, “Now this time my husband will become attached to me, because I have borne him three sons.” Therefore he was named Levi. 35 And she conceived again and bore a son and said, “This time I will praise the LORD.” Therefore she named him Judah. Then she stopped bearing. Ray Pritchard makes an excellent point about this genealogical list - If you study these names in detail, it’s almost as if God has pulled together a rogue’s gallery. I’ve already said that we don’t know about every person on this list. But of the ones we know about, nearly all of them had notable moral failures on their spiritual resumes. For instance, Abraham lied about his wife Sarah. Isaac did the same thing. Jacob was a cheater, Judah a fornicator. David was an adulterer and Solomon was a polygamist. Manasseh was the most evil king Israel ever had. And on and on we could go. This is not a list of plaster saints. Far from it. Some weren’t saints at all. The best of these men had flaws and some were so flawed that it is impossible to see their good points. How does that show the grace of God? Simple. It shows the grace of God because people like this make up Jesus’ family tree. A murderer is on the list, a fornicator is on the list, an adulterer is on the list, a liar is on the list, a deceiver is on the list. Think about that. Most of these men were very great sinners. Brian Bill - Who God Uses - As we look at the forgotten family tree, I see three types of people hanging from the branches – the faithful, the failures, and the forgotten. 1. God uses the faithful. As we glance at this genealogy, there are at least ten names that stand out. Abraham. Hebrews 11:17: “By faith Abraham , when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice.” Isaac. Hebrews 11:20: “By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau in regard to their future.” Jacob. Hebrews 11:21: “By faith Jacob , when he was dying, blessed each of Joseph’s sons, and worshiped as he leaned on the top of his staff.” Ruth. Ruth 1:16: “Where you go I will go, and where you stay I will stay. Your people will be my people and your God my God.” David. 1 Samuel 13:14: “The LORD has sought out a man after his own heart…” Solomon. 1 Kings 13:12: “I will do what you have asked. I will give you a wise and discerning heart, so that there will never have been anyone like you, nor will there ever be.” Asa. 1 Kings 15:11: “Asa did what was right in the eyes of the LORD, as his father David had done.” Jehoshaphat. 2 Chronicles 17:3: “The LORD was with Jehoshaphat because in his early years he walked in the ways his father David had followed.” Josiah. 2 Kings 23:25: “Neither before nor after Josiah was there a king like him who turned to the LORD as he did-with all his heart and with all his soul and with all his strength, in accordance with all the Law of Moses.” Hezekiah. 2 Kings 18:5: “Hezekiah trusted in the LORD, the God of Israel.” God has always searched for devoted people to do His work as 2 Chronicles 16:9 states: “For the eyes of the LORD range throughout the earth to strengthen those whose hearts are fully committed to him.” God loves to use faithful people but if you look close enough, you will see that none of these individuals were perfect. In fact, some were greatly flawed. Abraham lied (Genesis 12:13), Jacob was a deceiver (Genesis 27:36), David committed adultery and murder (2 Samuel 11:3-21), Solomon slacked off spiritually (1 Kings 11:3-4), Asa bailed on God at the end of his life (2 Chronicles 16:12) and even Hezekiah became proud and was judged by God (2 Chronicles 32:25). Here’s the lesson: Even the “good” need God’s grace. Actually, the Bible declares that no one is good or fully faithful. Romans 3:12: “All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.” 2. God uses failures. As we continue to look at this family tree, I’m reminded of a statement: “Families are like fudge. Mostly sweet with a few nuts.” Matthew makes no effort to spruce up this tree. He’s not hiding the sorry spots or the twisted twigs. Most genealogists skipped over the scoundrels and focused just on the saints. Only the good guys made most lists, and if they had a bad reputation, the historian would often try to clean them up. ILLUSTRATION - I recently heard about a very prominent family who commissioned a professional biographer to record their family tree. They gave him very careful instructions, and cautioned him to deal carefully with a certain Uncle George, who in a drunken stupor, had committed murder and was subsequently sent to the electric chair. The biographer assured them that he could handle it. This is what he wrote: “Uncle George occupied a chair of applied electronics at an important government institution. He was attached to his position by the strongest of ties, and his death came as a real shock” (Quoted from Pastor Dan Meyer, Christ Church of Oak Brook, “A Question of Breeding,” 11/28/04). There are names in the lineage of the Lord that are shocking, and what some of them did can make us blush. Matthew’s genealogy is filled with “Uncle Georges,” but he makes no attempt at disguises. We don’t have time to go through all the bad apples and loose nuts in the tree, so I’ll pick just a few. Judah. Jacob had 12 sons, but for some reason, the lineage of the Lord ran through Judah. This is very interesting because he wasn’t the oldest like Reuben was, nor was he necessarily the favorite son – that would have been Joseph or Benjamin. Genesis 49:10 states that the ruler would come out of Judah: “The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until he comes to whom it belongs and the obedience of the nations is his.” This is traced all the way to the end of the Bible as well in Revelation 5:5: “Then one of the elders said to me, ‘Do not weep! See, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has triumphed. He is able to open the scroll and its seven seals.’” At the climax of history in heaven, Judah’s offspring is the only one that was found worthy. Judah must have been a godly guy, right? Actually he wasn’t. In another largely ignored section of Scripture, Genesis 38 describes his depravity. His first step down the slippery slope of sin happened when he married a Canaanite woman. Their children become spiritually schizophrenic and the older one is so wicked that the Lord takes his life. This son was married to a woman named Tamar, leaving her a widow and without children. According to their customs (Deuteronomy 25:5-10), his brother was to marry the widow and give her children but he refused, so the Lord took his life as well. Judah promised his third son to Tamar but he procrastinated. Tamar realized that this wedding was never going to happen so she took things into her own hands. The story goes from bad to worse at this point. She hears that her father-in-law Judah is going to take a trip so she comes up with a wicked plan. She decided to disguise herself as a prostitute and waited alongside the road. Judah, not knowing it was her, offered to pay her a young goat for her services, and gave her a deposit before the goat could be delivered – his signet ring, a cord, and his shepherd’s staff, which is the ancient equivalent of a Driver’s License today. Tamar becomes pregnant with twins and when Judah finds out, he is ready to burn her in the fire because of the disgrace she has caused his family. As she was dragged away to be killed, and the flames crackled in the background, she calmly identified the father of the twins by holding up Judah’s personal property. Judah is humiliated and admits in verse 26: “She is more righteous than I.” If there was a tale like this in your family tree, wouldn’t you want to avoid it? This seamy story is in the Bible to help us see that God uses failures. The genealogy of Jesus not only goes through Judah and Tamar, but also travels through Perez, the child of incest. Listen. Through the broken, God breaks through! Through the twisted twig of Tamar, God’s grace continues to grow. Rahab. Drop down to verse 5: “Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab.” Most everyone has heard of Rahab the prostitute, who provided protection to the Hebrew spies in Jericho. Her most famous deed is the telling of a lie. Rahab is mentioned eight times in Scripture, and six of those times, she’s referred to as “Rahab the prostitute.” Because of her faith, she is listed in Hebrews 11:31. Amazingly the Redeemer comes through Rahab as well. Bathsheba. She is not mentioned by name in this genealogy, but is called, “Uriah’s wife” in verse 6. She is the woman David committed adultery with. She may have purposely enticed him by bathing in an open courtyard. The son of their illicit union dies. Eventually David marries Bathsheba and they have another son named Solomon. The family tree of Jesus has Bathsheba as one of its branches. As someone has said, “We’re reminded again that God’s plan of redemption came neither through perfect people, nor for perfect people.” Rehoboam. This king, listed in verse 7, was the son of Solomon, who because of his love of pride and lust for power, was responsible for the dividing of the kingdom (1 Kings 12:19). And yet, the Redeemer comes through Rehoboam. Ahaz. Verse 9 mentions ungodly Ahaz, who worshipped pagan gods and eventually self-destructed. It was to King Ahaz that Isaiah initially made his prophecy of the promised Immanuel that would be born to a virgin (see Isaiah 7:14). When he died he was buried without honor. Immanuel traces his earthly origin back to Ahaz. Manasseh. This king in verse 10 reigned 55 years, longer than any other, but was Judah’s most wicked ruler. He was into idolatry, sacrificed his own son to the pagan god Molech, worshipped the sun and stars, and killed anyone who disagreed with him. 2 Kings 21:9 gives a stunningly sad summary of his life: “Manasseh led them astray, so that they did more evil than the nations the LORD had destroyed before the Israelites.” Thankfully, after being deported to Babylon, he humbled himself and returned to the Lord (see 2 Chronicles 33:11-13). Manasseh is an ancestor of the Messiah. The Savior of the world came from people that most of us would want nothing to do with. These individuals, who we could call failures, are in the Forgotten Family Tree, not for what they have in common with Christ, but for what they share in common with each of us. We are like them in so many ways…but isn’t that why Christ came? Jesus can take our failures and turn them into something fruitful. 3. God uses the forgotten. God uses faithful people with flaws, He uses those who feel like failures, and He never forgets those who fear that they are forgotten. Look again at this list. There are some names here that we know nothing about. What about Hezron and Ram? One had a truck named after him but we don’t know if they were saints or scoundrels. Abiud, Azor and Akim? Zadok? They might not make the headlines but they are known in heaven. Do you feel forgotten today? Do you wonder if God even notices you? Don’t despair. You are never out of His mind. In fact, Psalm 139:17-18 says: “How precious to me are your thoughts, O God! How vast is the sum of them! Were I to count them, they would outnumber the grains of sand. When I awake, I am still with you.” The lion of the tribe of Judah is about deliverance, not condemnation. He takes what feeble faith we have, coupled with our failures and redeems them for his glory, and in the process, never forgets us. Lessons From the Tree 1. History is “His Story.” The hero of this story is God himself. Everything that has happened in the past, what takes place today, and what is yet to come, is part of His glorious and grand plan. As we look back at the lineage of the Lord, we see the Lord weaving His ways through the faithful, the failures, and the forgotten, in order to accomplish His purpose of bringing salvation to the world through the son of David. God is in the business of salvaging sinners and recreating those who He created. One writer said it this way: “This genealogy is marked by gross sin, blatant idolatry, captivity in Egypt, captivity in Babylon, a succession of flawed kings, and hostile enemies, yet God’s plan is carried out to completion. It’s as if God is saying, ‘The famine in Egypt could not starve my plan. 400 years of slavery in Egypt and another 70 in Babylon couldn’t shackle my plan. Murder, corruption, and idolatry could not stop my plan!’” Remember too that the Bible teaches that history is moving toward a point of conclusion. At some definite point in the future, God will send His Son to this earth a second time as the triumphant King. Are you ready for that? 2. Get in His tree today. None of us can appear in the blood-line that stretches back from Jesus through David to Abraham, but the good news is that the blood-line flows the other way too (idea from Pastor Dan Meyer). No matter if you’ve been fairly faithful, or find yourself a failure, or feel forgotten, there’s a place for you in God’s tree today. Jesus is the Savior of the world. Will you make Him your personal Savior right now? You can join the family of faith by receiving the gift of redemption. John 1:12: “Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God.” Jesus died on a tree in order for you to have a place in His eternal tree. 3. The glory of this genealogy is the grace of God. Jesus’ relatives could have been the Cleaver’s; instead they were more like the Simpson’s. God loves to give grace to the “Uncle George’s” of life. Jesus came not to redeem those who think they’re righteous, but to save sinners. Luke 19:10: “For the Son of Man came to seek and to save what was lost.” God demands not perfection, but contrition. It was Rick Warren who said, “The worse you are, the better candidate you are for the grace of God.” The glory of God’s grace extends to the faithful, the failures, and the forgotten because grace glows through the branches and twigs of this Christmas tree. In his book called, “The Grace and Truth Paradox,” Randy Alcorn writes: “Wesley Allan Dodd tortured and murdered three boys in Vancouver, Washington, fifteen miles from our home. Dodd was scheduled to be hanged—the first U.S. hanging in three decades—shortly after midnight, January 4, 1993. At dinner that evening, both our daughters, then eleven and thirteen, prayed earnestly that Dodd would repent and place his faith in Christ before he died. I agreed with their prayer…but only because I knew I should…Dodd’s last words were: ‘I had thought there was no hope and no peace. I was wrong. I have found hope and peace in the Lord Jesus Christ.’ “Gasps and moans erupted from the gallery. The anger was palpable. How dare someone who has done anything so terrible say he has found hope and peace in Jesus? Did he really think God would let him into heaven after what he’d done? Shut up and go to hell, child killer—you won’t get off so easy! The idea of God’s offering grace to Dodd was utterly offensive. “And yet…didn’t Jesus die for Dodd’s sins just as He did for mine? No sin is bigger than the Savior. Grace is, literally, not of this world. I struggled with the idea of God saving Dodd only because I thought too much of myself and too little of my Lord. I’d imagined the distance between Dodd and me as the difference between the South and North Poles. But when you consider God’s viewpoint from light-years away, that distance is negligible. In my standing before a holy God, apart from Christ…I am Dodd. I am Dahmer. I am Mao…if God isn’t big enough to save Dodd and Dahmer, He’s not big enough to save me…The cost of redemption cannot be overstated. The wonders of grace cannot be overemphasized. Christ took the hell He didn’t deserve so we could take the heaven we don’t deserve” (Multnomah, 2003: Pages 29, 43-45). JESUS "FAMILY TREE" The fairly faithful Those who find themselves to be failures Those who feel forgotten Do you qualify in any one of these categories? He is calling you today - Mt 11:28-30 Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. 29“Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and YOU WILL FIND REST FOR YOUR SOULS. 30“For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.” (Matthew 1:1-17 The Forgotten Family Tree) Matthew 1:3 Judah was the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar, Perez was the father of Hezron, and Hezron the father of Ram. Judah was the father of Perez: Ge 38:27,29,30 46:12, Nu 26:20,21 1Ch 2:3,4, 1Ch 9:6 Zerah by Tamar: Ge 38:6,11,24-26 Perez was the father of Hezron: Ge 46:12 Nu 26:21 Ru 4:18 1Ch 2:5 4:1, Lk 3:33+ father of Ram: Ru 4:19 1Ch 2:9 Rembrandt's Tamar and Judah "SKELETONS IN CHRIST'S CLOSET" Skeleton in the closet is an idiom used to describe an undisclosed fact about someone which, if revealed, would damage perceptions of the person. It evokes the idea of someone having had a human corpse concealed in their home so long that all its flesh had decomposed to the bone. Well, in the case of the Bible, God reveals the skeletons in Christ's closet! If you doubt the veracity of the Bible, sections like this in Matthew 1 ought to convince you that God's Word is true to life and true! Judah is singled out here and is also alluded to in other passages... Genesis 49:10 “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, Nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, Until Shiloh (THE MESSIAH) comes, And to him shall be the obedience of the peoples (NATIONS). (See notes on meaning of the scepter will not depart from Judah) Matthew 2:6 ‘AND YOU, BETHLEHEM, LAND OF JUDAH, ARE BY NO MEANS LEAST AMONG THE LEADERS OF JUDAH; FOR OUT OF YOU SHALL COME FORTH A RULER WHO WILL SHEPHERD MY PEOPLE ISRAEL.’” Hebrews 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, a tribe with reference to which Moses spoke nothing concerning priests. Revelation 5:5 and one of the elders *said to me, “Stop weeping; behold, the Lion that is from the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has overcome so as to open the book and its seven seals.” (Who/what is the Lion of the tribe of Judah?) Judah was the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar - Now here is where the genealogy becomes very interesting because when Jews made a genealogy they normally did not include women on the list, but instead traced the family tree from father to son. Matthew breaks the mold so to speak by including not just Tamar but three other women, Rahab (Mt 1:5), Ruth (Mt 1:5) and Bathsheba (Mt 1:6). Tamar was also a Canaanite, hence a Gentile. Two-strikes! Judah, as a widower, frequented prostitutes. This occurred frequently enough that his daughter-in-law, Tamar, whom he had dishonored, knew that if she disguised herself as one, he’d sleep with her. He did and got her pregnant (Genesis 38). Many are quick to judge Tamar for her actions, but it is said that even Judah recognised that she was "more righteous than I". 1 Chronicles 2:3,4 The sons of Judah were Er, Onan and Shelah; these three were born to him by Bath-shua the Canaanitess. And Er, Judah’s firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD, so He put him to death. (2:4) Tamar his daughter-in-law bore him Perez and Zerah. Judah had five sons in all. Ray Pritchard summarizes the story of Tamar - Her story—unknown to most of us—is found in Genesis 38. Tamar was the daughter-in-law of Judah who was the son of Jacob, grandson of Abraham. All you need to know is that Judah had a son named Er who married a Gentile woman named … Tamar. Er died and his brother Onan rose up to do his brotherly duty by marrying Tamar. But he, too, suddenly died, leaving Tamar both husbandless and childless—a kind of twin curse in those days. So because she was impatient and unwilling to wait for God to supply her need, she hatched a scheme to cause her father-in-law Judah to sleep with her. Her plan was simple: Dressing up as a shrine prostitute, she seduced Judah into sleeping with her, whereupon she became pregnant and gave birth to twin boys—Perez and Zerah. When she confronted Judah with the truth, he said (rightly), “She is more righteous than I.” Indeed, no one looks good in this story, which reeks of greed, deception, illegitimacy, prostitution, sexual lust, and even the hint of incest. Whatever you can say about Judah (and it’s not very good), you cannot by any stretch of the imagination make Tamar look good. She’s only less-bad than her father-in-law. But what she did was evil, wrong and immoral. She truly acted like a prostitute even if she wasn’t one by trade. That’s all we know about Tamar. There really isn’t a happy ending to this story. She’s just a footnote in biblical history—and an unsavory one at that. The story of her encounter with Judah is a story of human frailty and weakness—of the sinfulness of human flesh. That people like Judah and Tamar would be included in the line of the Messiah sends a strong message about the pure grace of God. Neither one deserved it, but both are on the list. (Four Women in Jesus' Family Tree). Steven
Mateus 1
Robertson comments that Joseph "Had the Jewish conscientiousness for the observance of the law which would have been death by stoning (Dt. 22:23-24). Though Joseph was upright, he would not do that." McNeile adds “As a good Jew he would have shown his zeal if he had branded her with public disgrace!” And not wanting (thelo - not have a feeling or desire) to disgrace her, planned (boulomai - had in mind as a purpose) to send her away secretly - Joseph did not want to bring shame or dishonor upon Mary. How? One way would have been by giving her a certificate of divorce publically which was required when couples had been betrothed. He sought to do it without others noticing so she would not be dishonored. What is interesting is what is not recorded -- no resentment, no anger, no malice from Joseph! A righteous man indeed! Disgrace (1165)(deigmatizo from deigma = an example from deiknuo = to show, present to one's sight, exhibit, point out) is literally make a show of openly and boldly, exhibiting, exposing, making a public spectacle or exposing to public shame which clearly would disgrace Mary. The only other use is Col 2:15+ "When He had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them, having triumphed over them through Him." Secretly (2977)(lathra from lanthano = to be hidden) is an adverb that means in a secretive way, doing so without others noticing. Four uses in NT - Matt. 1:19; Matt. 2:7; Jn. 11:28; Acts 16:37 - Of Herod who "secretly called the magi." (Mt 2:7). Of Martha when she "called Mary her sister, saying secretly, “The Teacher is here and is calling for you.” (Jn 11:28) Of Paul after being falsely beaten and jailed asked and "now are they sending us away secretly?" Septuagint - Dt. 13:6; 1 Sa 18:22; 1 Sa 26:5; Job 31:27; Ps. 101:5; Hab 3:14; To send away (630)(apoluo) means to let go, to release, to send away, to dismiss. Apoluo is used 62 times in the NT and 10 times is translated as divorce (3), divorced (2), divorces (5) (e.g., Mt 1:19; 5:31, 32, Mt 9:9 Mk 10:2, 4, 11 Lk 16:18; Mk 10:12) Related Resources: Andy Woods on The 10 Steps in the Sequence of the Typical Hebrew Wedding - below is an excerpt of "Step 4" Fourth, this time of separation is known as the betrothal period. During this time of separation, the fidelity of the groom and the bride was tested. The test, of course, involved whether the bride and the groom would be loyal to each other despite the vast distance between them. If either failed the test during this time of separation, the betrothal contract would be dissolved. This ancient Jewish ritual explains Joseph's dismay and desire to end the engagement upon discovering Mary's pregnancy. The severity of this situation also explains why an angel had to be dispatched from heaven to assure Joseph that Mary's pregnancy had in fact been wrought by the Holy Spirit rather than caused by Mary's unfaithfulness to Joseph during the betrothal period (Mt 1:18-25). Just as the fidelity of the groom and bride are tested during this time of separation, the church's loyalty to Christ is currently being tested as the church is tempted to succumb to false teaching and worldly conduct (Jas 4:4+; 2 Cor. 11:2+) during Christ's physical absence. The church demonstrates her loyalty to Christ during this time by maintaining both correct beliefs (orthodoxy) and correct practice (orthopraxy). Matthew 1:20 But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. NET Matthew 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. GNT Matthew 1:20 ταῦτα δὲ αὐτοῦ ἐνθυμηθέντος ἰδοὺ ἄγγελος κυρίου κατ᾽ ὄναρ ἐφάνη αὐτῷ λέγων, Ἰωσὴφ υἱὸς Δαυίδ, μὴ φοβηθῇς παραλαβεῖν Μαρίαν τὴν γυναῖκά σου· τὸ γὰρ ἐν αὐτῇ γεννηθὲν ἐκ πνεύματός ἐστιν ἁγίου. NLT Matthew 1:20 As he considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream. "Joseph, son of David," the angel said, "do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife. For the child within her was conceived by the Holy Spirit. KJV Matthew 1:20 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him 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. ESV Matthew 1:20 But as he considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. NIV Matthew 1:20 But after he had considered 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 home as your wife, because what is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit. ASV Matthew 1:20 But when he thought on these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared unto him 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 Spirit. CSB Matthew 1:20 But after he had considered these things, an angel of the Lord suddenly appeared to him in a dream, saying, "Joseph, son of David, don't be afraid to take Mary as your wife, because what has been conceived in her is by the Holy Spirit. But when he had considered: Ps 25:8,9 94:19 119:125 143:8 Pr 3:5,6 12:5 Isa 26:3 30:21 an angel of the Lord: Jud 13:3,8,9 Lu 1:10-13,19,26-38 2:8-14 in a dream: Mt 2:13,19,22 Ge 31:11 Nu 12:6 Job 4:13-16 33:15-17 Joe 2:28 Joseph: Isa 7:2,13 Jer 33:26 Lu 2:4 do not be afraid: Mt 28:5 Ge 46:3 1Ki 17:13 Isa 51:7 Jer 40:9 Lu 1:30 the Child who has been conceived: Mt 1:18 Jer 31:22 THE VIRGIN BIRTH CONCEIVED OF THE SPIRIT Constable makes the distinction that "The virgin birth is technically the virgin conception. Mary was not just a virgin when she bore Jesus, but she was one when she conceived Him." (Matthew 1 Commentary) But when - Term of contrast combined with a time term. In this context the result is a critical reversal in the direction of the narrative. Joseph was on the verge of divorcing Mary (aka "send her away secretly")! The sovereign God stepped into the scene by sending His messenger to speak to Joseph and encourage him to consider a change of heart and mind, which he does as the narrative unfolds. THOUGHT - Once again we see the juxtaposition of God's sovereignty and man's responsibility (or free will), that divine mystery that permeates the pages of Scripture from Genesis to Revelation. Keep your eyes peeled for this divinely inspired juxtaposition and be encouraged that God is behind the scenes in your life also, beloved, and He is not indifferent to what you are going through! He may not send an angel to encourage you or to warn you, but He may use other means, so be alert to His sovereign movements in your life, all for your gracious good and His great glory. Amen! He had considered this - This says a lot about Joseph. He may have only been a carpenter but he was a thoughtful man and not prone to impulsive decisions. He had considered (1760)(enthumeomai from en = in + thumos = mind, thought) means to ponder or reflect on, deliberate, think about, contemplate, process information by thinking about it carefully. Liddell-Scott = to lay to heart, consider well. To think out a thing, form a plan. Only 2 times in Nestle-Aland - Mt 1:20, Mt 9:4. One addition use in Textus Receptus of Acts 10:19 (where NAS has the related word dienthumeomai). Uses in the Septuagint - Gen. 6:6; Dt. 21:11; Jos. 6:18; Jos. 7:21 ("coveted"); Isa. 10:7; Lam. 2:17 ("what He purposed"); Dan. 1:8 ("Daniel made up his mind") Behold (Pay Attention!)(2400)(idou) is the second person singular aorist middle imperative of eidon which means to see, perceive, look at. In the NT idou is used as a demonstrative particle that draws attention to what follows. Idou in the middle voice means "you yourself look, see, perceive!" The aorist imperative is a command emphasizing "Do it now! Don't delay!"
Mateus 1
Robertson - 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.” And you shall call His Name Jesus (see Iesous) - Like His forerunner, John the Baptist (Lk 1:13+), Jesus was named by God (via His messenger Gabriel) before His birth. Joseph would have the privilege of giving the Savior of the World the Name above every name, the Name of Jesus. O dear reader, may the Spirit enable you to bow down in surrender, reverence and adoration to His Name Jesus while today is still called today. Amen. (2 Cor 6:2)! For this reason also (Php 2:8+), God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him (JOSEPH WAS GOD'S INSTRUMENT IN GIVING) the NAME which is above every name, so that at the NAME OF JESUS EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (AMEN AND AMEN!) (Php 2:9-11+). For (gar) is a term of explanation, in this case obviously explains why His Name was to be "Jesus." His Name is His message and His mission! It is interesting that "He" (autos) precedes the "for" in the Greek text, placing full emphasis on "He," on Jesus the summum bonum, the highest good! Summum bonum is generally thought of as being an end in itself, and at the same time containing all other goods, an apropos description of Jesus, the "the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End” (Rev 21:6+) (AND EVERYTHING GOOD IN BETWEEN!) Jesus (2424)(Iesous) is transliteration of the Greek Iesous, which in turn is the transliteration of Hebrew name Yehoshua or Yeshua which mean “Yahweh (Jehovah) saves” (Yahweh is typically rendered as “LORD” in OT) or Jehovah is help or Jehovah is salvation. The Greek form of the name Iēsous, was translated into Latin as Jesus. Jesus corresponds to the Name Joshua (Hebrew - Yeshua). Matthew 1:21 "defines" Jesus' Name = "He will save His people from their sins." The Name Jesus occurs 979x in 943v in the NT (NASB). Jesus Christ occurs 137x in 134v in the NT (only 6v in Gospels). Jesus was a common name among the Jews - (1). Joshua, successor to Moses Acts 7:45; Hb 4:8, (2). Joshua, son of Eliezer Lk 3:29, (3). Jesus referring to the Messiah, Jesus Christ - Mt 1:1, 21, 25 (4). Jesus Barabbas Mt 27:16f. (5). Jesus who is called Justus Col 4:11. THE SAVIOR OF ISRAEL Jesus as Savior of Israel was prophetically announced in Isaiah 43:3 "I am the LORD your God, The Holy One of Israel, your Savior." Jeremiah described Him as "Thou Hope of Israel, its Savior in time of distress (cf Jer 30:7+)." (Jer 14:8). In Acts 5:31+ Peter (and the apostles) declared "He (Jesus- Acts 5:30+) is the One Whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins." (cf Acts 13:23+) But even in the Genealogy of Jesus in Matthew 1:1-17 we see the door of salvation flung open wide to the Gentiles, for the lineage of Messiah included Gentiles Rahab the harlot and Ruth the Moabitess, both foreshadowing the greater harvest of Gentiles yet to come. The psalmist wrote "And He will redeem Israel from all his iniquities." (Ps 130:8). He will save His people from their sins - This was the purpose for which Jesus was born! Not to destroy but to save (Jn 3:16-18). Notice His people refers in context to the Jews. Why do His people (and all people) need to be saved? They are in their sins. And Paul says unequivocally that "the wages of sin is death (physical death, spiritual death and eternal life unless saved by Jesus)." (Ro 6:23+).
Mateus 1
Robertson says "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." Surprisingly Matthew has only 7 uses of hamartia (150 verses in NT) - Matt. 1:21; Matt. 3:6; Matt. 9:2; Matt. 9:5; Matt. 9:6; Matt. 12:31; Matt. 26:28 “Whom Say Ye That I Am” 1. WHO IS HE? Matt. 1:23 2. WHY DID HE COME? Matt. 1:21 3. WHAT DID HE DO? Isa. 53:5, 6 4. WHY DID HE DO IT? John 3:16 5. WHERE IS HE NOW? Luke 24:51 6. WHY IS HE THERE? John 14:2 7. WILL HE COME AGAIN? John 14:3 The Name God also has highly exalted Him . . . , that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow. —Philippians 2:9-10 Today's Scripture: Philippians 2:5-11 Jesus! No other name draws people together so closely, while at the same time evoking hatred in others. In 1999, a political candidate answered a question about who had the greatest effect on his life by saying, “Jesus Christ. He changed my heart.” This person’s honest answer was met with disdain from people who detest the name of Jesus. On the other hand, people all over the world who love Christ meet every week to honor and praise Jesus’ name. To them, His name means love, joy, peace, hope, and forgiveness. What is it about this name that divides people so clearly? Why do some treat the name of Jesus with contempt while others hold it in highest esteem? I think the reason some people can’t stand Jesus’ name is that they don’t want to be reminded of their sins. Jesus is “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6), the One who saves us from our sins (Matthew 1:21). People who refuse to ask for forgiveness from sin cannot love the name of Jesus. Yet His name “is above every name,” and one day “every tongue [will] confess that Jesus Christ is Lord” (Philippians 2:9,11). Reflect & Pray Jesus—O how sweet the name, Jesus—every day the same; Jesus—let all saints proclaim Its worthy praise forever. —Martin We honor God's name when we call Him our Father and live like His Son. Big Plans Read: Luke 2:1-12 You shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins. —Matthew 1:21 Two thousand years ago, there were no earthly plans for celebrating Jesus’ birth. Quietly and unannounced, Joseph and Mary entered Bethlehem and searched for a place to spend the night. It was a busy time in the Judean village, but the excitement had nothing to do with the upcoming birth. The crowds had gathered to take part in a census. They didn’t know that Mary was about to deliver the Savior. As the year 2000 approaches, the story has changed. There are serious discussions going on about how Bethlehem can get ready for the estimated 4 million tourists who will converge on the Israeli city during Christmas 2000. One estimate puts the price tag at $3.5 billion to prepare for the big day. What a contrast to that first Christmas! It’s almost as if people want to make up for missing His birth. Yet, a proper preparation has nothing to do with money or motels or shrines. It’s a matter of the heart. If we want to honor Christ for who He is, we will put our complete faith in His death, burial, and resurrection. The Christmas season comes again. Let all the earth with one accord Rejoice that God has given to men A Savior, who is Christ the Lord. —Baker You can't truly celebrate Christ's birth until you've invited Him into your heart. The Baby Grew Up Read: Matthew 1:18-25 You shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins. —Matthew 1:21 Even Christians can miss the point of the Christmas story if they aren’t careful. Halford E. Luccock warned of that danger in a thought-provoking essay. He wrote: “We can become so charmed with the story of a baby that we grow sentimental about it. It does not ask that we do anything about it; it does not demand any vital change in our way of thinking and living. “The great question for us is this: Is our Christmas still only a story about a baby, or is it more, a deathless story about a Person into whom the baby grew, who can redeem the world from its sins, and who calls us into partnership with His great and mighty purposes?” When the angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph, he said, “You shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins” (Mt. 1:21). It is only as we see the birth of Jesus in light of His crucifixion and resurrection that we are able to grasp the full meaning of Christ’s coming. Christ the Savior is born! When we look beyond the manger To the cross of Calvary, We will know the reason Christmas Brings such joy to you and me. —DJD The mission of the cross is hidden in the message of the cradle. Matthew 1:22 Now all this took place to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet: NET Matthew 1:22 This all happened so that what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet would be fulfilled: GNT Matthew 1:22 Τοῦτο δὲ ὅλον γέγονεν ἵνα πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν ὑπὸ κυρίου διὰ τοῦ προφήτου λέγοντος, NLT Matthew 1:22 All of this occurred to fulfill the Lord's message through his prophet: KJV Matthew 1:22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, ESV Matthew 1:22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: NIV Matthew 1:22 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: ASV Matthew 1:22 Now all this is come to pass, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, CSB Matthew 1:22 Now all this took place to fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through the prophet: to fulfill what was spoken: Mt 2:15,23 5:17 8:17 12:17 13:35,21 1Ki 8:15,24 Ezr 1:1 Lu 21:22 24:44 Joh 10:35 12:38-40 15:25 17:12 18:9, Joh 19:36,37 Ac 3:18 13:27-29 Rev 17:17 VIRGIN BIRTH FULFILLED PROPHECY Now all this took place - What is this? The virgin birth of Jesus which was predicted in the Old Testament. NET has "This all happened." Took place (happened) is in the perfect tense indicating that it stands on record as a historical fact! You can stake you life on it! Indeed, you must! (Acts 4:12+, Jn 8:24+, Acts 16:31+). To fulfill what was spoken by the Lord through (dia = by way of, by means of) the prophet (who was the intermediate agent) - The OT prediction of the virgin birth of the Messiah is now fulfilled. Matthew does not name the prophet but the text quoted is from Isaiah 7:14 (see below). Notice the phrase spoken by the Lord through the prophet which is a clear definition of divine inspiration of the Word of God (see verbal plenary inspiration) through "men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." (2 Pe 1:21+). God spoke and Isaiah was His "instrument" to record what He said! TECHNICAL NOTE - Remember that 25% of Scripture was prophecy when it was originally inspired by the Spirit and recorded by men and that 80% of those prophecies have already been perfectly fulfilled. That means that the remaining 20% will be perfectly fulfilled! Dear pastors and teachers, can I humbly exhort you to not fail to preach and teach prophecy! I have been a follower of Messiah for 38 years and can recall only a few sermons on God's Plan for the Ages in that time! If you fail to study prophecy (reading it literally and not through the "grid" of anyone's systematic theological approach, including dispensationalism!), you leave open the door for the cults who feast on the Biblical ignorance of prophecy and draw many into their snare by false teachings on the prophetic passages. Your best defense to their false teaching is your knowledge of the Truth. So study, preach and teach prophecy, for we are one day closer to the beginning fulfillment of the last 20% of God's sure word of prophecy (2Pe 1:19+)! Maranatha, Lord Jesus Christ! Amen. To fulfill (complete) (4137)(pleroo) means to be filled (passive voice = saints acted on by outside force). Matthew repeatedly uses the phrase of Old Testament prophecy being fulfilled (Mt 2:15, 17, 23+; Mt 8:17+; Mt 12:17+; Mt 13:35+; Mt 21:4; Mt 26:54) John Broadus has an interesting note on fulfill - Fulfilled is the translation of a Greek word signifying to ‘make full,’ to ‘fill up.’ (So the English fill full or fulfill). It is often used in New Testament, both literally, as to fill a valley, boat, etc., and figuratively, as to fill with gladness, knowledge, etc. In a derivative sense it signifies to ‘perform fully,’ ‘accomplish,’ being applied to a work or a duty, and to predictions, as here. This last very important use, to fulfill (a prediction), is found frequently in Matthew (1:22; 2:15, 17, 23; 4:14; 8:17; 12:17; 13:35; 21:4; 26:54, 56; 27:9), and in John (12:38; 13:18; 15:25; 17:12; 18:9, 31; 19:24, 36); several times in Luke (1:20; 4:21; 21:22; 24:44), and in Acts (1:16; 3:18; 13:27); once in Mark (14:49) and in James (2:23.) An examination of these passages would show that in general they will admit only the strict sense of fulfill, implying a real prediction, and that no one of them requires the quite different meaning attached to the term by some expositors, viz.: that while there was no real prediction, the New Testament occurrence reminded the Evangelist of the Old Testament passage, or so resembled the Old Testament occurrence as to warrant the application to it of the same language. This serious departure from the etymology and regular use of the word is supposed by such expositors to be required by a few passages in which it is difficult for us to see that there exists the strict relation of prediction and fulfillment. But such passages, it will be found, all admit of at least a possible explanation in consistency with the idea of a real fulfillment (see on 2:15, 18), and we have no right to take this or any other word in a sense alien to its origin and use, unless there be found passages in which it cannot possibly have the usual meaning. The strict application of this rule of interpretation is here a matter of importance, as the question involved seriously affects the prophetic relation between the Old and the New Testament. But two things are to be observed. (1) The New Testament writers sometimes quote Old Testament expressions as applicable to gospel facts or truths, without saying that they are prophecies (e. g., Rom 10:18), and in some cases it is doubtful how they intend the quotation to be regarded. (2) It is often unnecessary, and sometimes impossible, to suppose that the prophet himself had in mind that which the New Testament writer calls a fulfillment of his prediction. Some predictions were even involuntary, as that of Caiaphas. (John 11:50.) Many prophecies received fulfillments which the prophet does not appear to have at all contemplated. But as God’s providence often brought about the fulfillment though the human actors were heedless or even ignorant of the predictions they fulfilled (e. g., John 19:24), so God’s Spirit often contemplated fulfillments of which the prophet had no conception, but which the Evangelist makes known. And it is of a piece with the general development of revelation that the later inspiration should explain the records of earlier inspiration, and that only after events have occurred should the early predictions of them be fully understood. Matthew 1:23 "BEHOLD, THE VIRGIN SHALL BE WITH CHILD AND SHALL BEAR A SON, AND THEY SHALL CALL HIS NAME IMMANUEL," which translated means, "GOD WITH US." NET Matthew 1:23 "Look! The virgin will conceive and bear a son, and they will call him Emmanuel," which means "God with us." GNT Matthew 1:23 Ἰδοὺ ἡ παρθένος ἐν γαστρὶ ἕξει καὶ τέξεται υἱόν, καὶ καλέσουσιν τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ Ἐμμανουήλ, ὅ ἐστιν μεθερμηνευόμενον Μεθ᾽ ἡμῶν ὁ θεός. NLT Matthew 1:23 "Look! The virgin will conceive a child! She will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel, which means 'God is with us.' " KJV Matthew 1:23 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. ESV Matthew 1:23 "Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel" (which means, God with us). NIV Matthew 1:23 "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel"--which means, "God with us." ASV Matthew 1:23 Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, And they shall call his name Immanuel; which is, being interpreted, God with us. CSB Matthew 1:23 See, the virgin will become pregnant and give birth to a son, and they will name Him Immanuel, which is translated "God is with us." virgin: Isa 7:14 Emmanuel: Isa 7:14, 8:8 God: Mt 28:20 Ps 46:7,11 Isa 8:8-10 9:6,7 12:2 Joh 1:14 Ac 18:9 Ro 1:3,4 9:5 2Co 5:19 1Ti 3:16 2Ti 4:17,22 GOD WITH US "BEHOLD (see note above) THE VIRGIN (parthenos) SHALL BE WITH CHILD AND SHALL BEAR A SON -