Three Missing Kings?
“And Asa begat Josaphat; and Josaphat begat Joram; and Joram; begat Ozias;
and Ozias begat Joatham; and Joatham begat Achaz; and Achaz begat Ezekias;”
Matthew 1:8,9
“And Solomon’s son was Rehoboam, Abia his son, Asa his son, Jehoshaphat his
son, Joram his son, Ahaziah his son, Joash his son, Amaziah his son, Azariah his
son, Jotham his son, Ahaz his son, Hezekiah his son, Manasseh his son,” 1 Chronicles
3:10-13
In 1 Chronicles 3 we have the list of the kings of Judah and it agrees perfectly with the rest
of the books of Kings and Chronicles. In Matthew 1 we have transliterations of the Greek
equivalent to the Hebrew names. (Hebrew does not contain vowels, so often the Greek
equivalent looks quite different from the English equivalent.) The names Ahaziah, Joash,
and Amaziah are missing from the genealogy of Matthew 1.
But this is not all...
“So all the generations form 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.”
Matthew 1:17
These can be counted and they are correct according to the genealogy of Matthew 1. Also
in Luke 3 we can count 21 generations from Adam to Abraham, 14 generations from
Abraham to David, 21 generations from David to the carrying away into Babylon (a different
line than from Matthew 1), and 21 generations from the carrying away into Babylon to
Christ; all multiples of 7. Matthew gives the legal genealogy of Christ through Joseph, while
Luke gives the genealogy of Christ through Mary. The Lord Jesus is prefect and his
genealogy is perfect. The number 7, is used by the Lord in His word to indicate perfection
(eg: Psalm 12:6,7). The two genealogical accounts are laced with the number 7.
It appears as though the three kings Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah, are missing from
Matthew 1 so that the numbers work out right. This is a major problem because it means
that not only can’t we trust the genealogy, but it also means that some man has inserted
Matthew 1:17 because this is also wrong. If we cannot trust the genealogy of Matthew 1,
and if we cannot trust Matthew 1:17 then what can we trust in God’s word?
How can both Matthew 1 and 1 Chronicles 3 be absolutely correct?
The first of these missing kings is Ahaziah. Let’s take a look at where Jehoram dies and
Ahaziah his son becomes king:
“Thirty and two years old was he (Jehoram) when he began to reign, and he
reigned in Jerusalem eight years, and departed without being desired. Howbeit
they buried him in the city of David, but not in the spulchres of the kings”
2 Chronicles 21:20
“Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign, and he reigned
one year in Jerusalem. His mother’s name also was Athaliah the daughter of
Omri.” 2 Chronicles 22:2
“Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign; and he reigned
one year in Jerusalem. And his mother’s name was Athaliah, the daughter of
Omri king of Israel.” 2 Kings 8:26
We appear to have big problems here. Jehoram was 40 when he died, and according to
Chronicles his son Ahaziah was 42 when he took over the throne, but according to Kings he
was only 22.
Obviously a literal son cannot be 42 when the literal father is 40. But even 22 seems an
unlikely age. In 2 Chronicles 22:1 we read that Ahaziah was the “youngest son” of Jehoram.
But Jehoram was a sensual man with wives and sons (2 Chron 21:17) and he was only 40
when he died.
We have another problem with Ahaziah:
“In the twelfth year of Joram the son of Ahab king of Israel did Ahaziah the son of
Jehoram king of Judah begin to reign.” 2 Kings 8:25
“And he sought Ahaziah: and they caught him, (for he was hid in Samaria,) and
brought him to Jehu: and when they had slain him, they buried him: Because,
said they, he is the son of Jehoshaphat, who sought the Lord with all his heart.” 2
Chronicles 22:9
Who is the father of Ahaziah? Jehoram or Jehoshaphat.
Ahaziah is the first of the three missing kings in Matthew 1, and immediately we have other
problems with him. There is obviously something going on with the genealogy of Ahaziah
that we are not understanding.
Before we go any further, we will examine some principles that we have to apply when
trying to understand the word of God, especially the books of Kings and Chronicles...
1. The word “son” can be used many ways. The main use of course is a literal son, but
there are other ways it can be used, especially when looking at lines of royalty. “Son”
can mean a literal grandson or even a son to many generations; for example Christ is
often referred to as being the “Son of David”. “Son” can also mean son-in-law; for
example Saul called David his “son” even though he was his son-in-law (1 Sam 24:16).
“Son” can also be used by a king to address any subject (2 Chron 29:11), and Solomon
uses the word “son” with great freedom in the book of Proverbs. “Son” can also be used
to describe a stepson or adopted son, just as it is used in this way today. Conversely the
word “begat” can only be used to show a literal son. Therefore there is no room for
gaps in the genealogy of Matthew 1.
The same applies to the words “daughter”, “father”, and “mother”. For example
Athaliah is actually granddaughter or Omri and she is the literal daughter of Ahab and
Jezebel (2 Kings 8:26). Also Nebuchadnezzar is referred to as the “father” of Belshazzar
in the book of Daniel even though he is not related to Belshazzar at all.
2. It was not unusual for a King to start “reigning” at more than one time in his life. For
example when did David begin to reign? Do we mean when he was anointed, or when
he began to reign in Hebron, or when he began to reign in Jerusalem, or when he began
to reign the second time in Jerusalem after being chased out of Jerusalem by his son
Absalom? Jehoiachin (2 Kings 24:8 & 2 Chron 36:9) and Pekah (2 Kings 15:32 & 2 Kings
16:1) can both be shown to have started “reigning” at two different times.
3. It was possible to have two kings reigning for short periods at the same time. For
Example, we all know that Solomon was crowned king while David was still alive, see
also 2 Kings 8:16. Historians also tell us that in ancient times it was quite normal for a
king going to war to anoint his son king in his place while he was gone. This was not only
good for the affairs of the country, but it also ensured that the chosen successor would
be formally crowned if the true king never returned.
4. It was common for a king, or a common person for that matter, to have more than one
name. For example Jehoahaz (2 Chron 21:17) is the same person as Ahaziah (2 Chron
22:1). Both of these names are Hebrew for “Jehovah has siezed”. Another example that
is important for us is that Azariah and Uzziah are equivalent names. They are both
Hebrew for “Jah has helped or strengthened”. The king known as Azariah in the book 2
Kings is known as Uzziah in the book of 2 Chronicles. Also Joram and Jehoram are the
same names, as are Abia and Abijah.
5. There are some names that are used for more than one person. We are dealing with
two royal lines that commonly use certain names. For example we must not confuse
Ahaziah and Jehoram, kings of Judah, with Ahaziah and Jehoram, sons of Ahab, who
lived and ruled at the same time.
Now we will take another look at Ahaziah king of Judah, the first missing king of Matthew 1.
According to 2 Chronicles 21:20 and 2 Chronicles 22:2, Ahaziah was 42 years old when
Jehoram died at the age of 40. Therefore Ahaziah is simply not the literal son of Jehoram.
Ahaziah must be the literal son of Jehoshaphat according to 2 Chronicles 22:9.
The mother of Ahaziah is Athaliah. This means that godfearing Jehoshaphat married
Athaliah the daughter of the wicked Ahab and Jezebel. This does not surprise us too much
as we know that Jehoshaphat, king of Judah had a great friendship with Ahab king of Israel;
helping Ahab with his battles. It was normal in these ancient times to seal such a
relationship with marriage. In fact Jehoshaphat’s relationship with Ahab went so far that he
set up his throne alongside Ahab’s (1 Kings 22:10) and Jehoshaphat is even referred to as
the “king of Israel” (2 Chron 21:2)
As Jehoshaphat set up his throne alongside the throne of Ahab in Israel, we would expect
Jehoshaphat to anoint one of his sons to be king in his stead. Jehoshaphat had at least two
wives: Athaliah from whom was born Ahaziah and possibly other children; and another wife
who bore him seven sons including Jehoram (2 Chron 21:1,2). This makes Ahaziah and
Jehoram half-brothers, Ahaziah being two years older. To keep Ahab happy, the obvious
son to anoint king in his stead was Ahaziah who was also the grandson of Ahab. This
explains why Ahab tried to sneakily kill Jehoshapat (1 Kings 22:30), because as his grandson
was in control of the throne in Jerusalem, it would have been quite easy for Ahab to unite
the two thrones. Ahaziah was 22 years old (2 Kings 8:26) when his father Jehoshaphat
anointed him king in his stead in Jerusalem. This corresponds to the 5 th year of
Jehoshaphat’s reign and the 8th year of Ahab’s reign. Like David, Ahaziah was anointed king
many years before he began to actively reign. Ahaziah was formally crowned king 20 years
later.
After the death of Ahab, the godly Jehoshaphat must have repented. Jehoshaphat knew
that the ungodly houses of Ahab or Ethbaal (1 Kings 16:31) should have nothing to do with
the genealogical line of Christ. Jehoshaphat knew that Ahaziah should not be his successor.
Anticipating a struggle among his sons for the throne after his death, Jehoshaphat did with
Jehoram exactly the same thing that David did with Solomon. Jehoram was crowned while
Jehoshaphat was still alive (2 Kings 8:16). Now we can understand why there was a violent
struggle for the throne after the death of Jehoshaphat (2 Chron 21:4). Ahaziah failed to win
the throne but he obviously got away with his life unlike many of his brothers and halfbrothers.
Jehoram now confused the generations by marrying Athaliah (2 Kings 8:18), the other wife
of his father, making Ahaziah his stepson. (This marriage was probably another attempt of
the house of Ahab to gain control over the throne of Judah.) We can now see how an
apparent “son” (2 Chron 22:2) can be two years older than the apparent father. Jehoram
had at least two other wives and other sons (2 Chron 21:17). Ahaziah could not have been
the stepson for more than 3 years, and possibly less. Now if a king marries a 2 nd wife with
children from her previous marriage, these stepchildren cannot displace the natural children
from the line to the throne. As far as the throne is concerned they are “younger” children
even though they may be older in age. This is why Ahaziah is called the “youngest son” of
Jehoram. (As explained before even the age of 22 is unrealistic.) It is interesting to note
that the Hebrew word used for “youngest” literally means “least”.
We can also understand why Ahaziah is not in the genealogy of Christ in Matthew 1, but
what about Joash and Amaziah? Why are they missing form Matthew 1?
According to Matthew 1, the literal son of Jehoram is Ozias which is equivalent to the
Hebrew name Uzziah or Azariah. We have established that Ahaziah is not the natural son of
Jehoram. According to Matthew 1 there must be a natural son of Jehoram called Uzziah or
Azariah. But were not all of Jehoram’s other sons dead?
Carefully read 2 Chronicles 21:16 to 2 Chronicles 22:1. It appears that there were no sons of
Jehoram left alive other than Ahaziah, whom we know is not a natural son. Now take a
closer look at the meticulous wording:
“And they came up into Judah, and brake into it, and carried away all the
substance that was found in the king’s house, and his sons also, and his wives; so
that there was never a son left him, save Jehoahaz, the youngest of his sons.” 2
Chronicles 21:17
This verse tells us that Jehoram never saw any of his sons again except Jehoahaz (equivalent
to Ahaziah). It does not say that these sons were dead. It says that Jehoram did not see
these sons because they were carried away captive, and were not released in his lifetime.
Ahaziah, not being a natural son and probably still grieving that he lost the struggle for the
throne, was almost certainly not living in the king’s house explaining why the Arabs did not
get him.
“And the inhabitants of Jerusalem made Ahaziah his youngest son king in his
stead: for the band of men that came with the Arabians to the camp had slain
all the eldest.” 2 Chronicles 22:1
“Eldest” does not mean “elder” or “rest”. “Eldest” is used here because it means that the
Arabs did not kill all the rest; they killed all the eldest. They killed all of the sons old enough
to usurp the responsibilities of the throne, and therefore Ahaziah at the age of 42 managed
to successfully stake his claim to the throne, even though he was the “least” son as far as
the line to the throne was concerned.
So how many natural sons of Jehoram were still alive? That we don’t know, but we do know
that a son called Azariah was still alive …
“And Azariah the son of Jehoram king of Judah went down to see Jehoram the
son of Ahab at Jezreel, because he was sick.” 2 Chronicles 22:6
Azariah is the same name as Uzziah which is equivalent to the Greek “Ozias”. This
corresponds perfectly with “Joram begat Ozias” in Matthew 1:8. We can read in 2 Chron
22:7, and also in 2 Kings 8:29 that Ahaziah also went to see Joram.
If we can show that the Azariah in 2 Chronicles 22:6 is the same as king Azariah in 2 Kings,
known as Uzziah in 2 Chronicles, then we would have completely solved the mystery of the
three missing kings. Azariah in 2 Chronicles 22:6 is still quite young, probably not out of his
teenage years, but there is no way that he can be shown to be the same King Azariah who
was not born yet. So we have still got a problem. Yet we are not far away from solving the
mystery. First we will look at another apparent problem which can be found identically in
Kings and Chronicles:
“Ahaz was twenty years old when he began to reign, and he reigned sixteen
years in Jerusalem” 2 Chronicles 28:1
“And Ahaz slept with his fathers, and they buried him in the city, even in
Jerusalem: but they brought him not into the sepulchres of the kings of Israel:
and Hezekiah his son reigned in his stead.” 2 Chronicles 28:27
“Hezekiah began to reign when he was five and twenty years old,” 2 Chronicles 29:1
Ahaz was 11 years old when Hezekiah was born, so Hezekiah was not the natural son of
Ahaz. If we look at 2 Chronicles 28:3,7 and the rest of the chapter we are not at all surprised
that Ahaz had no natural sons left. Consequently either Hezekiah is a son in law or more
probably he was formally adopted by Ahaz as his chosen successor (a common trick of
ancient kings but not so well known in Israel).
Seeing that Hezekiah is not the natural son of Ahaz then whose son is he? According to
Matthew 1:9 Hezekiah is the natural son of Achaz. Obviously Achaz is not Ahaz. So who is
Achaz? In Matthew 1 we read that Achaz is the grandson of Ozias which is the same name
as Uzziah or Azariah as we met in 2 Chronicles 22:6. The whole mystery is now solved!
Summary:
In 1 Chronicles 3 we have the list of kings. There is no error in it although there might have
been some error in our understanding of the word “son”. In Matthew 1 we have the
genealogy of Christ which contains most, but not all of the kings of Judah. We have
discovered that there is no error in either the genealogy of Matthew 1 or the three sets of
fourteen in Matthew 1:17. On the way we have discovered that Ahaziah being 42 in
2 Chronicles 22:2 does not contradict Jehoram being 40 when he died or Ahaziah being 22 in
2 Kings 8:26. We have also discovered that the word “eldest” in 2 Chronicles 22:1 is not a
mistake, and neither is “Azariah” in 2 Chronicles 22:6. We have also learnt that the
apparent contradiction regarding the ages of Ahaz and Hezekiah in both Kings and
Chronicles is not a mistake. We have also learnt a lot more about the relationship between
the royal lines of Judah and Israel, knowing that this whole problem started by the godly
Jehoshaphat having friendship with the godless Ahab. Another interesting thing is that we
have also shown that no seed of the godless houses of either Ahab or Ethbaal (1 Kings
16:31) has mixed with the ancestry of Christ.
The following is a representation of the genealogical line of Christ and the kings of Judah
form Asa to Manasseh. A solid line represents a natural son (Matthew 1), a dotted line
represents a son-in-law, stepson or adopted son. The Hebrew names are in capitals and the
Greek equivalent names are in lower case letters.
ASA / Asa
|
JEHOSHAPHAT / Josaphat
|
JEHORAM / Joram
|
AZARIAH (UZZIAH) / Ozias
|
Joatham
|
Achaz
|
AHAZIAH (JEHOAHAZ)
|
JOASH
|
AMAZIAH
|
AZARIAH (UZZIAH)
|
JOTHAM
|
AHAZ
HEZEKIAH / Ezekias
|
MANASSEH / Manasses
Note that there are actually six kings not in the direct ancestory of Christ but due to
similarity and repetition of common royal names it appears as though three names have
been left out of Matthew 1. Note also that all names mentioned here are of the seed of
David.
The aim of this is to give an awesome impression of the holiness and accuracy of the Word
of God and to have that childlike belief even when we are unable to fully understand
something. We must always blame our finite and sinful understanding when we come to an
apparent difficulty rather than “correcting” the Word.