Christian Churches of God
No. 119
Genealogy of the Messiah
(Edition 2.0 19950604-20050509)
The significance of the genealogy of the Messiah is explained from Adam. The texts in
Matthew 1 and Luke 3 are explained and the apparent contradiction between them and
Chronicles is also explained. The correct and true meaning shows that Messiah was
indeed sent to save sinners.
Christian Churches of God
PO Box 369,
WODEN
ACT 2606,
AUSTRALIA
Email: secretary@ccg.org
(Copyright  1995, 1998, 2005 Wade Cox)
This paper may be freely copied and distributed provided it is copied in total with no alterations or
deletions. The publisher’s name and address and the copyright notice must be included. No charge may
be levied on recipients of distributed copies. Brief quotations may be embodied in critical articles and
reviews without breaching copyright.
This paper is available from the World Wide Web page:
http://www.logon.org and http://www.ccg.org
Page 2
Genealogy of the Messiah
Genealogy of the Messiah
The genealogy of the Messiah is an important
tool in understanding who Messiah was. More
importantly the genealogies convey an
important understanding of the fulfilment of
prophecy and also of biblical law. Their
excision from the Reader’s Digest Bible is a
serious and unfortunate error.
There are a number of genealogical rules that
have to be understood also from the outset.
The first is that only the male lines were
noted. This stems from the law and the
practice that the female was taken into the
tribe of her husband on marriage. There were
a number of laws, which prohibited
intermarriage.
The
prohibitions
on
intermarriage were there for sound reasons.
From Numbers 36 we see that the land was
given for an inheritance by lot to the children
of Israel. The inheritance was outlined through
genealogy. No woman who possessed an
inheritance of the tribes of Israel could be
married outside of her tribe (Num. 36:8). She
was to marry into the family of her father’s
tribe. The inheritance could not be removed
from tribe to tribe. Each was to keep to their
own inheritance (Num. 36:9). For on the
blowing of the Jubilee the inheritance then
passes to the tribe into which the woman
marries (Num. 36:4). The Jubilee rules were
applied from Leviticus 25. Thus genealogy
was essential to the understanding and the
maintenance of the economic system under
the law. This system is held to be reintroduced
under Messiah (see Ezekiel for its
development). God follows the blood lineages
and protects them even under dispersion and
captivity (Amos 9:9).
These rules of inheritance applied also to the
Levites. The houses of the cities of the Levites
were their possession in the Jubilee. Therefore
Levites were bound by the rules of inheritance
over both the priesthood and the cities and the
field of the suburbs of the cities (Lev. 25:3234). This Levitical restriction has application
to the Messianic prophecies, as we will see.
The genealogy of Messiah in the New
Testament is of two lineages, in Matthew 1:17 and Luke 3:23-38, both entirely different.
Moreover, the lineage in Matthew differs from
that in Chronicles. Therefore there has to be a
sound explanation for these contradictions or
the Bible is open to the charge of being
uninspired. Modern Christianity chooses to
ignore the problem going even to the extreme
that we see in the Reader’s Digest Bible. To
understand what is happening is to admit of
other problems which some prefer to ignore.
Matthew and Luke both commence with
Adam. The lineage is a process of narrowing
down the necessity of prophecy to a particular
family in time. The seed of the woman came
from Adam (Gen. 3:15). The seed of the
woman here is in the masculine singular
(zer’a). (The texts of Gen. 17:7; 21:12; and
Gal. 3:16 have relevance. Satan’s power is
removed and his system destroyed from Heb.
2:14; 1Jn. 3:8).
Genesis 17:7 showed that the Covenant and
hence Messiah had to come through
Abraham’s seed. Genesis 21:12 narrows the
lineage to Isaac by whom Abraham’s seed
shall be called. However Ishmael was also
Abraham’s seed and therefore was established
as a nation. However it was through Isaac that
the seed was called.
The lineage of Messiah is further narrowed.
John 7:42 refers to a number of prophecies in
a single text.
John 7:42 Hath not the scripture said, That Christ
cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of
Bethlehem, where David was? (KJV)
The Scriptures that are covered by this text are
found at Psalm 110:1-7 where he is David’s
Lord and Priest of Melchisedek. This text
refers thus to the priest Messiah.
Psalm 132:6,11 shows that it is one of David
and Ephratah that God will sit upon the
throne.
Genealogy of the Messiah
Psalm 132:11 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. (KJV)
Messiah shall be of the root of Jesse and
would be salvation to the Gentiles from Isaiah
11:1,10.
Isaiah 11:1 And there shall come forth a rod out of
the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of
his roots: (KJV)
Isaiah 11:10 And in that day there shall be a root of
Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people;
to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be
glorious. (KJV)
Thus Messiah had to be the seed of the root of
Jesse, the father of David. Messiah is of
David’s line from Jeremiah 23:5-8.
Jeremiah 23:5-8 Behold, the days come, saith the
LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous
Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and
shall execute judgment and justice in the earth. 6 In
his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell
safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be
called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. 7
Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD,
that they shall no more say, The LORD liveth,
which brought up the children of Israel out of the
land of Egypt; 8 But, The LORD liveth, which
brought up and which led the seed of the house of
Israel out of the north country, and from all
countries whither I had driven them; and they shall
dwell in their own land. (KJV)
This text confounds modern Christianity
because it shows absolutely that Messiah shall
rule on earth and that there will be a second
exodus which establishes Israel.
Micah 5:2 shows that Messiah will be born
from Bethlehem.
Micah 5:2 But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though
thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out
of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be
ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from
of old, from everlasting. (KJV)
Thus the seed is of Adam through Abraham,
through Isaac, through Judah, through David
and from Bethlehem. This is the traditional
narrowing of the lineage. The lineage can and
should be narrowed further than this. There
are two aspects of the Messianic advent which
show that Messiah is of two advents for two
purposes. The first purpose was as the priest
Messiah to establish the order of Melchisedek,
to create a priesthood without genealogy, so
Page 3
that it might be opened to the Gentiles as the
gift of God.
The elect have been ransomed by Christ as an
order of kings and priests (Rev. 1:6; 5:9-10).
Rev. 5:9-10
And they sang new praise saying, Thou art worthy
to take the book and to open the seals thereof; for
thou wast slain and hast redeemed us to God by thy
blood out of every tribe and tongue and people and
nation.10 And hast made them for our God kings
and priests; and they shall reign on the earth.
The Aaronic priesthood therefore had to come
to an end and with it the Temple both in
Jerusalem and also in Egypt at Heliopolis. The
temple of Leontopolis in the nome of
Heliopolis was established by Onias IV
through the prophecy of Isaiah 19:19. It was
established in the land of Goshen to assist in
the fulfilling of a prophecy in Hosea of both
Israel and Messiah, that is, Out of Egypt have
I called my son (Hos. 11:1; Mat. 2:15). The
temple in Egypt operated from c. 160 BCE to
71 CE when it was closed by order of
Vespasian after the destruction of Jerusalem.
The closure thus completed the Sign of Jonah,
extending from 30 CE - 70 CE, and being
completed from 1 Nisan 70 CE to 1 Nisan 71
CE (see the paper The Sign of Jonah and the
History of the Reconstruction of the Temple
(No. 13)). The authority of the temple was
removed after the forty years had expired
which had been allowed for Judah’s
repentance. The forty years followed on from
the three years of Messiah’s ministry on a year
for a day against that of the ministry of Jonah
to Nineveh.
The new order was after the order of
Melchisedek (Ps. 110:4). Christ was the High
Priest of that order. The elect are the priests,
being without genealogy (Heb. 7:1-21). These
priests are also kings given a kingdom (Heb.
12:28). It is self evident that a High Priest can
only be so if there are other priests over which
he might rule. By definition those cannot be
Aaronic, although the sons of Aaron will also
be part of that priesthood (Rev. 7:7). The
concept of the priesthood is wider than the
nation, as the concept of Israel is also
extended to include all nations.
Page 4
The Messianic lineage included not only a
Davidic lineage but also an Aaronic lineage.
The prophecy shows that the lineages were of
David through Nathan and Levi through
Shimei. This prophecy in Zechariah 12:10-14
also shows that Messiah was to be killed.
Zechariah 12:10-14 "And I will pour out on the
house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a
spirit of compassion and supplication, so that, when
they look on him whom they have pierced, they
shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only
child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps
over a first-born. 11 On that day the mourning in
Jerusalem will be as great as the mourning for
Hadadrim'mon in the plain of Megid'do. 12 The land
shall mourn, each family by itself; the family of the
house of David by itself, and their wives by
themselves; the family of the house of Nathan by
itself, and their wives by themselves; 13 the family
of the house of Levi by itself, and their wives by
themselves; the family of the Shim'e-ites by itself,
and their wives by themselves; 14 and all the
families that are left, each by itself, and their wives
by themselves. (RSV) (note the KJV reads me
whom they have pierced based on western codices,
the eastern codices show the correct word to be
him).
The text shows two lineages. The first is
David through Nathan the second is Levi
through Shimei. This act was to cause a
destruction and a mourning in Jerusalem and
the nation (vv. 11-14). The prophecy thus
linked the destruction of Jerusalem to the
death of Messiah. The time span of the forty
years from 30 CE to 70 CE is thus of
significance. Jerusalem was surrounded by
Roman armies from 1 Nisan 70 CE. The
Jerusalem temple was destroyed in 70 CE
from Atonement however the Egyptian temple
was closed in 71 CE from the order of
Vespasian following the Jewish war. The
destruction continued in the countryside after
the destruction of the temple.
Only Matthew and Luke are concerned with
genealogies. Mark and John commence with
Jesus as an adult, thus genealogies are not as
relevant.
In his paper (“The Genealogy of Messiah”,
The Vineyard, November 1993, pp. 10-13,
reprinted from Issues, A Messianic Jewish
Perspective) Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum of
Ariel Ministries says:
Genealogy of the Messiah
In Matthew, Joseph plays an active role, but
Miriam (Mary) plays a passive role. Matthew
records angels appearing to Joseph, but there is no
record of angels appearing to Miriam. Matthew
records Joseph’s thoughts but nothing is recorded
about Miriam’s thoughts. On the other hand,
Luke’s Gospel tells the same story from Miriam’s
perspective. From the context of each Gospel, it
should be very evident that the genealogy of
Matthew is that of Joseph, and the genealogy of
Luke is that of Miriam.
The question then raised is: why do we need two
genealogies, especially since Y’shua (Jesus) was
not the real son of Joseph? A popular and common
answer is: Matthew’s Gospel gives the royal line,
whereas Luke’s Gospel gives the real line. From
this concept another theory arises. Since seemingly
Joseph was the heir apparent to David’s throne, and
Jesus was the adopted son of Joseph, Jesus could
claim the right to David’s throne.
On the other hand, Luke’s Gospel gives the real
line, showing that Y’shua himself was a descendant
of David. Through Miriam, he was a member of the
house of David, but he could claim the right to sit
on David’s throne through Joseph, the heir
apparent. Actually the exact opposite is true
(emphasis added).
Arnold Fruchtenbaum raises very important
issues in his work, however he does not tie
them in as is necessary from an understanding
of Zechariah as we see above. From Zechariah
we see the lineage of David through Nathan
mentioned. Nothing is mentioned of David
through Solomon and for very good reason.
As noted by Fruchtenbaum, there were two
requirements for kingship in the Hebrew
Scriptures. These were adopted after the
division of the kingdom after the death of
Solomon.
The first requirement to hold the throne of
Judah was to be a Davidic descendent.
Messiah was to be seated on the throne of
David (Isa. 9:7). The king could only be of the
House of David. Jeremiah 33:20-21 shows
that the covenant with David and his seed, and
also the Levites, could not be broken. Any
conspiracy to do away with the House of
David such as we see from Isaiah 7:5-6 was
prophesied to fail.
Isaiah 7:5-6 Because Syria, with E'phraim and the
son of Remali'ah, has devised evil against you,
saying, 6 "Let us go up against Judah and terrify it,
Genealogy of the Messiah
and let us conquer it for ourselves, and set up the
son of Ta'be-el as king in the midst of it," (RSV)
The prophesied failure was to preserve the
kingdom so that Scripture could not be
broken. Messiah will return to take up that
kingdom in accordance with Daniel 2:35,4445.
The failure of any conspiracy is seen from
Isaiah 8:9-15 where it is rather God that
should be feared.
Isaiah 8:9-15 Be broken, you peoples, and be
dismayed; give ear, all you far countries; gird
yourselves and be dismayed; gird yourselves and be
dismayed. 10 Take counsel together, but it will
come to nought; speak a word, but it will not stand,
for God is with us. 11 For the LORD spoke thus to
me with his strong hand upon me, and warned me
not to walk in the way of this people, saying: 12 "Do
not call conspiracy all that this people call
conspiracy, and do not fear what they fear, nor be
in dread. 13 But the LORD of hosts, him you shall
regard as holy; let him be your fear, and let him be
your dread. 14 And he will become a sanctuary, and
a stone of offense, and a rock of stumbling to both
houses of Israel, a trap and a snare to the
inhabitants of Jerusalem. 15 And many shall stumble
thereon; they shall fall and be broken; they shall be
snared and taken." (RSV)
Anyone who tried to rule on the throne of
Israel without divine sanction was doomed.
All those who usurped Samaria’s throne
without prophetic sanction were assassinated
(1Kings 11:26-39; 15:28-30; 16:1-4,11-15;
21:21-29; 2Kings 9:6-10; 10:29-31; 14:8-12).
Another significant and totally ignored text
relating the household of David to Messiah is
that of Zechariah 12:7-9 which precedes that
quoted above but actually is placed in
sequence behind the activities described in
Zechariah 12:10-14. Zechariah 12:10-14
relates to the killing of Messiah at the first
advent. The text above it in Zechariah 12:7-9
relates to the return and the battles of the last
days.
Zechariah 12:7-9 The LORD also shall save the
tents of Judah first, that the glory of the house of
David and the glory of the inhabitants of Jerusalem
do not magnify themselves against Judah. 8 In that
day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of
Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that
day shall be as David; and the house of David shall
be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them. 9
Page 5
And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will
seek to destroy all the nations that come against
Jerusalem. (KJV)
The significant aspects of this text are that:
1. Judah is converted and saved in precedence
so that the glory of the House of David and
also that of Jerusalem is not magnified
against Judah.
2. Jerusalem shall be defended by the Lord.
He that is feeble among them shall be as
David; and the House of David shall be as
God, as the angel of the Lord [Yehovah]
before them.
3. In that day all nations that come against
Jerusalem shall be destroyed.
These points are very significant. To address
the last point first, it is obvious that we are
concerned with the last days and the prophetic
battle of the Valley of Meggido from verse 11.
Thus the scene of the first death is used to
determine the final victory over the nations.
The first two aspects show that there is a
distinction made between the House of David
and that of the House of Judah when
theoretically one springs from the other.
However this is not the case with the
Household of David in the last days because it
is extended to embrace the Gentiles under the
elect as we have seen above where the
Gentiles are blessed through Messiah.
This sequence shows a physical and a spiritual
level. Firstly, the feeble of Jerusalem will be
strengthened to be as David. Secondly, the
household at this time will be as Elohim or
God as the Angel of Yehovah (or Yahovah)
was before them. The Angel of Yehovah was
the Angel of Great Counsel of the LXX, Isaiah
9:6, Israel’s second God who was the Angel of
Yehovah (or Yahovah) of Zechariah 12:8.
This Angel was an elohim and was the face of
God, the Peniel of the Patriarchs, the El Bethel
or God of the House of God of Abraham. This
Angel was the God who was anointed as God
by his God with the oil of gladness above his
partners from Psalm 45:6-7 which Hebrews
1:8-9 shows us refers to Messiah.
Page 6
Genealogy of the Messiah
Thus the elect become elohim, as Christ was
elohim, as the pre-incarnate Angel of Yahovah
in the Old Testament, and as he is elohim
from his resurrection from the dead as a son of
God in power (Rom. 1:4; Heb. 1:8-9).
Nahshon, and Nahshon the father of Salmon, 5 and
Salmon the father of Bo'az by Rahab, and Bo'az the
father of Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of
Jesse, 6 and Jesse the father of David the king. And
David was the father of Solomon by the wife of
Uri'ah, (RSV)
This is a powerful concept. It also shows the
magnitude of the calling of God and the plan
of God. It is ignored because it does not
accord with orthodox views from the Council
of Chalcedon which occurred around 451.
The women mentioned are Tamar, Rahab,
Ruth, and Bathsheba who was the wife of
Uriah. The significance of these women
demonstrates specific lessons in the
genealogy. Sarah was not mentioned. She was
undoubtedly more significant than all.
Fruchtenbaum makes two pertinent points
about them.
We are thus in a position to relate Matthew
and Luke to the rest of Scripture in their
proper context. The genealogy in Matthew has
a number of distinct aspects which confer a
series of biblical lessons and show
conclusively why that lineage had to be that of
Joseph. Y’shua or Joshua could not be
Messiah from the account in Matthew alone.
The account in Luke is needed to demonstrate
why in spite of the lineage of Joseph, he could
be king and how God was to reconcile the
injunction He had instituted in the line of
David and the kingship through the prophet
Jeremiah.
Messiah is named by divine direction. His
name is given in Matthew 1:21 and Luke 1:31.
The name is derived from the name Hoshea
(as in Num. 13:16) with the prefix Yah
pronounced or written Jah. This means
effectively God is our Salvation. Yahoshua is
then rendered as Yeshua or Joshua in usage.
Jesus is a Greek version of Joshua and is
derived from non-Hebrew sources. The form
in Greek may well be influenced by Esus of
the trinity system of the Hyperborean Celts.
Matthew commences his lineage by linking
three key figures. Yeshua or Joshua called
Jesus is the Son of David, the Son of
Abraham. He then commences the lineage
from Abraham proceeding to the line of
Judah. The brothers are merely mentioned.
This is to acknowledge prophecy. The lineage
breaks with tradition and mentions women
from verses 3-6.
Matthew 1:3-6 and Judah the father of Perez and
Zerah by Tamar, and Perez the father of Hezron,
and Hezron the father of Ram, 4 and Ram the father
of Ammin'adab, and Ammin'adab the father of
First, they were all Gentiles. This is obvious with
Tamar, Rahab and Ruth. It was probably true of
Bathsheba, since her first husband, Uriah, was a
Hittite. Here Matthew hints at something he makes
clear later: that while the main purpose of the
coming of Jesus was to save the lost sheep of the
house of Israel, the Gentiles would also benefit
from his coming. Second, three of these women
were guilty of sexual sins. Bathsheba was guilty of
adultery, Rahab was guilty of prostitution and
Tamar was guilty of incest. Again, Matthew only
hints at a point he later clarifies: that the purpose of
the Messiah’s coming was to save sinners ...
Reconciling sinners to God is the primary
point of the sacrifices of Messiah. That is the
crucial point in the Gospels.
Only those who do not understand the
spiritual significance of the saving grace of
Messiah become preoccupied with trying to
prove that these women were not Gentiles and
that they were not sinners. It is unimportant
what their status was given the objectives of
the incarnation of Messiah. His sacrifice was
enough. That is not fully understood. Time is
thus wasted trying to prove that Rahab was a
descendent of Israel among the Canaanites.
Also that she was a widow by resort to
Sanskrit words for an innkeeper. The fact was
that she came from a prominent family. Her
people, under the religious system at the time,
practised temple prostitution and as such she
could hardly have avoided the issue, much
less been stigmatised because of it.
Time is also wasted trying to prove that Ruth
was not a Moabitess, from the injunction
against marriage with a Moabite, despite the
wording of the texts. It is asserted that she was
Genealogy of the Messiah
in fact a descendent of Israel in Moab of
perhaps Manasseh, Reuben or Gad (Josh.
1:12-15). That is unnecessary. Ruth’s own
statements indicate that the god of her people
was different from that of Naomi and that she
swore allegiance not only to Naomi but also to
her God (Ruth 1:16).
The fact of the matter was that the royal
lineage was opened to Gentiles and to sinners
commencing from the very first activities of
the tribes in Canaan. This has significance for
the elect.
Another major point of Matthew’s genealogy
is that he is selective in naming only the direct
lineage. Solomon is also mentioned because
the kingship rested in him. He built the
temple. However, he also lapsed into idolatry
and his line is listed then to Jeconiah who was
one of the last kings before the Babylonian
captivity. The lineage of Joseph is then traced
from Jeconiah to Joseph. Thus Joseph is a
descendent of David but through Jeconiah.
This has great significance.
Jeremiah 22:24-30 "As I live, says the LORD,
though Coni'ah the son of Jehoi'akim, king of
Judah, were the signet ring on my right hand, yet I
would tear you off 25 and give you into the hand of
those who seek your life, into the hand of those of
whom you are afraid, even into the hand of
Nebuchadrez'zar king of Babylon and into the hand
of the Chalde'ans. 26 I will hurl you and the mother
who bore you into another country, where you were
not born, and there you shall die. 27 But to the land
to which they will long to return, there they shall
not return." 28 Is this man Coni'ah a despised,
broken pot, a vessel no one cares for? Why are he
and his children hurled and cast into a land which
they do not know? 29 O land, land, land, hear the
word of the LORD! 30 Thus says the LORD: "Write
this man down as childless, a man who shall not
succeed in his days; for none of his offspring shall
succeed in sitting on the throne of David, and
ruling again in Judah." (RSV)
Coniah is formed by removing Je from
Jeconiah or Let Jehovah [or Jah] establish.
The removal of the divine name is meant to
show the departure of God from Jeconiah. The
signet on His or God’s right hand can be seen
from Haggai 2:23.
Haggai 2:23 On that day, says the LORD of hosts, I
will take you, O Zerub'babel my servant, the son of
She-al'ti-el, says the LORD, and make you like a
Page 7
signet ring; for I have chosen you, says the LORD
of hosts." (RSV)
Zerubbabel was listed in Matthew as the son
of Shealtiel. However we know from
1Chronicles 3:18-19 that he was the son of
Pediah. Yet Matthew and also Ezra 3:2; 5:2
say he was the son of Shealtiel.
1Chronicles 3:17-19 and the sons of Jeconi'ah, the
captive: Sheal'tiel his son, 18 Malchi'ram, Pedai'ah,
Shenaz'zar, Jekami'ah, Hosh'ama, and Nedabi'ah; 19
and the sons of Pedai'ah: Zerub'babel and Shim'e-i;
and the sons of Zerub'babel: Meshul'lam and
Hanani'ah, and Shelo'mith was their sister; (RSV)
How is this contradiction resolved? The text
actually reflects an aspect of the law.
Deuteronomy 25:5-6 "If brothers dwell together,
and one of them dies and has no son, the wife of the
dead shall not be married outside the family to a
stranger; her husband's brother shall go in to her,
and take her as his wife, and perform the duty of a
husband's brother to her. 6 And the first son whom
she bears shall succeed to the name of his brother
who is dead, that his name may not be blotted out
of Israel. (RSV)
This duty is mandatory. Failing to execute this
responsibility (through covetousness) was the
sin for which Onan was killed (Gen. 38:8-10).
Zerubbabel thus succeeded to the lineage of
Shealtiel through the legal obligations placed
upon Pediah who then died. Shenazzar thus
became regent or guardian to Zerubbabel for
the return to Israel as noted in Ezra 1:8-11;
5:14-16 where he is termed Sheshbazzar.
Strong and others hold Sheshbazzar to be
Zerubbabel’s Persian name because to have it
otherwise, and Zerubbabel so young, requires
the reconstruction of the temple to be
relocated to its correct place in the reign of
Darius II, instead of being misplaced in the
reign of Darius I, which both rabbinical
Judaism and orthodox Christianity would
prefer for their own reasons (see The Sign of
Jonah and the History of the Reconstruction
of the Temple (No. 13); and Reading the Law
with Ezra and Nehemiah (No. 250)).
From the prophecy given through Jeremiah
the lineage was further limited. God decreed
that none of Jeconiah’s offspring could
Page 8
succeed in sitting on the throne of David and
ruling again in Judah. The descent however, to
Zerubbabel of the line, showed that God
would choose of this line for specific tasks as
a signet ring. In other words, as a seal of God.
Thus Messiah could not be the natural son of
Joseph and sit upon the throne, without
specific divine approval or Scripture would
have been broken. Christ would have been
disqualified from sitting on the throne if he
were the natural son and, as Joseph himself
could not be the heir apparent, he could not
inherit the title by adoption. God set about
repairing the breach and restoring the lineage
in another way. Matthew is aware of this
problem. That is why he commences the
Gospel with this lineage thus demonstrating
the problem and then giving the account of the
virgin birth which he obviously saw as
overcoming the problem. Following on from
the genealogy, Matthew 1:18-25 shows that it
could only be by the virgin birth by Mariam or
Miriam (Mary) that Christ could ascend the
throne. This has significance for the Jewish
people in that only through Messiah could
they ascend to the spiritual kingdom and
spiritual priesthood.
There is a third aspect of the lineage to
Zerubabbel that requires examination.
Zorobabel was the 23rd generation in male line
descent from King David (No. 1). He was the
accepted heir. The details of his ancestry and
the solution of the two fathers listed for him
being Shealtiel and Pediah (1Chro. 3:19) are
explained under the Levirate laws and the
explanation above. The matter of this lineage
is also examined in the paper From David and
the Exilarchs to the House of Windsor (No.
67), according to Jewish chronology using the
Darius I sequence. The correct timings are
dealt with in the paper The Sign of Jonah and
the History of the Reconstruction of the
Temple (No. 13).
Zorobabel was the royal Jewish heir and 3rd
Exilarch at Babylon ca 545 BCE. He was 8th
Governor of Judea ca 537-536 BCE. He was
Prince of Judah ca. 515 BCE and was recalled
Genealogy of the Messiah
and imprisoned 513 BCE and executed 510
BCE.
He married three wives. The first wife was
Amytis a Babylonian Princess, who was called
a foreign wife. She bore him Shazrezzar,
which is a Babylonian name. He was the
ancestor of a major Davidic line.
Zorobabel’s second wife was Rhodah who
was a Persian princess who later remarried a
Persian prince and was also called a foreign
wife. She bore him Reza (a Persian name). He
was allegedly the half brother of Darius, king
of Persia through his mother. It is this line that
is referred to in the ancestry of Mariam if we
accept that the line of Zorobabel was in fact
through Nathan and the adopted son of
Jeconiah, namely Shealtiel who was the actual
son of Neri(ah). The Crown Princess Tamar
was the means of the change in lineage. This
is another incident of a Princess Tamar being
used to transfer the kingship. We will examine
this further below.
Thirdly, Zorobabel married Esthra, who was a
Jewish princess and from whom the line of the
current royal family is descended.
The prophecy concerning the throne and the
place of Zorobabel in the process is seen to be
part of the process of the birthright promises
of the last days.
Remember that the father of Zorobabel was
Shealtiel/Pediah and the father of Shealtiel
was not actually Jeconiah. He was the adopted
son of Jeconiah and was his acknowledged
heir (Mat. 1:12). He was the son of the wife of
King Jehoiakin or Jeconiah by a former
husband of Princess Tamar, namely Prince
Neri(ah). See also Luke 3:27. Now this fact
gives another rise to the issue of from whom
the lineage of Zorobabel or Zerubbabel was
actually descended.
We see that the line in Luke was of David
through Nathan, and the line in Matthew was
of David through Solomon. If this explanation
is taken into account, then the line of Jeconiah
and the curse placed upon it is overcome in
Genealogy of the Messiah
that the lineage through Zorobabel is through
Shealtiel. However, the reality is that the
father was claimed to be Pedaiah under the
Levirate laws, and the progeny goes to the
father’s line. That lineage is in fact in Nathan
through Neri or Neriah. It is equally probable
that this was the means that was used to
overcome the curse placed on Jeconiah’s
lineage. Shealtiel appears to be the focal point
in the combining of the lines. The lineage
certainly sits on the throne of Judah, albeit in
exile, and has done so for centuries, and
recently over the ten tribes.
The major fact in all this is that we can trace
the ancestry in the royal houses of Israel down
to Northern Germany and the United
Kingdom who are the Northern tribes of
Israel. The kingship rests in Israel to this day
until the return of the Messiah whose right it
is.
The Rightful Prince of Judah
It is of major importance to note that in the
line of the Exilarchs (cf. Cox ibid, (No. 67)
above), that from the year 12 BCE which was
the earliest date that Christ could have been
born and which was in fact the date of the
original census decree by Augustus from
which all subsequent census undertaking in
the Roman Empire commenced, there was no
Exilarch on the throne of Judah. From that
time onward they were deposed. It was only
after the death of Messiah in 30 CE that there
was an Exilarch appointed as Prince of Judah.
Thus, God did not permit an alternate prince
to sit on, or be eligible and nominated for the
throne of Judah during the entire cycle of the
incarnation of Jesus Christ who was the
rightful prince of Judah.
There is another aspect of the lineage which
bears reflection and that is that there are a
number of generations mentioned in Matthew
1:17.
So all the generations from Abraham to David were
fourteen generations, and from David to the
deportation to Babylon fourteen generations, and
from the deportation to Babylon to the Christ
fourteen generations. (RSV)
Page 9
The grouping of the generations are seen to be
significant in number groupings. The
genealogy of Messiah has an extensive
significance from Adam. The first seven
generations from Adam have significance to
the Plan of Salvation. The grouping in
Matthew of three fourteens are to highlight the
activities of God. Abraham was called and set
apart. Fourteen generations later David the
layman was set apart (1Sam. 16:13). David
established Israel as a power and built the
Temple through his son Solomon for whom he
prepared the nation and the resources.
Fourteen generations later the end result of
human government and kingship was
captivity. Fourteen generations later, after the
nation had been restored under the priesthood,
they were to be judged by the advent of
Messiah and dispersed under the Sign of
Jonah (see paper The Sign of Jonah and the
History of the Reconstruction of the Temple
(No. 13) ibid.). This was not understood.
More importantly the 42 generations of
Matthew from Abraham to Christ refers to a
concept found in the construction of the
Temple. The Temple was constructed on the
spiritual plan of the Jubilee. Six levels applied
to the nave or entrance symbolising the
development of man. The seventh cycle was
in the body proper. This sequence symbolised
that Messiah would make entry into the
temple proper accessible from his advent. By
his death he tore the Temple veil making the
way open into the naos or Holy of Holies,
which the elect were (1Cor. 3:16). This way
was opened fully from the destruction of the
physical Temple (Heb. 9:8).
Both priesthood and kingship had been
established and judged wanting by Messiah.
Messiah was thus the Messiah of Aaron and
Israel; he was both priest-Messiah and kingMessiah. The one Messiah of two advents was
expected by Israel, as we know from the Dead
Sea Scrolls (see G. Vermes The Dead Sea
Scrolls in English, re Damascus Rule VII and
the fragment from cave IV). Vermes, among
others, holds that these texts show that the
Messiah of Aaron and the Messiah of Israel
Page 10
were understood to be the same entity of
different advents by first century Judaism.
The answer to the problems raised from the
Matthew genealogy is answered by him from
1:18. The more comprehensive answers to the
texts are provided by Luke. Thus both should
be read in conjunction.
Another significant point made by Arnold
Fruchtenbaum regarding the genealogy of
Messiah, which also has broader application is
that of the Judaic customs of the time. He says
of Luke’s genealogy:
Unlike Matthew, Luke follows strict Jewish
procedure and custom in that he omits no names
and mentions no women. However, if by Jewish
custom one could not mention the name of a
woman, but wished to trace her line, how would
one do so? He would use the name of her husband.
(Possible Old Testament precedents for this
practice are Ezra 2:61 and Nehemiah 7:63).
That would raise a second question: If someone
studied a genealogy, how would he know whether
the genealogy were that of the husband or that of
the wife, since in either case the husband’s name
would be used? The answer is not difficult: the
problem lies with the English language.
In English it is not good grammar to use a definite
article (the) before a proper name (‘the’ Matthew,
‘the’ Miriam); however, it is quite permissible in
Greek grammar. In the Greek text of Luke’s
genealogy, every single name mentioned has the
Greek definite article ‘the’ with one exception: the
name of Joseph (Luke 3:23). Someone reading the
original would understand by the missing definite
article from Joseph’s name that this was not really
Joseph’s genealogy but his wife Miriam’s.
Furthermore, although many translations of Luke
3:23 read: “...being supposedly the son of Joseph,
the son of Heli...”, because of the missing Greek
definite article before the name of Joseph, the same
verse could be translated: “Being the son (as was
supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli...” (emphasis
retained).
In other words although Yehoshua (Yeshua,
Joshua or Jesus) was supposed to be the son of
Joseph he was in fact the descendent of Heli
who was the Father of Miriam. The Jerusalem
Talmud recognised this genealogy to be that
of Miriam and not of Joseph. It refers to
Miriam as the daughter of Heli in Hagigah
2:4.
Genealogy of the Messiah
The use of the definite article in the Greek text
also has application when making distinction
between Messiah and God, for example in
John 1:1,18; 1John 5:20. This has been noted
extensively over time by sects in disagreement
with so-called orthodoxy (e.g. the Socinians;
see Heydock commentary to the 1851 reprint
Catholic or Douay-Reims Bible).
Luke sets out to trace Christ back to Adam
thus identifying the process of the seed of the
woman from Adam. This text identifies the
Davidic lineage with Nathan which is vital to
fulfil the prophecy in Zechariah. More
importantly it is then apart from the Jeconiah
lineage which had been removed, among other
things, to make way for the rule of the High
Priesthood. Thus Yehoshua or Joshua was a
descendent of David from his mother.
Therefore the virgin birth apart is developed
first and then the genealogy is mentioned here
in Luke. He thus establishes the first
requirement for kingship that is Davidic
lineage apart from Jeconiah.
He establishes the second requirement to be of
the line of Nathan and of the family also of
Levi through Shimei from the outset by his
outline of the family relationship of Miriam to
Elisabeth wife of Zacharias, the High Priest of
the Division of Abijah (or Abia), which was
the eighth division of the Temple Priesthood
(see 1Chron. 24:10; Neh. 12:17). The twentyfour divisions were reformed after the return
from four divisions, by lot, with the original
names (see Comp. Bible fn. and App. 179 III).
The wife of Zecharias was Elisabeth (named
for Aaron’s wife Elisheba (Ex. 6:23) and spelt
Elizabeth in the LXX). She was of the
daughters of Aaron and hence she was a
Levite (Luke 1:5). She was the mother of John
the Baptist by divine direction. Thus John was
appointed. Miriam (or Mary) was of the
family of Elisabeth (Lk. 1:36). Thus Miriam
must have possessed Levitical bloodlines as
well as being of the House of David.
We can only guess at the lineage of Levi being
through Shimei, however it can be assumed,
as Scripture cannot be broken. The
Genealogy of the Messiah
demonstration of Levitical lineage is enough.
The divine inspiration of Zecharias and
Elisabeth and the naming of John brings us to
the next point.
There were others of the House of David not
of the line of Jeconiah. Thus the issue must be
one of divine appointment which then
constitutes the third requirement for the
kingship. Luke proceeds to establish the
requirement for divine appointment at Luke
1:30-33.
Luke 1:30-33 And the angel said to her, "Do not be
afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. 31
And behold, you will conceive in your womb and
bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. 32 He
will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most
High; and the Lord God will give to him the throne
of his father David, 33 and he will reign over the
house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there
will be no end." (RSV)
Thus the Lord God gave him the throne of his
father David. He fulfilled the requirement by
divine appointment.
He was of the seed of the woman as it was
prophesied from Genesis. Matthew showed
why he could not be king by lineage from
Joseph but only by virgin birth and divine
appointment. Luke showed why he fulfilled
other prophecy not fully understood by either
rabbinical Judaism or orthodox Christianity.
The rabbinical objections to his Messiahship
on the grounds that it must be through the
lineage of his father are spurious on the
grounds of prophecy and the requirement to be
the son of God. Israel’s elohim could not
assume physical being by natural means. He
became human under direction of his elohim
who was the El Elyon, the God Most High.
This requirement was prophesied by Isaiah
who said:
Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself will give
you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive
and bear a son, and shall call his name Imman'u-el.
(RSV)
Page 11
The requirement is that God with us can only
be achieved if the El sent was formerly an
elohim and indeed the elohim of Israel
anointed as elohim by his elohim as noted
from Psalm 45:6-7. He received his humanity
entirely from his mother. Thus the traditions
of Jewish nationality and tribal identity were
transcended by this being so that he could
assume the priesthood after the order of
Melchisedek and hence become head of an
order of kings and priests selected regardless
of lineage but allocated to all tribes as we see
from Revelation 7:3-8.
He is the son of David and the son of Abraham
from Matthew 1:1. Luke 3:38 terms him the
son of Adam and the son of God. He thus
achieves the fourfold aspects reflected also in
the gospels. As son of David he is King
through Judah. As son of Abraham he is King
of Israel as heir to the promises conferred on
and through Joseph. He is also the head of the
other nations of Abraham. As the son of Adam
he is a man and hence qualified to lead
humanity to salvation through death. As the
son of God he assumes the elohim status that
he laid down at the incarnation, through his
resurrection from the dead as son of God in
power (Rom. 1:4). He qualified to become the
Morning Star and he will share that rule with
his household (Rev. 2:27-28; 22:16; cf. Zech.
12:8) as they share the divine nature of God as
he does (2Pet. 1:4). The Peshitta says:
27
And he shall shepherd them with a rod of iron;
like the vessels of the potter they shall be shattered,
even as I was disciplined by my Father.
28
And I will give him the Morning Star.
Messiah was obedient unto death and so also
must we be obedient and he will give us the
rulership of the Morning Star as a Son of God;
as an elohim, as the Angel of Yahovah at our
head. (Zech. 12:8).
q