Matthew 1:8

Monday, 15 July 2024

 

Asa begot Jehoshaphat, Jehoshaphat begot Joram, and Joram begot Uzziah. Matthew 1:8

 

“And Asa begot Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat begot Joram, and Joram begot Uzziah” (CG).

 

The previous verse finished with the words, “And Abijah begot Asa.” The ongoing genealogy continues with, “And Asa begot Jehoshaphat.”

 

The record of Jehoshaphat is first found in 1 Kings 15:24. However, the narrative at that time switches to the line of the king of Israel and Jehoshaphat is not mentioned again until 1 Kings 22. The summary of his life is found there saying –

 

“Jehoshaphat the son of Asa had become king over Judah in the fourth year of Ahab king of Israel. 42 Jehoshaphat was thirty-five years old when he became king, and he reigned twenty-five years in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Azubah the daughter of Shilhi. 43 And he walked in all the ways of his father Asa. He did not turn aside from them, doing what was right in the eyes of the Lord. Nevertheless the high places were not taken away, for the people offered sacrifices and burned incense on the high places.” 1 Kings 22:41-43

 

The name Jehoshaphat means Yah has Judged or Yah Judges. He was a good king of Judah. Matthew next records, “and Jehoshaphat begot Joram.”

 

This king is called both Jehoram (2 Kings 8:16) and Joram (2 Kings 8:23). Of him, it says –

 

“He was thirty-two years old when he became king, and he reigned eight years in Jerusalem. 18 And he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, just as the house of Ahab had done, for the daughter of Ahab was his wife; and he did evil in the sight of the Lord.” 2 Kings 8:17, 18

 

As such his record defines him as a bad king. His name means Yah is High or Yah is Exalted. With him out of the way, Matthew next skips three generations of kings: Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah. He also omits the reign of Athaliah, the wicked queen who usurped the throne upon the death of Ahaziah, her son. Athaliah was the daughter of Omri, King of Israel. He was a bad king.

 

Joash (aka Jehoash) was a good king during the time of his instruction under Jehoiada the priest. Eventually he was killed and Amaziah, his son, reigned. Amaziah was an ok king, “yet not like his father David” (2 Kings 14:3). Eventually, a conspiracy was formed against him and he was killed. That is when his son Azaiah (aka Uzziah) replaced him. This is where Matthew’s genealogy continues. As it says, “and Joram begot Uzziah.”

 

He is first noted in 2 Kings 14:21. Azariah means Yah Has Helped. Uzziah means something like Strength of Yah or Yah is My Strength. Azariah (Uzziah) was considered a good king over Israel, but he became prideful, attempted to offer incense to the Lord in the temple (a duty that belongs to the priest alone), and he was struck with leprosy till the day he died. He lived in an isolated house apart from the people and he was cut off from the house of the Lord.

 

Life application: There are various suggestions as to why Matthew skips generations in his genealogy. One is that the three generations were omitted to keep the record of generations totaling fourteen to maintain the pattern set forth in Matthew 1:17. This is obvious, but it does not explain why he chose that pattern or why he chose these three to be omitted.

 

There is the suggestion that the three omitted kings were descended from Jezebel and that this is then explained by the words of the second commandment –

 

“For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, 6 but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.” Exodus 20:5, 6

 

That is reasonable, but it may not be the case as well. The word “begot” does not necessarily mean from one generation to the next. Jesus was begotten of all of the people named in His genealogy, being a product of each of them. Therefore, it is not necessary to include all the names.

 

Despite the difficulties in this genealogy, especially when compared to that of Luke’s found in Luke 3, there is no known ancient dispute against them by detractors of the Christian faith. They were considered reasonable and reliable from the very beginning. And more, there are possible explanations for all of the complexities found in them. Referring to the innumerable written commentaries available on them will provide reassurances that these records are acceptable as valid representations of the genealogy of Jesus Christ.

 

Lord God, Your word is big, it is often complicated, and it has mysteries that take careful consideration. And yet, for those who are willing to put in the effort of searching, comparing, and contemplating what is recorded in it, there are always answers that can be found to even the most difficult issues. Thank You for Your word which challenges us to seek You out more and more, no matter how much we already know. Amen.