Thread by @JamesBejon

MINI-THREAD: A Genealogy, some Numerology, and even a bit of Theology.

Matthew’s genealogy is a carefully constructed composition.

And it’s as close to a proof-text for gematria as I’m likely to find in Scripture, so I’d be a fool not to take advantage of it.

(Or perhaps I’d be a fool to do so. Suggestions on a tweet please.)

In any case, the study of genealogies has the potential to lead to tenure.

Leslie McFall wrote 500,000 words on Matt. 1.11 alone.

And b. Pesachim 62b refers to 400 camel loads’ worth of commentaries on the Benjaminite genealogy of 1 Chr. 8.37–9.44, which are sadly now lost to us:

(1 Chr. 8.37–9.44 is topped and tailed by references to Saul’s descendant אצל.)

To kick off, then, a few words on the numerical properties of Matthew’s genealogy:

🔹 It’s built around the number 14.

🔹 It divides into three lists of 14 (cp. 1.17).

🔹 The name ‘David’ (דוד) has gematrial value of 14.

🔹 And the name ‘David’ is mentioned three times in the course of Matthew’s genealogy (per its three 14-generation lists) and 14 times elsewhere in Matthew.

The number 42 is equally significant.

🔹 Matthew’s list consists of a total of 42 names (counted per 1.17), which makes Jesus the 42nd generation from Abraham.

🔹 The most frequent word in Matthew’s genealogy is τον, which occurs 42 times and has a gematrial value of 420.

🔹 And, insofar as Jesus ushers in a 7th heptad, he can be associated with a ‘Jubilee’ (יובל), which has a gematrial value of 42.

Meanwhile, the notion of a 42-generation list has a nice harmony to it,

since the words ואלה תולדת = ‘Now these are the generations’ (cp. Gen. 11.27, 25.19, etc.) resonate with the number 42 (insofar as 42 = ואלה and 420 = תולדת/תלדות).

None of these allusions are insignificant.

Matthew wants to portray Jesus not as an otherworldly deliverer who materialises out of thin air,

but as the summary and fulfilment of Israel’s history—the culmination of Abraham’s ‘generations’ (תולדת),

the long-awaited successor to king David (דוד),

and the one who will usher in a new phase in Israel’s history.

Matthew also wants to associate Jesus with a particular *shape*.

Insofar as Matthew’s genealogy moves forward in groups of 14, it resembles the course of the moon,

which waxes for 14 days and wanes for 14 days.

Over the course of 14 generations, God’s promise to Abraham unfolds and reaches a climax in the rise of king David.

We then *expect* David to usher in a line of godly and successful kings in 1.6b–11,

but none is forthcoming.

With the mention of Bath-Sheba, Uriah, and Rehoboam, we are instead plunged into the murky depths of Judah’s history

as a line of 14 largely godless kings lead Israel down in exile,

where they remain until, with the birth/adoption of Shealtiel, a corner is turned and Jehoiachin’s curse is undone.

Suffice it to say, Jesus must tread a similar road.

Jesus will soon be carried away to Egypt (Matt. 2.13–15), and will ultimately be brought down to the grave,

into an exile of death.

But, just as Jehoiachin is ‘lifted up’ from prison (2 Kgs. 25), so Jesus will be raised up and delivered from ‘the bars of the grave’ (Jon. 2).

And, like Shealtiel, Jesus will hence obtain redemption for his people and breathe new life into their future.

Note: For further details on Shealtiel’s role within Matthew, cf. academia.edu/41135348/.

Matthew’s genealogy is not, therefore, a literary abstraction.

Matthew claims to have uncovered a fundamental pattern/periodicity in Israel’s history.

Israel’s story unfolds in blocks of 14, each of which reaches a significant zenith/nadir in its 14th generation.

And hence, just as Israel traverses the wilderness in 42 discrete phases (Num. 33),

so she traverses the long era between Abraham and the fulfilment of his promise by means of 42 generations.

As such, Jesus arrives right on time, and lives out Israel’s history in his life, death, and resurrection.

——————

But how authentic is the pattern portrayed in Matthew’s genealogy?

Is it grounded in historical/textual reality? Or is it a pattern of Matthew’s own creation?

Well, Matthew’s genealogy certainly isn’t complete.

Matthew traverses 1,000 years with his first 14 generations, 400 with his next 14, and 60 with his final 14.

Matthew’s genealogies must, therefore, be selective.

But who’s made the relevant selections? And on what basis?

In terms of the final leg of Matthew’s genealogy, we lack the data to say,

but it’s at least *possible* Jesus was listed as the 14th generation from the exile in certain genealogies.

When Rabbi Eleazar was appointed to the Sanhedrin (in c. 80 AD), he was announced to be a 10th-generation descendant of Ezra (b. Berachot 27b).

And 10 generations is too few to take us from c. 450 BC to 70 AD.

Might Azariah’s count of generations therefore have been based on a selective genealogy (streamlined per a known convention)?

And might a similarly selective genealogy (from Ezra’s day onwards) have been available to Matthew, which he included (unedited) in his genealogy?

It’s possible.

If the interval from 450 BC to 70 AD could (conventionally) be spanned by a 10-generation genealogy,

then it would seem about right to span the interval from c. 600 BC to Jesus’ birth with a 14-generation genealogy,

and Matthew clearly takes his genealogy to have apologetic value, which it would not do if it relied on emendation.

——————

So, what about the other two legs of Matthew’s genealogy?

Well, Matthew’s genealogy between Abraham and David clearly isn’t his own creation.

It comes straight from the text of 1 Chr. 2.1–15 (alt. Ruth 4.18–22),

and takes us from Abraham down to David (דוד = 14) by means of 14 generations—a fact which may well have been part of Matthew’s initial inspiration for his genealogy.

That then leaves us with Matthew’s record of Judah’s kings.

On what basis has Matthew abbreviated a list of 17 to 14?

Or, to put the question more specifically, why has Matthew omitted Ahaziah, Jehoash, and Amaziah (cp. 1 Chr. 3)?

Note: Matthew’s reference to ‘Jehoiachin and his brothers’ doesn’t involve any omissions. Matthew charts out *generations*, and his mention of ‘Jehoiachin and his brothers’ represents the generation below Josiah.

The answer, I believe, concerns the dynasty of Jehu.

While Judah’s kings represent a single dynasty (namely David’s), the northern kingdom’s don’t.

They consist of five distinct dynasties: those of Jeroboam, Baasha, Omri, Jehu, and Menahem.

In terms of our present enquiry, our interest lies in Jehu’s dynasty.

With the rise of Ahab, a remarkable sequence of events begins to unfold in Israel’s history.

Assisted by Jezebel, Ahab ruthlessly enforces the worship of Baal in Israel (at the cost of YHWH’s prophets).

YHWH therefore pronounces judgment on Ahab and his household,

which has become inseparably intertwined with *Judah’s* household (due to the marriage of Ahab’s daughter and Jehoshaphat’s son).

God’s chosen instrument of judgment is Jehu.

Jehu is commissioned by Elisha to wipe out the entire house of Ahab and the worship of Baal along with it (2 Kgs. 10.28), which Jehu is only too happy to do.

Note: Like certain other people I know, Jehu is recognisable by ‘the fury of his driving’ (2 Kgs. 9.20).

As a result, Jehu is granted authority over Israel for four generations (2 Kgs. 10.30),

apparently in answer to YHWH’s promise to visit the iniquity of the fathers on their children up until the fourth generation (Exod. 34.7).

And, four generations later, right on time, Jehu’s dynasty falls,

at which point YHWH restates his authorisation of Jehu’s reign for four generations (cp. 2 Kgs. 10.30, 15.12).

YHWH’s choice of words in his commission of and comment on Jehu’s reign is noteworthy.

YHWH grants Jehu ‘the throne of Israel’ (כסא ישראל)—a phrase which is only otherwise employed in reference to the reigns of David and Solomon (2 Sam. 3.10, 1 Kgs. 2.4, 8.20, 25, 9.5, 10.9, 2 Chr. 6.10, 16, Jer. 33.17)

and which is inherently related to YHWH’s promise to leave David a man on the throne.

In addition, YHWH gives Jehu authority over ‘the people of YHWH’ (עם יהוה)—a term only otherwise employed (in Samuel, Kings, and Chronicles) in reference to the united people of Israel (2 Sam. 1.12) and David’s authority over them (2 Sam. 6.21).

As such, the dynasty of Jehu describes an unusual period in Judah’s history.

Israel’s northern and southern kingdoms are briefly reuinted (due to the intermarriage between Ahab and Jehoram) and jointly given over to Jehu in order to be punished.

Inherent in the text of Scripture, then, is a reason for Matthew’s genealogy to omit the descendants of David between Jehoram and Jotham.

Matthew’s genealogy reflects the fulfilment of YHWH’s promise to leave David a man on the throne, which is interrupted by Jehu’s dynasty of blood and vengeance:

FINAL REFLECTIONS:

In sum, then, the fourteen-fold pattern reflected in Matthew’s genealogy is theological and apologetically significant,

and, given what we’ve noted above, we have reason to think it is not merely Matthew’s creation.

That is to say, we have reason to think Matthew has not simply constructed a pattern out of OT texts (to fit his own agenda),

but has *identified* a pattern which is present in Israel’s historical records, and which points towards Jesus as the fulfilment of Abraham’s promise.

It would be nice, of course, to have *more* reasons to affirm the pre-existence of Matthew’s genealogy (and to acquire further insight into its final leg), but that is not something I can presently offer.

Perhaps some kind soul out there will furnish us with a few camel loads’ worth of commentaries on Second Temple genealogies in order to further expand our horizons.

THE END.

#ItCouldBeYou

P.S. For a pdf:

academia.edu/41195750