the Week of Proper 23 / Ordinary 28
Click here to join the effort!
Read the Bible
King James Version
Matthew 1:7
Bible Study Resources
Concordances:
- Nave'sDictionaries:
- AmericanEncyclopedias:
- CondensedDevotionals:
- EveryParallel Translations
Solomon was the father of Rehoboam. Rehoboam was the father of Abijah. Abijah was the father of Asa.
Salomon begat Roboam: Roboam begat Abia: Abia begat Asa:
Solomon fathered Rehoboam, Rehoboam fathered Abijah, Abijah fathered Asaph,Asa">[fn]1 Chronicles 3:10;">[xr]
Solomon fathered Rehoboam, Rehoboam fathered Abijah, and Abijah fathered Asa.
Solomon was the father of Rehoboam. Rehoboam was the father of Abijah. Abijah was the father of Asa.
and Solomon begot Rehoboam; and Rehoboam begot Abijah; and Abijah begot Asaph;
And Solomon begat Roboam; and Roboam begat Abia; and Abia begat Asa;
Solomon was the father of Rehoboam, Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asa.
and Solomon the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asaph,
Solomon became the father of Rehoboam. Rehoboam became the father of Abijah. Abijah became the father of Asa.
And David the king begat Solomon, of the wife of Uriah; And Solomon begat Rehoboam, and Rehoboam begat Abijah, and Abijah begat Asa;
Solomon of Rehoboam; Rehoboam of Abijah; Abijah of Asa;
Salomon bigat Roboam. Roboam bigat Abias.
and Solomon begat Rehoboam; and Rehoboam begat Abijah; and Abijah begat Asa;
Solomon the father of Rehoboam, Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asa.
and Solomon begat Rehoboam; and Rehoboam begat Abijah; and Abijah begat Asa;
And the son of Solomon was Rehoboam; and the son of Rehoboam was Abijah; and the son of Abijah was Asa;
Shlomo was the father of Rechav‘am, Rechav‘am was the father of Aviyah, Aviyah was the father of Asa,
and Solomon begat Roboam, and Roboam begat Abia, and Abia begat Asa,
Shelemun begat Rehebaam, Rehebaam begat Abia, Abia begat Asa,
Solomon begat Rehoboam: Rehoboam begat Abia: Abia begat Asa:
And Solomon begat Roboam, and Roboam begate Abia, and Abia begate Asa.
Solomon was the father of Rehoboam. Rehoboam was the father of Abijah. Abijah was the father of Asa.
Solomon was the father of Rehoboam. Rehoboam was the father of Abijah. Abijah was the father of Asa.
and Solomon the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asaph,
And Solomon begate Roboam. And Roboam begate Abia. And Abia begate Asa.
Solomon begot Rehoboam; Rehoboam begot Abijah; Abijah begot Asa;
And Solomon begat Rehoboam, and Rehoboam begat Abijah, and Abijah begat Asa;
And Solomon begot Roboam. And Roboam begot Abia. And Abia begot Asa.
and Solomon the father of Rehobo'am, and Rehobo'am the father of Abi'jah, and Abi'jah the father of Asa,
Solomon begat Roboam, Roboam begat Abia, Abia begat Asa.
From David to the time when the people of Israel were taken into exile in Babylon, the following ancestors are listed: David, Solomon (his mother was the woman who had been Uriah's wife), Rehoboam, Abijah, Asa, Jehoshaphat, Jehoram, Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amon, Josiah, and Jehoiachin and his brothers.
Solomon fathered Rehoboam,
Shlomo became the father of Rechav`am. Rechav`am became the father of Aviyah. Aviyah became the father of Asa.
and Solomon became the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam became the father of Abijah, and Abijah became the father of Asa,
and Solomon fathered Rehoboam, and Rehoboam fathered Abijah, and Abijah fathered Asa,
and Solomon begat Rehoboam, and Rehoboam begat Abijah, and Abijah begat Asa,
Salomon begat Roboam: Roboam begat Abia: Abia begat Asa:
Solomon was the father of Roboam, Roboam the father of Abia, Abia the father of Asa.
The family tree of Jesus Christ, David's son, Abraham's son: Abraham had Isaac, Isaac had Jacob, Jacob had Judah and his brothers, Judah had Perez and Zerah (the mother was Tamar), Perez had Hezron, Hezron had Aram, Aram had Amminadab, Amminadab had Nahshon, Nahshon had Salmon, Salmon had Boaz (his mother was Rahab), Boaz had Obed (Ruth was the mother), Obed had Jesse, Jesse had David, and David became king. David had Solomon (Uriah's wife was the mother), Solomon had Rehoboam, Rehoboam had Abijah, Abijah had Asa, Asa had Jehoshaphat, Jehoshaphat had Joram, Joram had Uzziah, Uzziah had Jotham, Jotham had Ahaz, Ahaz had Hezekiah, Hezekiah had Manasseh, Manasseh had Amon, Amon had Josiah, Josiah had Jehoiachin and his brothers, and then the people were taken into the Babylonian exile. When the Babylonian exile ended, Jeconiah had Shealtiel, Shealtiel had Zerubbabel, Zerubbabel had Abiud, Abiud had Eliakim, Eliakim had Azor, Azor had Zadok, Zadok had Achim, Achim had Eliud, Eliud had Eleazar, Eleazar had Matthan, Matthan had Jacob, Jacob had Joseph, Mary's husband, the Mary who gave birth to Jesus, the Jesus who was called Christ. There were fourteen generations from Abraham to David, another fourteen from David to the Babylonian exile, and yet another fourteen from the Babylonian exile to Christ. The birth of Jesus took place like this. His mother, Mary, was engaged to be married to Joseph. Before they came to the marriage bed, Joseph discovered she was pregnant. (It was by the Holy Spirit, but he didn't know that.) Joseph, chagrined but noble, determined to take care of things quietly so Mary would not be disgraced. While he was trying to figure a way out, he had a dream. God's angel spoke in the dream: "Joseph, son of David, don't hesitate to get married. Mary's pregnancy is Spirit-conceived. God's Holy Spirit has made her pregnant. She will bring a son to birth, and when she does, you, Joseph, will name him Jesus—‘God saves'—because he will save his people from their sins." This would bring the prophet's embryonic sermon to full term: Watch for this—a virgin will get pregnant and bear a son; They will name him Immanuel (Hebrew for "God is with us"). Then Joseph woke up. He did exactly what God's angel commanded in the dream: He married Mary. But he did not consummate the marriage until she had the baby. He named the baby Jesus.
Solomon the father of Rehoboam, Rehoboam the father of Abijah, Abijah the father of Asa,
Solomon begot Rehoboam, Rehoboam begot Abijah, and Abijah begot Asa. [fn]
Solomon was Rehoboam's daddy. Rehoboam was Abijah's daddy.Abijah was Asa's daddy.
Solomon was the father of Rehoboam, Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asa.
And Solomon was the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam was the father of Abijah, and Abijah was the father of Asa.
Contextual Overview
Bible Verse Review
from Treasury of Scripure Knowledge
Roboam: 1 Kings 11:43, 1 Kings 12:1-24, 1 Chronicles 3:10, 2 Chronicles 9:31, 2 Chronicles 13:7, Rehoboam
Abia: 1 Kings 14:31, Abijam, 2 Chronicles 12:1, Abijah
Asa: 1 Kings 15:8-23, 2 Chronicles 14:1 - 2 Chronicles 16:14
Reciprocal: 2 Chronicles 10:1 - Rehoboam 2 Chronicles 11:20 - Abijah 2 Chronicles 12:16 - Abijah
Cross-References
And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.
And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.
And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.
And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
He bindeth up the waters in his thick clouds; and the cloud is not rent under them.
He sendeth the springs into the valleys, which run among the hills.
Praise him, ye heavens of heavens, and ye waters that be above the heavens.
Gill's Notes on the Bible
And Solomon begat Roboam,.... Called Rehoboam, 1 Kings 11:43 of Naamah an Ammonitess, 1 Kings 14:21.
And Roboam begat Abia, sometimes called Abijam, as in 1 Kings 14:31, sometimes Abijah, 2 Chronicles 12:16 and sometimes, as here, Abia, 1 Chronicles 3:10. Him Rehoboam begat of Maachah, the daughter of Abishalom,
1 Kings 15:2 called Michaiah, the daughter of Uriel, 2 Chronicles 13:2. Maachah and Michaiah being the same name; or else she went by two names, as her father did.
And Abia begat Asa, who was a good king; his mother's name is the same with the name of his father's mother; and perhaps it is not his proper mother, but his grandmother who is meant in 1 Kings 15:10. He is wrongly called Asaph in the Persic and Ethiopic versions, and in one copy.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible
These verses contain the genealogy of Jesus. Luke also Luke 3:0 gives a genealogy of the Messiah. No two passages of Scripture have caused more difficulty than these, and various attempts have been made to explain them. There are two sources of difficulty in these catalogues.
- Many names that are found in the Old Testament are here omitted; and,
- The tables of Matthew and Luke appear in many points to be different.
From Adam to Abraham Matthew has mentioned no names, and Luke only has given the record. From Abraham to David the two tables are alike. Of course there is no difficulty in reconciling these two parts of the tables. The difficulty lies in that part of the genealogy from David to Christ. There they are entirely different. They are manifestly different lines. Not only are the names different, but Luke has mentioned, in this part of the genealogy, no less than 42 names, while Matthew has recorded only 27 names.
Various ways have been proposed to explain this difficulty, but it must be admitted that none of them is perfectly satisfactory. It does not comport with the design of these notes to enter minutely into an explanation of the perplexities of these passages. All that can be done is to suggest the various ways in which attempts have been made to explain them.
1. It is remarked that in nothing are mistakes more likely to occur than in such tables. From the similarity of names, and the different names by which the same person is often called, and from many other causes, errors would be more likely to creep into genealogical tables than in other writings. Some of the difficulties may have possibly occurred from this cause.
2. Most interpreters have supposed that Matthew gives the genealogy of Joseph, and Luke that of Mary. They were both descended from David, but in different lines. This solution derives some plausibility from the fact that the promise was made to David, and as Jesus was not the son of Joseph, it was important to show that Mary was also descended from him. But though this solution is plausible, and may be true, yet it wants evidence. It cannot, however, be proved that this was not the design of Luke.
3. It has been said also that Joseph was the legal son and heir of Heli, though the real son of Jacob, and that thus the two lines terminated in him. This was the explanation suggested by most of the Christian fathers, and on the whole is the most satisfactory. It was a law of the Jews that if a man died without children, his brother should marry his widow. Thus the two lines might have been intermingled, According to this solution, which was first proposed by Africanus, Matthan, descended from Solomon, married Estha, of whom was born Jacob. After Matthan’s death, Matthat being of the same tribe, but of another family, married his widow, and of this marriage Heli was born. Jacob and Heli were therefore children of the same mother. Heli dying without children, his brother Jacob married his widow, and begat Joseph, who was thus the legal son of Heli. This is agreeable to the account in the two evangelists. Matthew says that Jacob begat Joseph; Luke says that Joseph was the son of Heli, i. e., was his legal heir, or was reckoned in law to be his son. This can be seen by the plan on the next page, showing the nature of the connection.
Though these solutions may not seem to be entirely satisfactory, yet there are two additional considerations which should set the matter at rest, and lead to the conclusion that the narratives are not really inconsistent.
1. No difficulty was ever found, or alleged, in regard to them, by any of the early enemies of Christianity. There is no evidence that they ever adduced them as containing a contradiction. Many of those enemies were acute, learned, and able; and they show by their writings that they were not indisposed to detect all the errors that could possibly be found in the sacred narrative. Now it is to be remembered that the Jews were fully competent to show that these tables were incorrect, if they were really so; and it is clear that they were fully disposed, if possible, to do it. The fact, therefore, that it is not done, is clear evidence that they thought it to be correct. The same may be said of the acute pagans who wrote against Christianity. None of them have called in question the correctness of these tables. This is full proof that, in a time when it was easy to understand these tables, they were believed to be correct.
2. The evangelists are not responsible for the correctness of these tables. They are responsible only for what was their real and professed object to do. What was that object? It was to prove to the satisfaction of the Jews that Jesus was descended from David, and therefore that there was no argument from his ancestry that he was not the promised Messiah. Now to make this out, it was not necessary, nor would it have conduced to their argument, to have formed a new table of genealogy. All that could be done was to go to the family records - to the public tables, and copy them as they were actually kept, and show that, according to the records of the nation, Jesus was descended from David. This, among the Jews, would be full and decided testimony in the case. And this was doubtless done. In the same way, the records of a family among us, as they are kept by the family, are proof in courts of justice now of the birth, names, etc., of individuals. Nor is it necessary or proper for a court to call them in question or to attempt to correct them. So, the tables here are good evidence to the only point that the writers wished to establish: that is, to show to the Jews that Jesus of Nazareth was descended from David. The only inquiry which can now be fairly made is whether they copied those tables correctly. It is clear that no man can prove that they did not so copy them, and therefore that no one can adduce them as an argument against the correctness of the New Testament.
