the Second Week after Easter
Click here to learn more!
Read the Bible
Mace New Testament
Matthew 1:12
Bible Study Resources
Concordances:
- Nave'sDictionaries:
- AmericanEncyclopedias:
- CondensedDevotionals:
- EveryParallel Translations
After the exile to Babylon
And after they were brought to Babylon, Iechonias begat Salathiel, and Salathiel begate Zorobabel.
And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;
And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoniah was the father of Shealtiel, and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,
After the deportation to Babylon: Jeconiah fathered Shealtiel, and Shealtiel fathered Zerubbabel.
After they were taken to Babylon: Jehoiachin was the father of Shealtiel. Shealtiel was the grandfather of Zerubbabel.
After the deportation to Babylon: Jeconiah became the father of Shealtiel, and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel.
And after they were caried away into Babylon, Iechonias begate Salathiel. And Salathiel begate Zorobabel.
After the deportation to Babylon: Jeconiah became the father of Shealtiel, and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel.
And after the deportation to Babylon: Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel, and Shealtiel was the father of Zerubbabel.
After the exile to Babylon: Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel, Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,
From the exile to the birth of Jesus, his ancestors were: Jehoiachin, Shealtiel, Zerubbabel, Abiud, Eliakim, Azor, Zadok, Achim; Eliud, Eleazar, Matthan, Jacob, and Joseph, the husband of Mary, the mother of Jesus, who is called the Messiah.
After the Babylonian Exile, Y'khanyahu was the father of Sh'altiel, Sh'altiel was the father of Z'rubavel,
And after the carrying away of Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel, and Salathiel begat Zorobabel,
After they were taken to Babylon: Jehoiachin was the father of Shealtiel. Shealtiel was the grandfather of Zerubbabel.
And after the captivity of Babylon, Jechoniah begot Shealtiel; Shealtiel begot Zerubbabel;
From the time after the exile in Babylon to the birth of Jesus, the following ancestors are listed: Jehoiachin, Shealtiel, Zerubbabel, Abiud, Eliakim, Azor, Zadok, Achim, Eliud, Eleazar, Matthan, Jacob, and Joseph, who married Mary, the mother of Jesus, who was called the Messiah.
And after the deportation to Babylon, Jechoniah became the father of Shealtiel, and Shealtiel became the father of Zerubbabel,
And after the deportation of Babylon, Jehoiachin fathered Shealtiel, and Shealtiel fathered Zerubbabel,
And after the carrying away to Babylon, Jechoniah begat Shealtiel; and Shealtiel begat Zerubbabel;
And after the taking away to Babylon, Jechoniah had a son Shealtiel; and Shealtiel had Zerubbabel;
After the exile to Bavel, Yekhonyah became the father of She'alti'el. She'alti'el became the father of Zerubbavel.
After the deportation to Babylon, Jechoniah fathered Salathiel, Salathiel fathered Zerubbabel,1 Chronicles 3:17,19; Ezra 3:2; 5:2; Nehemiah 12:1; Haggai 1:1;">[xr]
And after the exile of Bobel Jukania begat Shalathiel, Shalathiel begat Zurbobel,
And after the captivity of Babylon, Jeconiah begat Salathiel: Salathiel begat Zerubbabel:
And, after they were brought to Babylon, Iechonias begat Salathiel, Salathiel begat Zorobabel.
And after the carrying away to Babylon, Jechoniah begat Shealtiel; and Shealtiel begat Zerubbabel;
After the exile to Babylon, Jechoniah became the father of Shealtiel. Shealtiel became the father of Zerubbabel.
And after they were brought to Babylon, Jeconiah begat Salathiel, and Salathiel begat Zerubbabel; And Zerubbabel begat Abiud,
After the Removal to Babylon Jeconiah had a son Shealtiel; Shealtiel was the father of Zerubbabel;
And aftir the transmygracioun of Babiloyne, Jeconyas bigat Salatiel. Salatiel bigat Zorobabel.
And after the Babylonian Exile, Jehoiachin begot Shealtiel; and Shealtiel begot Zerubbabel;
And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;
After the deportation to Babylon, Jeconiah became the father of Shealtiel, Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel,
And after they were brought to Babylon, Jeconiah begot Shealtiel, and Shealtiel begot Zerubbabel.
After the Babylonian exile: Jehoiachin was the father of Shealtiel. Shealtiel was the father of Zerubbabel.
After they were taken to the city of Babylon, Jeconiah was the father of Shealtiel. Shealtiel was the father of Zerubbabel.
And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoniah was the father of Salathiel, and Salathiel the father of Zerubbabel,
And, after the removal to Babylon, Jechoniah begat Shealtiel, and Shealtiel begat Zerubbabel;
And after the transmigration of Babylon, Jechonias begot Salathiel. And Salathiel begot Zorobabel.
And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoni'ah was the father of She-al'ti-el, and She-al'ti-el the father of Zerub'babel,
And after they were brought to Babylon Iechonias begat Salathiel: Salathiel begat Zorobabel:
And after the Babylonian removal, Jeconiah begat Shealtiel, and Shealtiel begat Zerubbabel,
And after the captiuyte of Babylon, Iechonias begat Salathiel: Salathiel begat Zorobabel:
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.
After the Babylonian boot out:Jehoiachin was Shealtiel's daddy. Shealtiel was Zerubbabel's daddy.
Contextual Overview
Bible Verse Review
from Treasury of Scripure Knowledge
Jechonias: 2 Kings 25:27, Jehoiachin, 1 Chronicles 3:17, 1 Chronicles 3:19-24, Jeconiah, Jeremiah 22:24, Jeremiah 22:28, Coniah
and: Ezra 3:2, Ezra 5:2, Nehemiah 12:1, Haggai 1:1, Haggai 1:12, Haggai 1:14, Haggai 2:2, Haggai 2:23, Shealtiel, Zerubbabel, Luke 3:27
Reciprocal: 2 Kings 24:8 - Jehoiachin 2 Chronicles 36:8 - Jehoiachin Ezra 1:11 - captivity Ezra 2:2 - Zerubbabel Nehemiah 7:7 - Zerubbabel Jeremiah 22:30 - Write
Cross-References
for the earth spontaneously produces, first the blade, then the ear, after that the grain of corn in the ear.
for every tree is known by its fruit: it is not on thorns that men gather figs, nor do they gather grapes on a bramble bush.
now he that furnishes seed to the sower, and bread for food, shall furnish and multiply what you sow, and increase the fruits of your liberality.
be not deceived, God will not be mocked: for what a man soweth, that shall he also reap:
Gill's Notes on the Bible
And after they were brought to Babylon,.... Not Jechonias, but the father of Jechonias, and the Jews.
Jechonias begat Salathiel. Not Jechonias mentioned in the former verse, but his son, called Jehoiachin, 2 Kings 24:6 and Coniah,
Jeremiah 22:24 both which are rendered Jechonias by the Septuagint in 2 Chronicles 36:8 and he is so called, 1 Chronicles 3:16. Abulpharagius c calls him Junachir, and says he is the same who in Matthew is called Juchonia; and he asserts him to be the father of Daniel the Prophet. But here a considerable difficulty arises, how he can be said to beget Salathiel, called Shealtiel, Haggai 1:1 when he was pronounced "childless", Jeremiah 22:30. To remove which, it may be observed, that the sentence pronounced may be considered with this tacit condition or proviso, if he repented not. Now the Jews have a tradition d that he did repent in prison, upon which the sentence was revoked; but there is no need to suppose this, though it is not an unreasonable supposition; for the sentence does not imply that he should have no children, but rather that he should, as will appear upon reading the whole; "thus saith the Lord, write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days; for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting on the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah". Besides, the Hebrew word
ערירי, rendered "childless", comes from ערה, which signifies "to make naked" or "bare" and so denotes not only such as have no children, or are bereft of them, but such as are by any providence stripped of the blessings of life, and are left bare, destitute, and unhappy, as Jechonias and his posterity were: however, the Jews have no reason to find fault with our Evangelist, since Salathiel is expressly called Jechonias's son, 1 Chronicles 3:17 either he was his proper natural son, or, to use their way of speaking, בן מלכות "the son of the kingdom" e, that is, his heir and successor in the kingdom, as some have thought; since it looks as if he was the son of Neri, Luke 3:27 though the chronicle of Jedidaeus of Alexandria f, or Philo the Jew, says, that Jechonias was called Neri, because Ner, or the lamp of David, shined in him, which had been almost extinguished.
And Salathiel begat Zorobabel. This account perfectly agrees with many passages in the Old Testament, where Zorobabel is called the son of Shealtiel or Salathiel, Ezra 3:2 Haggai 1:1 which is sufficient to justify the Evangelist in this assertion. There is indeed a difficulty which as much presses the Jews as the Christians, and that is, that Zorobabel is reckoned as the son of Pedaiah, 1 Chronicles 3:19 for the solution of which a noted Jewish commentator g observes, that
"in Haggai, Zachariah and Ezra, Zorobabel is called the son of Shealtiel, because he was his son's son; for Pedaiah was the son of Shealtiel, and Zorobabel the son of Pedaiah; and do not you observe (adds he) that in many places children's children are mentioned as children?''
No doubt there are many instances of this; but to me it seems that Pedaiah was not the son of Shealtiel, but his brother, 1 Chronicles 3:17. And I greatly suspect that Shealtiel had no children of his own, since none are mentioned; and that he adopted his brother Pedaiah's son Zorobabel, and made him his heir and successor in the government of Judah. However, it is certain, as a genealogical writer h among the Jews observes, that he was of the son's sons of Jechonias, king of Judah, from whom our Evangelist makes him to descend.
c Hist. Dynast. p. 45. Vid. Hieron. Comment. in Dan. i. fol. 264. B. d Kimchi in 1 Chron. iii. 17. & in Jer. xxii. 30. e Ib. in 1 Chron. iii. 15. f Apud Vorst. Observ. in Ganz. Chronolog. p. 310. g Kimchi in 1 Chron. iii. 19. & in Hagg. i. 1. h Juchasin, fol. 13. i.
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.
Clarke's Notes on the Bible
Verse Matthew 1:12. Jechonias begat Salathiel — After Jechonias was brought to Babylon, he was put in prison by Nebuchadnezzar, where he continued till the death of this prince, and the accession of Evilmerodach, who brought him out of prison, in which he had been detained thirty-seven years, and restored him to such favour that his throne (seat) was exalted above all the kings which were with him in Babylon: Jeremiah 52:31-32. But though he thus became a royal favourite, he was never restored to his kingdom. And, according to the prophecy of Jeremiah, Jeremiah 22:30, no man of his seed sat upon the throne of David; yet the regal line was continued through his son Salathiel, who died in Babylon: but Zorobabel, his son, returned from captivity, and by him the race of David was continued, according to Matthew, by Abiud; and, according to Luke, by Rhesa. See on Luke 3:23, c.
The term carrying away to Babylon, μετοικεσια, from μετοικεω, to change a habitation, or place of residence, would be more properly translated by the word transportation, which is here peculiarly appropriate: the change was not voluntary they were forced away.
