Genealogy

In Hebrew the term for genealogy or pedigree is “the book of the generations;” and because the oldest histories were usually drawn up on a genealogical basis, the expression often extended to the whole history, as is the case with the Gospel of St. Matthew, where “the book of the generation of Jesus Christ” includes the whole history contained in that Gospel. The promise of the land of Canaan to the seed of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob successively, and the separation of the Israelites from the Gentile world; the expectation of Messiah as to spring from the tribe of Judah; the exclusively hereditary priesthood of Aaron with its dignity and emoluments; the long succession of kings in the line of David; and the whole division and occupations of the land upon genealogical principles by the tribes, occupation of the land upon genealogical principles by the tribes, families and houses of fathers, gave a deeper importance to the science of genealogy among the Jews than perhaps any other nation. When Zerubbabel brought back the captivity from Babylon, one of his first cares seems to have been to take a census of those that returned, and to settle them according to their genealogies. Passing on to the time of the birth of Christ, we have a striking incidental proof of the continuance of the Jewish genealogical economy in the fact that when Augustus ordered the census of the empire to be taken, the Jews in the province of Syria immediately went each one to his own city. The Jewish genealogical records continued to be kept till near the destruction of Jerusalem. But there can be little doubt that the registers of the Jewish tribes and families perished at the destruction of Jerusalem, and not before. It remains to be said that just notions of the nature of the Jewish genealogical records are of great importance with a view to the right interpretation of Scripture. Let it only be remembered that these records have respect to political and territorial divisions as much as to strictly genealogical descent, and it will at once be seen how erroneous a conclusion it may be that all who are called “sons” of such or such a patriarch or chief father must necessarily be his very children. Of any one family or house became extinct, some other would succeed to its place, called after its own chief father. Hence of course a census of any tribe drawn up at a later period would exhibit different divisions from one drawn up at an earlier. The same principle must be borne in mind in interpreting any particular genealogy Again, when a pedigree was abbreviated, it would naturally specify such generations as would indicates from what chief houses the person descended. Females are named in genealogies when there is anything remarkable about them, or when any right or property is transmitted through them. See (Genesis 11:29; 22:23; 25:1-4; 35:22-26; Exodus 6:23; Numbers 26:33)

GENEAL'OGY. The matter of pedigree was deemed of great importance by the Hebrews and ancient peoples generally, as at present among the Arabs. Genealogical lists are interspersed all through the historical books of the O.T. They are called "the book of the generation of," etc. They answer also a spiritual purpose. They prove the faithfulness of God in favoring the increase of the race, in accordance with his command, in keeping his promise to Abraham and his seed, in raising up priests to minister in his sanctuary, and finally, in sending, when the set time had come and all things were ready, his Son into the world. As far as the Bible is concerned, the preservation of these genealogical lists was for the authentication of Christ's descent. But the historical use is by no means to be ignored; indeed, in proportion as we grasp its value shall we attain conviction of the perfect reality of the earthly descent of Christ from the seed of David, according to prophecy. The first biblical genealogy is Gen 4:16-24. It gives the descendants of Cain. The following chapter gives the family of Seth. The tenth and eleventh chapters, though the ordinary reader might pass them over because they seem to consist of mere unimportant names, are regarded by ethnologists as invaluable, since they contain a history of the dispersion of the nations in prehistoric times. The first eight chapters of 1 Chronicles are devoted to genealogical accounts, beginning with Adam, because, as it is stated, "all Israel were reckoned by genealogies." 1 Chron 9:1. It is, however, to be observed that these several lists are not in all cases records of direct descent, though, perhaps, in the majority of instances, they are unbroken. Still, they are not sufficient to determine the length of any period, since in many cases the list the writer has transcribed contains only prominent names. Women are named occasionally, when there is something remarkable about them or when any right or property is transmitted through them. See Gen 11:29; Ex 6:23; 1 Chr 2:4; Luke 1:5, etc. Another feature is that these records especially concern the line of the chosen seed and the tribe and family from which our Lord sprung. Seth's family is more fully stated than Cain's, Abraham's than Lot's, Isaac's than Ishmael's, etc. They are both ascending and descending. For the former, see 1 Chr 6:33-43; Ezr 7:1-5; for the descending, see Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 3. The descending scale is likely to take in the collateral branches. There are many clerical errors in these lists. But notwithstanding these alterations and abridgments, it is capable of proof that the Bible presents us transcripts from certain official records. They bear the evidence of substantial truth. That such records existed is indicated rather than proved. Thus, the assignments of the temple-service by David were genealogical. In the reign of Rehoboam, Iddo wrote a book on genealogies. 2 Chr 12:15. From 2 Chr 31:16-19 we learn that in Hezekiah's day there existed genealogies — of the priests, at all events. The lists in Ezra and Nehemiah prove that such lists and others survived the Captivity. It is a monstrous assumption to say that they were forged. Lord Hervey (in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible) points out an incidental allusion to these lists at the time of Christ in proof that the census went upon them as a basis, since Joseph went to Bethlehem because he was of the house of David. Manifestly, Joseph had, in the genealogy of his family, good grounds for this belief. Probably "the registers of the Jewish tribes and families perished at the destruction of Jerusalem, and not before, although some partial records may have survived the event." When the temple fell there was no longer any special need of these lists. The Aaronic priesthood was no more; the nation was dispersed in captivity; the Messiah was come. Genealogy of Jesus Christ. Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38. This is the only genealogy given us in the N.T. "We have two lists of the human ancestors of Christ: Matthew, writing for Jewish Christians, begins with Abraham; Luke, writing for Gentile Christians, goes back to Adam, the father of all men. According to his human nature, Christ was the descendant of Abraham, David, and Mary; according to his divine nature, he was the eternal and only begotten Son of God, begotten from the essence of the Father. John 1:1-18, begins his Gospel by setting forth his divine genealogy. In him, the God-man, all the ascending aspirations of human nature toward God and all the descending revelations of God to man meet in perfect harmony. Matthew begins at Abraham, 1. To prove to Jewish Christians that Jesus of Nazareth was the promised Messiah; 2. To show the connection between the Old and New Testaments through a succession of living persons ending in Jesus Christ, who is the subject of the Gospel and the object of the faith it requires. Christ is the fulfilment of all the types and prophecies of the 0.T., the heir of all its blessings and promises, the dividing-line and connecting-link of ages, the end of the old and the beginning of the new history of mankind. In the long list of his human ancestors we have a cloud of witnesses, a compend of the history of preparation for the coming of Christ down to the Virgin Mary, in whom culminated the longing and hope of Israel for redemption. It is a history of divine promises and their fulfilment, of human faith and hope for the desire of all nations. In the list are named illustrious heroes of faith, but also obscure persons written in the secret book of God, as well as gross sinners redeemed by grace, which reaches the lowest depths as well as the most exalted heights of society. Matthew's table is divided into three parts, corresponding to three periods of Jewish preparation for the coming of Christ." —Schaff. The differences between Matthew and Luke have been variously explained. Both lists are incomplete and names must be supplied (there are only nine names for a period of 833 years). They coincide until David, when Matthew takes the reigning line through Solomon, Luke the younger and inferior line by David's son Nathan. A more serious difficulty is that names do not appear in the same place in the two lists. The greatest difference is that Matthew calls Joseph the son of Jacob, while Luke calls him the son of Heli or Eli. He cannot have been naturally the son of both, and it is not likely that the two names are meant for one and the same person. Hence the following theories: The oldest explanation assumes one, or perhaps two, levirate marriages in the family of Joseph — i.e. a marriage of a man to the childless widow of his elder brother, the children of the second marriage being reckoned as the legal descendants of the first husband. Heli and Jacob may have been brothers or half-brothers (sons of the same mother, but of different fathers), successively married to the mother of Joseph, who according to law was registered by Luke as the son of Heli, though naturally the son of Jacob, as recorded by Matthew. But this view involves inaccuracy in one or the other of the two genealogies. Matthew gives the legal or royal genealogy of Joseph, Luke the private line of Joseph. But this is exposed to the same objection. Matthew gives the genealogy of Joseph, Luke the genealogy of Mary. Heli may have been the father of Mary and the father-in-law of Joseph, and consequently the grandfather of Jesus. Luke, writing for Gentiles and proving that Christ was the seed of the woman, traces the natural or real pedigree of Jesus through his mother, Mary, in the line of Nathan, and indicates this by the parenthetical remark, "Jesus being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph [but in reality] the son of Heli," or his grandson by the mother's side. Mary is always called by the Jews "the daughter of Heli." Matthew, writing for Jews, gives the legal pedigree of Jesus (which was always reckoned in the male line) through Joseph, his legal father, in the line of Solomon. This explanation is the easiest, and has been adopted by Luther, Grotius, Bengel, Olshausen, Ebrard, Wieseler, Robinson, Gardiner, Lange, Plumptre. It is supported by the fact that in Matthew's history of the infancy Joseph is most prominent; in Luke's account, Mary. Jesus, then, was both legally and really the son and heir of David. The Davidic descent of Jesus is a mark of the Messiah, and is clearly taught in the prophecy, and also in Rom 1:3; 2 Tim 2:8; Heb 7:14; John 7:42; Acts 13:23. If we take this explanation, Jesus was in a double sense the son of David — in law and in fact, from his reputed father and from his natural mother.

GENEAL'OGY. The matter of pedigree was deemed of great importance by the Hebrews and ancient peoples generally, as at present among the Arabs. Genealogical lists are interspersed all through the historical books of the O.T. They are called "the book of the generation of," etc. They answer also a spiritual purpose. They prove the faithfulness of God in favoring the increase of the race, in accordance with his command, in keeping his promise to Abraham and his seed, in raising up priests to minister in his sanctuary, and finally, in sending, when the set time had come and all things were ready, his Son into the world. As far as the Bible is concerned, the preservation of these genealogical lists was for the authentication of Christ's descent. But the historical use is by no means to be ignored; indeed, in proportion as we grasp its value shall we attain conviction of the perfect reality of the earthly descent of Christ from the seed of David, according to prophecy. The first biblical genealogy is Gen 4:16-24. It gives the descendants of Cain. The following chapter gives the family of Seth. The tenth and eleventh chapters, though the ordinary reader might pass them over because they seem to consist of mere unimportant names, are regarded by ethnologists as invaluable, since they contain a history of the dispersion of the nations in prehistoric times. The first eight chapters of 1 Chronicles are devoted to genealogical accounts, beginning with Adam, because, as it is stated, "all Israel were reckoned by genealogies." 1 Chron 9:1. It is, however, to be observed that these several lists are not in all cases records of direct descent, though, perhaps, in the majority of instances, they are unbroken. Still, they are not sufficient to determine the length of any period, since in many cases the list the writer has transcribed contains only prominent names. Women are named occasionally, when there is something remarkable about them or when any right or property is transmitted through them. See Gen 11:29; Ex 6:23; 1 Chr 2:4; Luke 1:5, etc. Another feature is that these records especially concern the line of the chosen seed and the tribe and family from which our Lord sprung. Seth's family is more fully stated than Cain's, Abraham's than Lot's, Isaac's than Ishmael's, etc. They are both ascending and descending. For the former, see 1 Chr 6:33-43; Ezr 7:1-5; for the descending, see Ruth 4:18-22; 1 Chr 3. The descending scale is likely to take in the collateral branches. There are many clerical errors in these lists. But notwithstanding these alterations and abridgments, it is capable of proof that the Bible presents us transcripts from certain official records. They bear the evidence of substantial truth. That such records existed is indicated rather than proved. Thus, the assignments of the temple-service by David were genealogical. In the reign of Rehoboam, Iddo wrote a book on genealogies. 2 Chr 12:15. From 2 Chr 31:16-19 we learn that in Hezekiah's day there existed genealogies — of the priests, at all events. The lists in Ezra and Nehemiah prove that such lists and others survived the Captivity. It is a monstrous assumption to say that they were forged. Lord Hervey (in Smith's Dictionary of the Bible) points out an incidental allusion to these lists at the time of Christ in proof that the census went upon them as a basis, since Joseph went to Bethlehem because he was of the house of David. Manifestly, Joseph had, in the genealogy of his family, good grounds for this belief. Probably "the registers of the Jewish tribes and families perished at the destruction of Jerusalem, and not before, although some partial records may have survived the event." When the temple fell there was no longer any special need of these lists. The Aaronic priesthood was no more; the nation was dispersed in captivity; the Messiah was come. Genealogy of Jesus Christ. Matt 1:1-17; Luke 3:23-38. This is the only genealogy given us in the N.T. "We have two lists of the human ancestors of Christ: Matthew, writing for Jewish Christians, begins with Abraham; Luke, writing for Gentile Christians, goes back to Adam, the father of all men. According to his human nature, Christ was the descendant of Abraham, David, and Mary; according to his divine nature, he was the eternal and only begotten

Son of God, begotten from the essence of the Father. John 1:1-18, begins his Gospel by setting forth his divine genealogy. In him, the God-man, all the ascending aspirations of human nature toward God and all the descending revelations of God to man meet in perfect harmony. Matthew begins at Abraham, 1. To prove to Jewish Christians that Jesus of Nazareth was the promised Messiah; 2. To show the connection between the Old and New Testaments through a succession of living persons ending in Jesus Christ, who is the subject of the Gospel and the object of the faith it requires. Christ is the fulfilment of all the types and prophecies of the 0.T., the heir of all its blessings and promises, the dividing-line and connecting-link of ages, the end of the old and the beginning of the new history of mankind. In the long list of his human ancestors we have a cloud of witnesses, a compend of the history of preparation for the coming of Christ down to the Virgin Mary, in whom culminated the longing and hope of Israel for redemption. It is a history of divine promises and their fulfilment, of human faith and hope for the desire of all nations. In the list are named illustrious heroes of faith, but also obscure persons written in the secret book of God, as well as gross sinners redeemed by grace, which reaches the lowest depths as well as the most exalted heights of society. Matthew's table is divided into three parts, corresponding to three periods of Jewish preparation for the coming of Christ." —Schaff. The differences between Matthew and Luke have been variously explained. Both lists are incomplete and names must be supplied (there are only nine names for a period of 833 years). They coincide until David, when Matthew takes the reigning line through Solomon, Luke the younger and inferior line by David's son Nathan. A more serious difficulty is that names do not appear in the same place in the two lists. The greatest difference is that Matthew calls Joseph the son of Jacob, while Luke calls him the son of Heli or Eli. He cannot have been naturally the son of both, and it is not likely that the two names are meant for one and the same person. Hence the following theories: The oldest explanation assumes one, or perhaps two, levirate marriages in the family of Joseph — i.e. a marriage of a man to the childless widow of his elder brother, the children of the second marriage being reckoned as the legal descendants of the first husband. Heli and Jacob may have been brothers or half-brothers (sons of the same mother, but of different fathers), successively married to the mother of Joseph, who according to law was registered by Luke as the son of Heli, though naturally the son of Jacob, as recorded by Matthew. But this view involves inaccuracy in one or the other of the two genealogies. Matthew gives the legal or royal genealogy of Joseph, Luke the private line of Joseph. But this is exposed to the same objection. Matthew gives the genealogy of Joseph, Luke the genealogy of Mary. Heli may have been the father of Mary and the father-in-law of Joseph, and consequently the grandfather of Jesus. Luke, writing for Gentiles and proving that Christ was the seed of the woman, traces the natural or real pedigree of Jesus through his mother, Mary, in the line of Nathan, and indicates this by the parenthetical remark, "Jesus being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph [but in reality] the son of Heli," or his grandson by the mother's side. Mary is always called by the Jews "the daughter of Heli." Matthew, writing for Jews, gives the legal pedigree of Jesus (which was always reckoned in the male line) through Joseph, his legal father, in the line of Solomon. This explanation is the easiest, and has been adopted by Luther, Grotius, Bengel, Olshausen, Ebrard, Wieseler, Robinson, Gardiner, Lange, Plumptre. It is supported by the fact that in Matthew's history of the infancy Joseph is most prominent; in Luke's account, Mary. Jesus, then, was both legally and really the son and heir of David. The Davidic descent of Jesus is a mark of the Messiah, and is clearly taught in the prophecy, and also in Rom 1:3; 2 Tim 2:8; Heb 7:14; John 7:42; Acts 13:23. If we take this explanation, Jesus was in a double sense the son of David — in law and in fact, from his reputed father and from his natural mother.

Part of speech: noun (n.)

1. An account or history of the descent of a person or family from an ancestor; enumeration of ancestors and their children in the natural order of succession; a pedigree.

2. Regular descent of a person or family from a progenitor; pedigree; lineage.